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: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 10:23:04 AM
From: Bill	Respond to of 769670

Everyone wants an accurate count. The ballot was legal.

To: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 10:27:09 AM
From: J.B.C.	Respond to of 769670

>>Are you really against an accurate count of the votes? If so, why? Isn't America about getting the most accurate count possible? << I'll give YOU approximately (you don't get to know the exact number) 48,000 punch ballots with either yes or no marked off, I want you by friday 5:00 PM to give me the EXACT "vote". You're not going to do it accurately. >>Since the ballot used in Palm County was not legal...<< That's your opinion, and not shared by many: Fact: Sec. 101.151 does not apply to the Palm Beach County procedures. Sec. 101.151 provides in pertinent part: "101.151 Specifications for general election ballot-- In counties in which voting machines are not used, and in other counties for use as absentee ballots not designed for tabulation by an electronic or electromechanical voting system, the general election ballot shall conform to the following specifications:......." "Electronic Voting Systems Act". This Act was first adopted in 1973 and has been amended frequently since then. 101.5609 Ballot requirements.-- (a) When an electronic or electromechanical voting system utilizes a ballot card or paper ballot which is distributed to electors, the ballot shall meet the following requirements: Section 6 (6) “Voting squares may be placed in front of or in back of the names of candidates and statements of questions and shall be of such size as is compatible with the type of system used...” >>If all this is true, should they be allowed to have their vote counted?<< They have been counted and Gore keeps losing! Jim

To: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 11:00:32 AM
From: BishopsChild	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

1) Are you really against an accurate count of the votes? If so, why? Isn't America about getting the most accurate count possible? What is your definition of "an accurate count"......???? HOW many recounts should we do till it satisfies everybody that it is ACCURATE........???? A Statewide RECOUNT has been done PERIOD ! If an ACCURATE count is what the Gore camp wants WHY only a hand re recount in 4 counties.....???? Shouldnt we do the whole state......heck, Lets hand count all 50 states ! 2) Since the ballot used in Palm County was not legal (i.e. Florida law requires that the hole be to the right of the name) and since the ballot used was reportedly not the same one pre-published in the newspaper, and since some people (as reported by the NY Times) who mispunched WERE NOT GIVEN A NEW BALLOT WHEN THEY ASKED FOR ONE, were not those people screwed out of their vote? WRONG...........the ballot is LEGAL ! The AG of Florida is the states Gore campaign chairman..... Why hasnt he come forward and give his opinion on the so-called illegality of the ballot ????? This is about Gore and Bush........ This is about winning......... The 'WILL OF THE PEOPLE' is split right in the middle...... How about ALL the other rejected ballots in the other 49 states.....???? Should we ignore their vote ???? OR should we just stick with one county in the state of Florida ? SURELY you dont believe that the "will of the people" in the rest of the country should be ignored by not having a national recount........???????

To: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 11:05:47 AM
From: Pullin-GS	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

An accurate count is most desirable. Why would you want to risk not getting an accurate count by: 1)re-counting the four most democratic (historically) counties 2)Throwing out the machine counts for less accurate hand counts. 3) Inserting the hand-counting factors known as human-error and partiality in the counting process. And as to your other question about the ballot. It was/is legal by the ENTIRE definition of the ballot law. I suggest reading all of it.

To: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 11:12:25 AM
From: Follies	Respond to of 769670

Do you believe it is possible to get an accurate count when the subjective decisions as to whether a chad is pregnant or not is made by two democrats one of whom designed the ballot which may have cost Al Gore the election? If you believe that you are indeed a naive fool.

To: Dave Gore who wrote (73816)	11/14/2000 1:36:28 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I find it hard to respond to such blatant stupidity. There was a recount. Bush won. Dems want a fraudulent re recount in select Dem counties chosen to give AlGore a lead by "mining" votes. Every election expert understands that. >>2) Since the ballot used in Palm County was not legal Dopey, the ballot was legal and anyone saying otherwise is a Dem shill. The ballot was used in other elections. It was designed and approved by Dems and then published. The law states that the time to object was before the election. There was no objection. All the uproar has been manufactured by Dems trying to overturn the results.