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 : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (3118)	11/22/2000 5:42:14 PM
From: TraderGreg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

What the court determined was that the date might have been ok except for the manual recount law. Since that date was nearly FOUR weeks before the electors vote in the Electoral College, the Court used the old "reasonable man" rule to conclude that moving that date to 11/26 would accomplish two things: 1. Ensure that voters get their votes counted(the Prime Directive) 2. Not impact anyway whatsoever with the 12/12 meeting date of electors to vote. Nobody could question this solution were it involving an issue that wasn't partisan. The only reason the Bush people object to it is because it permits the recounting to go on a few more days...the only reason. None of the Bush people could give a reason why adding time to the date would impact the ability of the electors to cast their votes on time. A time deadline that has no negative impacts really isn't a "deadline" is it? TG

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (3118)	11/22/2000 5:47:57 PM
From: moosebeary	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

You are not wrong, Jeff, you are absolutely right. And don't let Greg and others tell you it is the courts job to interpret the law. It is the courts job to APPLY the law to individual cases. A well written, rational, intelligent law needs no interpretation by anyone, rather it is crystal clear and absolutely understandable by all. For instance, there is not one single thing in the constitution that is the least bit unclear. When something is written by one who knows how to use the language, problems are eliminated.