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 : Why is Gore Trying to Steal the Presidency? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SE who wrote (1919)	11/22/2000 8:57:15 AM
From: chomolungma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

Bush's hopes, IMO, hang on the ability to present a compelling case of fraud. The tricky thing is that most people don't know much statistical analysis. How do you explain that in a county that is 65-35 for Gore that it is impossible that 88% of the "found" votes went for Gore? And that was in the machine recount!

To: SE who wrote (1919)	11/22/2000 8:58:42 AM
From: ksuave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

SE -- A very reasoned post. A considerable flaw in your calculation about increased error on each recount, however, is that the first count was nothing like 55% - 45%. It was 49% - 49%, and when the final count is made, it is likely to remain 49% - 49%. Allegations of "likely" fraud are irresponsible.

To: SE who wrote (1919)	11/22/2000 9:02:18 AM
From: MasonS	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3887

Only in America...9 Democrats ultimately decide who will be our next President...democracy at its worst.

To: SE who wrote (1919)	11/22/2000 9:05:29 AM
From: Triffin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3887

My issue gets to timeliness and intent. First timliness. As time progresses there is more chance for partisan politics to introduce fraud into the process. That's why under Florida law they have the seven days post election deadline for re-counts in the first place .. Jim in CT ..

To: SE who wrote (1919)	11/22/2000 11:43:00 AM
From: Ellen	Respond to of 3887

You made some very good points, in a very reasoned and objective post. That's really nice to see. That the SC has held inviolate the will and intent of the voter should be commended. Very objective and fair of you to say so given the current situation and your being a Bush supporter. Can you imagine the backlash later, after tempers have cooled, if they had not upheld the rights of voters? When cooler heads prevail, I believe it will be seen that they made the only ruling possible on that particular issue, given our Constitution.