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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (6282)	11/16/2000 1:07:58 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Re: "Bush of course will litigate his way outta it....." Again, no. Bush is litigating his way directly to a court that can order it, allow it, or not. Gore and Bush can't order it. Gore's got HOW many suits out there prior to Bush's ONE(now on appeal)? Honestly, it's like Baker said today...gore's eight(8) supported "private" suits forced Bush to protect himself with ONE golden/@^#$ suit, take your pick, it's his reasonable, necessary response, In His Opinion. Baker expressed some doubt he'd have his way in Federal court. This might mean they allow the Fla. Supreme court to give Gore the counties he wants. I ain't bettin' on that though, and I don't think any of us want that. Dan B

To: pezz who wrote (6282)	11/16/2000 2:23:24 AM
From: Alex Mt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Gore also said that the manual count would "determine the true intention of the voters". It is ridiculous to presume that you can determine the "intention" of the person punching the ballot. There is a hole in the right place or there is none, period. Dimples, loose chads are most likely accidental. Double or no votes must be discarded by humans just as they are by machines. Any attempt to guess at the voter's intention is fraud! Manual re-count of the entire state would work if the entire state was using the same system. The Democrats could then interpret their counties and the Republicans could interpret theirs. If either of them did not like the outcome the could switch places and re-interpret. But that is not the case. The punched cards are used primarily in Democratic districts and only in those districts can you determine the "intention" of the voters. In most of the Republican districts you can only determine how the voters voted. The only fair way to count the results is to base the count on what the voters did with the ballots. The most accurate way to do that is by machine! JMHO Alex

To: pezz who wrote (6282)	11/16/2000 9:44:12 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10042

WE just want the votes counted correctly thass all sir. Excuse me? I believe they have been recounted SEVERAL TIMES already, in a manner that ALL OTHER American's votes were counted. So I guess it depends on who's votes you want recounted and in what specific areas. The law's intent is create fair and expeditious election process. It obviously not perfect (as that Republican who lost by 13 votes discovered when Theresa LePore denied HER request for a recount several months ago), but IT IS FAIR. There simply has to be some limitation to how many times votes are recounted. Otherwise, the electoral process will become incessantly delayed and manipulated by those who would like to drag this thing for their own advantage. Manual recounts exist for those instances where fraud, mechanical malfunction, or manipulation become evident. Otherwise, any particular candidate in ANY ELECTION could legally have the right to delay the expeditious execution of the electoral will of the people as a whole. And that means every one of the many more states that voted for Bush instead of Gore. Florida, an in particular, Palm Beach, do not have a right to disenfranchise the rest of the nation. At this point it just doesn't matter who the president is since neither will have a mandate. What IS important is having finality at the end of this week when the absentee ballots are counted (and they still could go for Gore if the Jewish ex-patriots in Israel all voted for him). Regards, Ron

To: pezz who wrote (6282)	11/16/2000 9:59:41 AM
From: dvdw©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

Pezz you said "we just want all the votes counted correctly" but the statistics indicate that NONE of the Above was the choice in the majority of potential ballots. Your side is now trying to usurp these NONE of the Above ballots, by looking at dimples to interpret a ballot where no president was chosen. The statistics are what they are, more than 51% say None of the Above by witholding their vote. That they may come to the polls voting for local electors, they reject the notion of the presidential choices. Your sides wrong in this because now you are taking away through subjective interpretation the choices to say...NEITHER!