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: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 7:03:44 PM
From: username	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I'll tell you what bothers me. What bothers me is that the media still doesn't see this as a threat to the Constitution. Wouldn't you agree?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 7:05:13 PM
From: ColtonGang	Respond to of 769667

CNN.Schneider: We are in the realm of the unknown and the unprecedented. It is rash to make predictions. Anybody who knows what's going to happen in January is grossly misinformed. I'm not going to make any predictions. It could up being divisive, partisan, gridlock. It could end up being that grown-ups come forward and say, "Look, we've got to end this in a mature, responsible way." That's what the voters clearly want. Who would that be, I don't know. It could be that given the way the vote counts have been going that in the next five days, Gore won't be able to make it, and he doesn't get enough recounted ballots to overtake Bush's lead. In that case, it's over, according to the court. That is not a partisan Bush statement, it's just a way of saying that's a possibility for an outcome. If Gore can't get enough recounted votes to overtake Bush's lead by Monday morning at 9 a.m., it is over. Bush also mentioned in his remarks that this was an effort by the judicial branch in Florida to change the law, to rewrite the election law. Most Americans, I believe, respect the judiciary as serious and independent and a neutral arbiter. Hardcore partisan Republicans don't. Number one, they know this court is appointed by Democrats. Number two, they resent all judicial activism as illegitimate. They have ever since abortion rights and school prayer decisions were handed down by the courts. Anger at judicial activism is an ancient and deeply embedded conservative sentiment. Bush appealed to that in his statement, when he said that courts are rewriting the laws. That instantly touches a nerve among conservatives, just like the word "civil rights" touches a nerve among Democrats. Democrats talk about a person's civil rights being violated, you get an instantaneous response. Republicans talk about the courts rewriting the law, you get an instant emotional response. What I'm suggesting is that Republicans, including Governor Bush are pushing those buttons... buttons that are calculated to create outrage among Republicans. We saw something today I have never seen in my life: a {disturbance} among Republicans in Miami. You don't see Republicans do that very much that we should fail to notice. That's because buttons are being pushed to create outrage. I'm not saying it's all cynical. I think they are angry. But I'm saying that those feelings are deep and they are intense.

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 7:10:46 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

It doesn't bother you that these dizzy old farts who can't handle something as clear and simple as that butterfly ballot may (with some help from Gore's lawyers) cause crises we cannot yet imagine and that could potentially destroy this nation and/or its democracy? That doesn't bother you? (In the photos I've seen, the arrows have numbers on them and the holes are numbered. How tough can this be?) I'll gladly throw away every one of their votes to avoid these possible consequences. If you don't agree, you've got your head in the sand. You're looking at American Armeggedon.

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 7:15:24 PM
From: JLIHAI	Respond to of 769667

It's not that their votes are not being counted that is bothersome, but a couple of things are bothersome. 1. Special consideration is being given to a select group of citizens which is not being applied equally to however many of Florida's 63 remaining counties use punch cards. Those who are familiar with math knew how mathematically biased that was the moment it began. We didn't need people on TV to tell us. 2. Votes are being counted as going for Gore, where it is not at all certain if the voter intended to vote for president at all. A tape of one such instance was on the news about 30 minutes ago. Jai

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 7:27:14 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

<<If you use punchballots, then you have to have a backup system to account for the 1000's of chads . Haven't you ever punched a card out and left a chad........sure you have. >> I haven't, not in 31 years of using them. Neither has my wife. 1st the machine will strip a hanging chad. 2nd the instructions say check your ballot. Dimpled ballots and intentions. 1, one, ein, ounces of pressure to poke a hole. Hole, you got a vote, no hole=no vote. Next time you play poker grab the pot and tell them you intended to fill that inside straight.

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 8:24:59 PM
From: Winston Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Do you work for Gore/Lieberman Colton?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86091)	11/23/2000 11:10:28 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

What thousands of votes? Everyone who went to the poll had an opportunity to vote. Over 95% of them had absolutely no problem at all in handling the difficult task of pushing a pin in a card for their candidate. The other 5% (in an absolute worst case scenario) did not follow the rules set forth by the Democrat officials. On the other hand, the rules for absentee ballots were so difficult to meet, nearly 75% of them failed to properly accomplish the task. Now, you tell me, which procedure is apt to be more difficult to accomplish and prevent citizens the right to vote? The one in which hundreds of thousands of people accomplished the task at 95% accuracy. Or the one in which 75% of a couple of hundred people failed to understand? Further, in the case of the 95% accurate voters, we are now jumping through every hoop in the circus in an attempt to ascertain the 'intent of the voter', by using completely subjective measurements which grossly favor one candidate. If the state of Florida voted 49% for Bush and 49% for Gore, the subjective measurement system should mirror the will of the majority of Floridians. Otherwise, the process is a ruse which subverts the will of the majority. At the very least, these subjective measurements results should mirror the specific county results. Counting only Democratically controlled precincts over and over until we invent enough 'intents of voters', is nothing less than fraud, which is an extremely dangerous precedent to set in a Republic founded on the principles of Democracy, liberty, justice and fairness. Regarding the military vs civilian overseas absentee ballots. It's really quite simple. If the rules are going to be strictly enforced regarding military ballots, then the same rules should be strictly enforced regarding punch card ballots. Those rules clearly stated it was the responsibility of the voter to remove all chad material after punching the hole. If the rules regarding punch card ballots are NOT going to be enforced, and we are going to jump through glass to invent new standards in order to do everything we can to ascertain the 'intent of the voter'. Then that same principle should apply to EVERY absentee overseas ballot. Each one should be gone through as painstakenly as the Broward votes have been gone through, in order to ascertain the 'intent of the voter'. If Gore and company do not agree with this fairness doctrine. Then at the very least, the military ballots which have been thrown out simply because they were missing post marks, or some other minor arbitrary requirement, (which I have no idea of what it might be here), should be investigated by the precincts and written evidence should be accepted from the parent commands which the ballots came from. If a Commanding Officer of some Destroyer cruising along the Straits of Hurmuz provides written evidence that the mail was sent before the deadline. That should be good enough for the state of Florida. After all, every Naval Officer over the rank of LCDR is automatically given official Notary status in the United States because of long standing tradition they are trustworthy honest individuals.