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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (71132)	11/12/2000 10:33:20 AM
From: TideGlider	Respond to of 769670

<font color=Purple>http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2000/11/11/102958 Saturday, Nov. 11, 2000 11:30 am EST Recount, So Far, Challenges Statistical Probablility No one knows statistical probability better than the folks in Vegas. Yesterday the Las Vegas Sun reported that the recount in Florida that has narrowed the gap for Gore by as many as 1400 votes so far does not jibe with statistical probability. The paper reported that University of Nevada at Las Vegas economics professor Tom Carroll "began running statistical equations Thursday on the net gains both Gore, who gained more than 2,200 votes, and Texas Gov. George W. Bush, who added about 700 votes, have made in the recount. He found that the statistical chances for such large and different totals to occur as a result of random glitches was less than infinitesimal." Carroll told the paper that the "The probability of being struck by lightning is about one in a million. The same person would have to be hit by lightning 30 times to compare with what we've seen in this recount." Carroll based his computations on the notion that ballots in Florida "were the result of computer or human mistakes." He added that "A recount is a 50-50 proposition, so statistically speaking, making up something like 1,700 votes is highly unlikely," Carroll said. "For this to have been just random error is statistically unlikely. It wouldn't be unlikely to see some changes in the number of votes during a recount, but the differences should come much closer to canceling each other out." Carroll is a Democrat.

To: jlallen who wrote (71132)	11/12/2000 10:34:14 AM
From: ColtonGang	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Whereas the democrats have stayed on the local and state level in Florida, the Bush camp has leaped to the federal level..........talk about getting lawyers involved!

To: jlallen who wrote (71132)	11/12/2000 10:38:19 AM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Recounts in a virtually tied election are routine in this country. Nothing "honorable" about accepting a loss by the slimmest of margins and bowing out early. Gore has already proven he made the right decision following the first electronic re-count which gave him back 1500 votes. He now trails Bush by 327 and remember absentee ballots haven't even finished coming in yet. You are just scared Bush will lose. Both sides should be equally scared at this point. From a Democrats perspective it will be a bitter pill tot ake if Bush wins after losuing the popular vote, especially if Nader hadn't been there draining crucial votes from Gore. Don't be selfish in your emotional concern and even anger. Both sides of this race are equally tense, angry and regretful now. And many Nader voters now have to be regretful too. Hey, even Buchanon is supporting this re-counting.