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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bwanadon who wrote (7654)	11/26/2000 10:00:54 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

But the resolution you suggest seems very fair. Too bad someone couldn't have found traction for it two weeks ago. Agreeing to a full recount would have avoided this mud wrestle, for sure. But I suggest to you that both sides made the same back-of-the-envelope calculation regarding error rates on different voting machines, the location of different voting machines vs. county results, and came to the same conclusion: there were more uncounted Gore votes to be found in a recount than Bush votes. So manual recounts became the root of all evil to the Republicans. I think the real pity was the anarchic state of Florida election law, which has been pitilessly exposed to the whole globe.

To: bwanadon who wrote (7654)	11/26/2000 10:02:15 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

I agree with you about dimpled chads. They should not be counted. No mind reading allowed. A full, fair manual recount would satisfy the bulk of the American people- most of them would be more than content to wait, to arrive at a decision all could abide by. It's too bad Gore and Bush couldn't get together and work out a solution like this amongst themselves. But they are two little men. It is unfortunate. Maybe one of them will rise to greatness, or have greatness thrust upon him. But I'm not optimistic about that.