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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: deibutfeif who wrote (119233)	11/26/2000 9:25:49 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

dbf, The only difference the RPOs' involvement made was that some people received absentee ballots when they otherwise wouldn't have. The voting process is supposed to be non-partisan. How did RPO members get access to the applications, and why were they allowed to selectively correct applications of Republicans? This apparently made the difference in the election. Why aren't you outraged? BTW: Why did the FL Supreme Court set a Sunday deadline, knowing that all of the days between their decision and the deadline were over the Thanksgiving holiday? Bush stole the election. Scumbria

To: deibutfeif who wrote (119233)	11/26/2000 10:48:14 AM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "The only difference the RPOs' involvement made was that some people received absentee ballots when they otherwise wouldn't have." Nice point !! The RPO's altered the application -- not the ballot -- and made a request so the voter would get a ballot they otherwise would not have received. The only problem is that this request is a felony violation of the Florida ant-fraud law. 104.047 Absentee ballots and voting; violations.-- (2) Except as provided in s. 101.62 or s. 101.655, any person who requests an absentee ballot on behalf of an elector is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. The problem for the Court looking at the problem is what kind of remedy should you provide for 4700 fraudulent ballots? You can't identify the individual ballots so you can't toss them. Do you toss all 15,000 absentee votes? Not likely because you then disenfranchise 10,000 voters who lose their vote. The likely result: the Court does nothing, the Republican authorities in Seminole county decide their was no crime and Bush gets 4000 fraudulent votes.