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 : Why is Gore Trying to Steal the Presidency? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carolyn who wrote (228)	11/13/2000 1:42:20 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

Recount 'Em All or None at All Politics/Elections Editorial Keywords: RECOUNT Source: Wall Street Journal Published: Mon Nov 13 Author: Ed Glaeser Posted on 11/13/2000 10:35:36 PST There is a well-known trick among statistical economists for biasing your data while looking honest. First, figure out which data points don't agree with your theory. Then zealously clean up the offending data points while leaving the other data alone. The key to maintaining academic dignity is to ensure that you do nothing to the data other than eliminate errors. But while this approach may seem to improve accuracy, it actually leads to biased results. If you only clean the offending data points, then you will disproportionately keep erroneous data that agrees with your prior views. This leads many scholars to beleive that data that is partially cleaned at the discretion of a researcher is worse than bad data. This lesson from the ivory tower has a clear implication for the current mess in Florida. Hand counting ballots in only a few, carefully chosen counties is a sure way to bias the results. Even if hand counting is more accurate than machine counting, there is a clear bias introduced because Al Gore chose which counties to hand count. Mr. Gore has selected the state and counties where recounting has the best chance of helping him. This is exactly the same as cleaning other data selectively. Naturally, if this opportunity for selective recounting becomes the norm, the floodgates will open and any candidate who loses a close election would be foolish not to demand a recount. The immediate implication of this is clear. If there is to be recounting by hand, it cannot be selective. There needs to be total hand counting, not just within Florida, but across the U.S. in any state that was close. One candidate cannot be allowed just to choose where he wants the data cleaned. If this is prohibitively expensive , or time consuming, then it is better to leave the process unchanged than to introduce the selective recounting bias. More generally, one of the principal lessons of macroeconomcs is that rules generally work better than discretion. This is as true in elections as any place else. Giving candidates influence over how election results are processed does not help democracy to accurately reflect the will of the people. Judicial discretion is not much better, as judges will be responding to cases selectively filed by candidates. Furthermore, judges determining elections will exalt the judiciary to a king-making role it should not have. While it may be appropriate to ban butterfly ballots for all of eternity, and while reform of balloting procedures seems like a must, it is also clearly wrong to selectively recount certain areas. Mr. Glaeser is a professor of economics at Harvard University and a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution.

To: Carolyn who wrote (228)	11/13/2000 1:54:49 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

Just when you thought you have heard it all: *********************************** LAWRENCE TRIBE SAYS MACHINES ARE BIASED AGAINST POOR Source: MSNBC Posted on 11/13/2000 10:32:19 PST On MSNBC Lawrence Tribe, DNC lawyer and possible Supreme Court appointee said that vote counting machines are biased against poor people.

To: Carolyn who wrote (228)	11/13/2000 2:01:02 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 3887

The link below will take you right to a website which will enable you to contact ALL the U.S. Senators, Congressmen and many Media outlets in just a couple fast and easy steps. NOTHING TO DOWNLOAD.......everything is done right on the site. Here is a letter which was passed on to me and may be helpful if used as a guide should you want to use it. Here it is: "Dear _______, I can't tell you how disheartened I am over Vice President Gore's refusal to accept the Florida vote count and concede the election. Each excuse the Gore campaign has given for not accepting the count has been refuted. Now they are saying the ballot in Palm Beach was confusing. Yet that ballot was published and approved ahead of time by the Democrats. If voters were confused over the ballot, the time to ask was at the time of voting, not after the votes were counted and their candidate had lost. Besides what proof is there that they were actually confused or that they did, in fact, vote for the wrong candidate? We have only their word given after the fact, after their candidate lost. On a CNN program all the New Yorkers shown the Florida ballot were able to pick out the proper Chad for Gore. Are the Florida voters less astute than the New York voters? If someone claimed after the winning lottery ticket was! announced that they actually meant to select the winning numbers, would they be given the prize? Please put an end to this mockery of our elective process. This is very bad for us at home and in the eyes of the world given we are the stalwarts of democracy." Yours truly, mailblasterdot.com

To: Carolyn who wrote (228)	11/13/2000 2:15:10 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

If Gore is successful he will be one of the most ineffective and despised presidents since Nixon. He will have damaged not only his presidential administration, but the political fortunes of many of his Democratic party members who hold positions in Congress and in the state legislatures. This is why the pressure increasing upon Al Gore to concede by Friday if the votes indicate Bush is a victor. Sure, he is free to litigate this matter in the courts, but once in the courts, the damage to the Democratic party, IMHO, will be irrevocable. If he concedes on Friday, he can at least save some face for himself and his fellow party members who now hold office. Gore must weigh his OWN political aspirations against the emotional health of the country on Friday. What's so intimidating to the many of us, and the market, is that the character that Al Gore has shown, or not shown, indicates that by Friday he may very well be willing to pursue his perceived right to office in the courts. In any civil proceeding, like an election, there is a winner and there is a loser, but unlike an election, in a civil proceeding very often there are damages that go beyond the court remedy and go to the very soul of the parties. If Gore takes this matter to the courts, the damage that will occur if he prevails will be substantial and long lived to everyone involved. Even if Bush prevails, there will be some damage, but more limited in scope and magnitude to Democratic Party interests. Gore needs to consider this before he single-handedly inflicts long lived damages upon his party and the interests of the nation.