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: sunshadow who wrote (72254)	11/13/2000 7:56:08 AM
From: sunshadow	Respond to of 769670

Volusia county results (with 57 or 58 of 172 precincts recounted): Bush gained 216 Gore gained 183 Net= Bush +33 Not quite the whole story tho... from the rejected ballots, Gore gained 54 and Bush gained 35 for net Gore gain of 19... The other difference was made up of a "missing" group of 310 ballots from one precinct (Bush +181, Gore +129) that machine had not counted (a worker had turned machine off and it zeroed out)...

To: sunshadow who wrote (72254)	11/13/2000 12:30:38 PM
From: jhild	Respond to of 769670

Indeed I didn't get the distinction that you were making between Protesting the election and Contesting the election. My apologies for that oversight. Chapter 102 Section 168 deals with Contesting and in actual fact it can be contested up to 10 days after the Canvassing Board Certifies their count. So for Palm Beach that clock has not begun ticking. But in reading the statute, I must say that I see pretty infertile ground for any such Contest appeal. (3) The complaint shall set forth the grounds on which the contestant intends to establish his or her right to such office or set aside the result of the election on a submitted referendum. The grounds for contesting an election under this section are: (a) Misconduct, fraud, or corruption on the part of any election official or any member of the canvassing board sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election. (b) Ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute. (c) Receipt of a number of illegal votes or rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election. (d) Proof that any elector, election official, or canvassing board member was given or offered a bribe or reward in money, property, or any other thing of value for the purpose of procuring the successful candidate's nomination or election or determining the result on any question submitted by referendum. (e) Any other cause or allegation which, if sustained, would show that a person other than the successful candidate was the person duly nominated or elected to the office in question or that the outcome of the election on a question submitted by referendum was contrary to the result declared by the canvassing board or election board. I would be fascinated to see the grounds upon which this section was invoked. At least in Palm Beach County it would appear that they have been extraordinarily careful to see that every vote is counted. (Yes, I know, some argue too careful, but I don't see any of these grounds as being sustainable.) But thanks again for the correction and the opportunity to study yet another arcane corner of Florida Election Law. What a great lesson in civics this all is.