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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Steve's Channelling Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bosco who wrote (8203)	11/27/2000 1:15:19 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 30051

<ot>Bosco. most of the points you ve listed are subject to debate and historical revisions . Ok, how about the reader's digest condensed version : :) 1. Bush did not ask for full hand recount in all 67 counties because he had nothing to gain and all to lose. After the results from 3 counties are counted, if he were behind, he could still ask for state-wide recount. This shows Bush wants to win more than he wants to unify the country. 2. Gore offered, but did not ask for full hand recount in all 67 counties because he feels he can have the best chance by going after the 3 large counties with DEM majorities. Statewide recount will include the counties that went to Bush. This shows Gore wants to win more than he wants to unify the country. 3. Some people think counting all the votes means the uncounted votes in only the 3 counties. Are the above at least in dispute? :) BTW. NT STILL looks strong today. SbH

To: Bosco who wrote (8203)	11/27/2000 8:20:51 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 30051

OT Bosco, With regard to the budget, I don't know for sure, but it doesn't sound quite right to me. What budget are we talking about? I'm referring to this article, cnn.com in the middle, there is a reference to a budget 14 days after he takes office. The first problem is his list of potential appointees, who should go through FBI background checks to weed out problem cases. If the article is to be believed, then it may well be that it would be better for Gore to win since he can use existing people. In fact, there is probably a strong case for Clinton to ask the FBI to carry background checks on ALL potential appointees by Gore (minimal) and Bush just to avoid pitfalls later, whoever wins. But if Bush is declared the winner, then all his people are new, and if the background checks are not complete, he may end up with some whackos. (no, seriously :) ) A bigger potential problem could be the next federal budget. The new president has to submit one 14 days after taking office. Will here be time? Here's how canada sees the world viewing the us election results. (I know, I know...) thestar.ca Here's the punchlines.. ``I find the whole process very confusing,'' Wong Siu-kam, a courier in Hong Kong, said today. ''The United States is such a technologically advanced county, so why is there so much chaos?'' In Japan, a country ruled by a U.S.-written constitution, some were perplexed. ''It makes me think that both candidates aren't so good,'' said Takayoshi Ishizeki, 55, a salesman for a paper pulp company. ''Japanese politicians are the worst, but this makes me feel American politicians aren't that different.'' SbH