SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: RocketMan who wrote (15092)11/12/2000 6:39:49 PM
From: im a survivor  Respond to of 65232
 
<<He lost the first count. He lost the automatic recount. He lost the manual recount on the 1% of the Palm Beach votes. He will probably lose with the absentees. Suppose that, with the full Palm Beach manual recount, he wins? We will have a President who takes office after several losses, because of a manual recount of ballots in one county, in one state, of the nation. And whose "win" would have been based on the opinion of a handful of officials about the intent of voters who did not follow the pre-set rules on how to fill out a proper ballot. And in spite of thousands of similar ballots in other counties, in Florida and in other states, in which similar errors may have been made, but that were not similarly recounted.
>>

Would the florida secreatary of state allow that to happen. Would be intense pressure to allow the election to hand on several gore counties.....bottom line is if they recount one county, they need to recount them all.....what makes Gore or anybody else think margin of error is any different in PB then other places. It would be a travesty if this happened. Whoever allows this to happen would be under intense scrutiny. Screw the laws....we need to do whats fair. Either follow past precedence, or come up with something new. I just dont see how we as a country could allow a president to take office under these conditions....do what we did in the past....recount, count the absentee's and declare a winner, or start anew...well, not anew, but if they count one county in one state, they need to recount all the counties in that state. I dont see any other fair way to do it.

Keith



To: RocketMan who wrote (15092)11/12/2000 6:53:40 PM
From: CAtechTrader  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 65232
 
George Will weighs in, in the Washington Post, he actually uses the word "coup d'etat", and Will is very careful with words...actually I am blown away by the tone and depth of this article..a must read :

washingtonpost.com



To: RocketMan who wrote (15092)11/12/2000 7:03:34 PM
From: CAtechTrader  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 65232
 
John Fund in tomorrow's Wall Street Journal:

opinionjournal.com



To: RocketMan who wrote (15092)11/12/2000 7:44:28 PM
From: Jim Willie CB  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 65232
 
Rocky, if WPBch alone tips balance, then DUE PROCESS kicks in
Federal Courts are adamant, persistent, and universal in enforcement of due process
the feds will be reluctant to step in
but they will step in on such an uneven ballot criterion
that is my prediction, and I love to make them
a few recently have been wrong

you cannot have one deeper handcount criterion apply to one county, and another more shallow machine count criterion apply to every other county (except maybe Volusia with Daytona)

NO WAY, JOSE

just learned my parents in Pennsylvania (over 80 yrs old) each voted for Bush, with my mother saying
"GORE IS A DISGUSTING LIAR"

you tell 'em, Mo
she packs a punch at 4'11" and 85 yrs old
/ Jim