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: jhild who wrote (80713)	11/18/2000 2:14:04 AM
From: Jimbobwae	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

To make the rather specious argument that it is ok to be less than 100% or not as close to it as we can get in such a close election for all the counties that we can, puts you on the side of wanting to elect by condoning conscious disenfrancisement To think that 100.000000% of our population is prepared to cast a vote contrasts with reality. Do I wish this was not so? Sure. So, do we make it 99.99%? 98.76%? No, We set up systems for qualified citizens to use to perform this privilege. Some are easy some, as we now understand, present challenges (punching butterflies) Does this make these people stupid or less worthy? No. It does create an artificial barrier that is flawed in its technology but ironically brings to light the failings of a small percentage of the people to be able to execute their rights. To have others divine their intent is just a bad as tossing these attempts to vote out. In the end its not Bush or Gore's fault how this happened. To have the Dershowitz's of the world rally to protect these peoples' rights is a sick self-serving joke. They became disenfranchised through their own actions and have themseleves to blame. If the butterfly ballot is so bad why in the hell didn't their democratically controlled board select a better system? If the people were fully engaged they would know what system produces the most reliable results and would make sure that they used it in their county. J

To: jhild who wrote (80713)	11/18/2000 8:45:17 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Let me say this again. The timing of Gore's offer makes it meaningless. It's nothing more than a publicity stunt. In all likelyhood, all votes cast have been 100% accurately counted. Two objective machine counts have been complete. Bush won both. He didn't need to change a standard to win. The votes were simply tabulated by accurate machines, and the winner declared. No manipulation of the process. No emotional workers bending the cards looking to erase or add a vote here or there. The problem is one of changing standards. Since Florida law doesn't address hanging chads, half hanging chad, pregnant chads, half pregnant chads, scratched chads, dimpled chads, etc.etc. It's one of subjective hand interpretation. In order to accomplish a complete hand-recount of the votes which have already been double counted by an accurate machine. We would need to first set a standard. Gore's team has already argued in court some of the most ridiculous standards known in the punch card industry. Therefore, we would be caught up in court for months arguing which chads should be counted, how they should be counted etc.etc. Why partisan Democrats here cannnot understand the logic of this blows me away. I realize you desperately want your man Gore to win this election and be the first court appoited President in history. But be real, put our country first, and end this mockery of our voting system. The military have spoken, since the primary job of President is Commander in Chief, why not allow them to select the next one at this stage in the game?