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: TH who wrote (83232)	11/21/2000 12:07:21 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

The machine error is not in question. Sorry, machine error is inherent. In that sense it is not in question. It is real. They have found more votes than were counted have they not? So if the machines were perfect there would be no differences. The focus of these recounts are the votes that registered as not voting for either candidate, but where there was an apparent pushing of the chad. So in effect these votes have yet to be counted even once. I know it pleases you to repeat the bromide about counting until they get the result they want, but that is not what is happening. There is no amount of machine counting that can determine the intent of the under-votes. The closeness of the election demands that they be counted, so all citizens can feel their vote counts. This much we can do. And we should. (In Palm Beach the most recent (just now) in a string of rejections of attempts to stop the process bears me out.) The ironic thing is that it is looking like there may well be no determinative difference other than the narrowing of Bush's lead. Btw, your presumption about my affiliation is also incorrect. I am merely on the side of seeing the right thing is done. Not the partisan thing.