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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (18215)	11/20/2000 6:00:59 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 65232

Jim: IMO, this election thing may be appealed all the way to the US Supreme Court. I think the country (and the major political parties) will feel the decision is more unbiased and appropriate for the situation. My hunch is that Bush will ultimately win -- in the courtroom and also in the court of public opinion. Regards, Scott BTW, How can Morgan Stanley accurately predict a slowdown in tech spending in the infrastructure area? What are their motivations for this statement?... <<Influential brokerage house Morgan Stanley Dean Witter gave the selling snowball an early downhill push when it told clients that internet infrastructure stocks, including Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO.O), could face diminishing growth in 2001 as the economy cools.>> Hmmm....Did Morgan Stanley want to scoop up more infrastructure stocks at a deep discount or are they shorting these stocks (like CSCO, JNPR, and NT) in their own accounts?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (18215)	11/20/2000 6:52:19 PM
From: im a survivor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 65232

<<they guys are gonna allow hand recounts to continue they will be giving deadlines for the process they probably will NOT offer chad criteria they talked consistently about HOW to include recounts>> Agreed....it's all over now...they will count the 1900 dimpled ballots and gore will come out victorious. I am amazed that "voter intent" is at the forefront of this dimple issue. Am I the only blind person here? Where in the constitution does it allow somebody to determine my intent?? If my intent is not clear, my ballot should go in the trash can..... I am amazed that our presidency is going to be won because 1900 ballots were given to gore, because a panel of democrats decided it was the intent of that voter to vote for their candidate. There shouldnt even be a question about those 1900 votes. The US Supereme Ct shoule MAKE them not count those votes. The more I think about this the more aggravated it gets me. This is america. As we speak, there are many votes being changed. Somebody did not mean to vote for gore....changed their mind at the last minute or whatever, yet those votes are what will put him in the white house..... Looks like Volty is gonna owe me a six pack of cheap beer<ggg>