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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ibexx who wrote (117686)	11/14/2000 3:20:08 AM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 186894

Hi Ibexx, RE: "they believed they had a stronger case by calling manual recounts "flawed"." This could be because there are two laws which conflict with each other (one which would favor the Dems and one which would favor the Republicans). By claiming manual recounts are "flawed", this essentially invalidates one of the two laws, which leaves only one law standing, the one favoring Bush. Thus, from a strategy standpoint, I can understand why they would have a stronger case by calling manual recounts "flawed." Unfortunately, this was probably before the 200 Bush lawyers discovered (possibly to their dismay) that Bush had passed legislation in Texas for manual recounts. Florida State University law professor Steven Gey says ... “The statute seems to give discretion to the secretary of state,” he explains. “On the other hand, the counties are obligated under Florida law to give accurate results. So those two principles seem to be in conflict, and the courts will have to resolve it.” abcnews.go.com Regards, Amy J