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: Zeev Hed who wrote (8242)	11/27/2000 10:09:05 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 30051

Hi Zeev Hed; Re the "3rd class felony." The thing to note is that the people who marked those absentee ballot requests are in big trouble. Imagine what 4700 felony convictions would be like... But that doesn't impact the voter at all. It is very clear that the absentee requests were in error because of a computer problem, not a fraud. In addition, the fraud was not perpetrated by the voter, so why punish the legitimate voter by tearing up his vote? The voter committed no crime. All he did was assume that the people who sent him the form had filled it out correctly. From reading the above article, it is clear that this is not an uncommon problem. The judge hearing the case had the same problem in her primary, and her campaign staff used the same solution. Instead of mailing all the stuff all over again, it must have seemed like the right thing to do at the time. It is only later that they realize that they broke the law. But the thing to remember is that the voters did not break the law, the people who corrected the forms did. And since the forms were corrected by the same people who had previously printed them, what's the big scandal? No one was trying to fool anyone about who was requesting an absentee ballot. No dollars (or cigarette packs) were changing hands for votes. The fact is that the reason that this was done was because everybody involved thought it was the right thing to do, not because people were deliberately ignoring a 3rd degree felony. No one is so stupid as to violate the law that openly and seriously in a public place. All they were doing was correcting an error in their own computer output. By doing it that way, they saved the county from having to pay for mailing the ballots back, as well as the time and money of the voter for second ballot request. This is such a minor technicality. Stop dreaming that this is going to go anywhere, or that it signifies that "there is really no certitude now that all these ballots were indeed filed by voters and not "ghost voters"" Watch this closely if you want to. If it becomes significant, the first thing the Republicans will do is find examples where the Democrats did the same thing. But the basic fact is that the people who put the data onto the form incorrectly corrected it. The big problem is that the voter signed it in the interim. Clearly the voter intended to sign a form that was preprinted with his voter number, rather than one that was preprinted with his birth date, but how is he to know the details to that accuracy? All the workers were doing was correcting the forms to the way they were quite legally intended to be printed. I doubt that anyone will be punished for this, more than a reprimand. This is a technical violation of the law, not a violation of the spirit of the law. That is why a judge made the same mistake. But it makes a great bloody shirt to wave around, and that feels great, doesn't it. Have you noticed that the public perception is now decidedly in favor of Gore throwing the towel in? This is so Democratic of you. You're trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill for obvious partisan gain. All you're going to do is to alienate the swing voters, for your party's own sake, give it up. The way you look presidential is by supporting the other guy when the election is over, not by threatening to take it to the United Nations. -- Carl

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (8242)	11/27/2000 10:18:52 PM
From: Kona	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30051

I haven't bought either sides's arguments regarding "disenfranchisment" so leaving that aside, it appears that the absentee ballot registration process in Seminole county was not in accordance with the Florida statute, which I would think would be an invitation to the Gore campaign given the situation that they now find themselves.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (8242)	11/28/2000 10:00:31 AM
From: Rashomon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 30051

Enough already. The winning margin in Florida, however you slice it, is smaller than the error/noise level. The decision is essentially arbitrary because of the imprecision of the devices and methods used to vote in a number of counties. Bush has won the first count, the machine recount, and the two-county hand counts, though different standards were used in the counties to divine "voter intent". If enough selective recounts are allowed, Gore may eventually win. The country would be best served by closure. At this point, the New Mexico practice of a hand of five-card stud to settle a draw might be appropriate. However, I find my visceral dislike of Gore increases as this process draws on, making it hard to support the result that would likely have the best medium-term effect on my portfolio.