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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (118746)	11/21/2000 3:20:50 PM
From: ratan lal	Respond to of 186894

Pete Now that you explain it, it makes more sense to apportion the # of electors based on votes as opposed to all or none. That would also avoid the major fights such as the present one in Florida since it may make a difference of only 1 to 2 electoral vote as opposed to 25.

To: pgerassi who wrote (118746)	11/21/2000 6:17:16 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Pete, <You have a much better chance in getting each state to proportionally allocate its electors by the popular vote in each legislative district> At first, I would have agreed with you. But on second thought, what happens if there is only a difference of one or two electoral votes between the leading candidates? Proportional allocation of electors in each state will be affected by rounding errors. Then there will be a nationwide recount of every state out there, haggling over rounding math, more idiots who claimed they voted for the wrong candidate, etc. Compared to this, the current antics in Florida would be nothing. Tenchusatsu