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 : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Trumptown who wrote (41895)	11/21/2000 11:19:34 PM
From: Runner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

If they allow "intent" you have Gore winning the next count, then all hell breaks loose! Revolutionary times. Thank God this is not the 1960's again. The Florida Supreme Court ruled the "Illinois method" of counting "dimpled" or "indented" chads will be in effect. If that is true Gore has thousands of votes going his way. Runner

To: Trumptown who wrote (41895)	11/22/2000 12:26:58 AM
From: maverick61	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 57584

Like thieves in the night, the activist, liberal Democratic court, has sent us on a downward spiral. I foresee a rocky road ahead in the markets. This absurd decision, which in essence re-wrote the law and usurped the legislative authority, usurps the executive branch, overrules the trial judge is going to lead us into the abyss of more and more litigation, likely challenges in the Florida Congress, as well as likely battles in the US Congress. Even if you supported Gore and thus are happy at this liberal activist court decison, I think you would agree with me that this puts us much further from a conclusion to this matter than anything. Strap yourself in for more turbulence in the markets ahead PS - If you don't believe there was any bias from this Democratic court (which by the way, most of the members have made political contributions to Clinton / Gore / leiberman), just as some allege bias from Katherine Harris - then just read the opinion and how these disgusting liberal jurists castigate Katherine Harris in their decision. They made a point of harshly criticizing and rebuking her. If they were concerned about a sense of fairness, they at least would have been more tempered in their remarks.