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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (84745)	11/22/2000 9:59:20 AM
From: Timothy W. Johnson	Respond to of 769670

<If they were truly bothered by the lack of standards, they had several opportunities to ask for a statewide recount with uniform standards (Gore offered a statewide recount last week, and the Florida Supreme Court offered them a chance to ask for a recount during the hearing). They didn't take their chances; they preferred to continue bad-mouthing all manual recounts. > Neither Gore nor the supreme court suggested uniform standards. So why should the Republicans go along with a subjective recount? I ask you, why should the Republicans go along with a subjective recount?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (84745)	11/22/2000 10:00:23 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Nadine, this is really, really simple. 1) The first recountw as generated by automatic Florida law when the results are a half a pecentage of a point apart. 2) The second recount was requested by Al Gore, within the 72-hour period prescribed by Florida law, in four counties only. This is the only recount requested by Gore. Does a candidate have a right to request a recount when an election of six million produces a result where the candidates are only hundreds of votes apart? 3) The Bush campaign requested a machine recount to take place before Gore's manual recount. Then the GOPwingers paraded spinner after spinner on national television complaining about all the recounts. Heck, all Gore did was request one and this in an extremely close election where he led the nation in the popular vote. What's wrong with this? 4) Bush had the same right--equal protection--to request recounts in counties which he thought might have produced a favorable result for him. But he didn't do this. Why? 'Cause he knew he had the secretary of state, whose office is directly next to his brother's gubernatorial office, in the bag and he knew that she's pronounce him the winner. 5) Because of the confusion of the butterfly ballot, and because of the error rate of the voting machines producing undervotes, it seems apparent that Gore got more votes than Bush. Conclusion: Bush should concede and the GOPwingers should not attempt to recreate another impeachment scenario whereby they heap only venom. Gore got the majority of votes nationwide and I believe the manual recounts will prove he got the majority of votes in Florida and, thus, the majority of votes in the electoral college.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (84745)	11/22/2000 10:22:43 AM
From: md1derful	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Nadine...you hit the nail on the head..no statewide standards, big problem..and I think that was the thrust of GW's concern.....yes each local board can control the counting...but this alone does not legitimize a perceived unfair counting of only Democrat counties..particularly when the boards are all or mostly Democratic....I think, you can honestly say this is a bit maloderous, at the least.If the supreme court chooses to support manual counts while not providing guidance on standards....then we ultimately have lack of due process for those counties which weren't manually counted doc