Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Z Best Place to Talk Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron McKinnon who wrote (26681)	11/12/2000 12:56:01 PM
From: Iceberg	Respond to of 53068

>I'd sure like to see the mess over with Ron, Perhaps one way to end the mess would be this: Call it a tie and flip a coin. I'm serious. Here's why... I think back to the Vietnam war. By LOTTERY, I was awarded number 48 to go to Vietnam. My brother was awarded number 1. Those fortunate enough to have been awarded much larger numbers got to stay home and not go to Vietnam or die in Vietnam. Thus, who lived and who died was effectively determined by a simple lottery. In this election, we aren't talking about a life and death situation between two highly pampered candidates. So why not get a national consensus to call this damn thing a tie, and simply flip a coin? The result for either candidate would be far less harsh than the results of the Vietnam war lottery was for the less pampered people back during the infamous DRAFT LOTTERY. One problem with my suggestion, I suppose, is that the dems and reps would argue about WHERE to flip the coin, WHOSE coin it would be, what TYPE of coin it was, and WHO would flip the coin, etc. All I know is that our country has a history of determining who lives, and who potentially dies in war, based upon no more than a mere LOTTERY. And that perhaps a coin flip should not be completely ruled out as a method of solving this sad situation...an election that appears to be a virtual TIE. It's at least something to think about. Of course, there are Constitutional constraints on the process. But those can be changed by the will of the people if they are so inclined. IMO, and FWIW Ice

To: Ron McKinnon who wrote (26681)	11/12/2000 1:43:19 PM
From: pz	Respond to of 53068

Ron, <<<as a side note i tend to see many things from a tilted perspective is it just me or is it rather ironic that for a year one of Bush's main themes has been: "Gore trusts big govt, I TRUST THE PEOPLE" but now the bush camp says: "WE TRUST MACHINES MORE THAN WE TRUST PEOPLE" make one go hmmmmmmm>>> Bush trusts the people, he just doesn't trust the DEMOCRATS that are counting these DEMOCRATIC counties by hand. Would you? Paul P.S. Ron, I'm going to play tennis this afternoon and have decided to ask for a recount after every game I lose. Heck, I'll keep recounting until I win. What a deal...