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: Mighty_Mezz who wrote (87825)	11/26/2000 5:12:18 AM
From: Mighty_Mezz	Respond to of 769668

Humor break - Some Wisdom from Emo Phillips I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?" He said, "Baptist church of God!" I said, "Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or Reformed Baptist Church of God?" He said,"Reformed Baptist Church of God!" I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off. ---

To: Mighty_Mezz who wrote (87825)	11/26/2000 10:06:14 AM
From: Zeuspaul	Respond to of 769668

From the haggard looking face of that guy I saw on TV, I'd think he'd be only too pleased to delegate it, if the law permitted. Assuming these guys have NO options but to scrutinize all disputed votes with a microscope...they should still be able to get the hand recount done in a reasonable amount of time. All they need to do is reduce the disputed votes they have to look at. If they had clear counting rules in line with the standards that their own Supreme court referenced...ie the Illinois Supreme court ie forget the dimples unless the rest of the ballot had dimples..then they would have fewer disputed votes. IMO this also goes too far as the instructions on the ballot clearly indicate that the ballot should be turned over by the voter and checked for incomplete votes. The counting system should not include extraordinary means to correct for the incompetence or negligence of the voter. Dimples and chads are recognized as part of the punch system. That is why the voters are given instructions on how to vote. Also does state law dictate the definition of a disputed vote? If the pre counting teams were composed of two democrats and two republicans and they had clear and distinct rules..two corners must be detached unless the rest of the ballot were dimpled and three votes indicates agreement wouldn't there be fewer disputes? The point is there is probably a way. Without specific knowledge of the law I can only speculate. IMO it comes down to what you are looking for. Are you looking for a way that it can be done or are you looking for a way that it can not be done. The Florida Supreme court was looking for a way that it can not be done. Zeuspaul