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 : Why is Gore Trying to Steal the Presidency? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (2675)	11/28/2000 1:26:52 AM
From: Ellen	Respond to of 3887

Tried to answer earlier, but SI acting weird and I could not post. Thanks Christopher for answering. It's just nice to see these questions considered. Your willingness to admit you are bothered a bit is appreciated as an honest answer. Of course, I disagree that votes not read by the machines have been counted. And yes, I do know that these unread machine ballots occur in elections. No system or machine is perfect so we can't expect perfect results, but in such a close election as this one is - and for the office of President - it just seems important that they also be counted. The only way to do that is by hand. Not a perfect answer, but it's all we've currently got. After what manual recount #'s we have seen, it would be hoped that it can be seen these humans did their best to be objective rather than subjective. It seems that if these people had been subjective we would have seen more of these manually recounted votes on the Gore side since it was, as so often pointed out (!) the recounts were in heavily-Democratic counties (Palm Beach and Broward). If there were a way to assure a truly fair and objective hand count, it would bother me more that Bush opposes it. But that's not the reality. It isn't perfectly fair but, again, it's the only system we currently have. I believe, as I know you know, that Bush tried to stop the recount to preserve his slim lead. But it's equally disturbing that he disputed them claiming there are unconstitutional. And your second answer you know I don't agree with. With such a close election and so many as yet uncounted (at all) votes I just can't consider him to be the vote-verified winner. Guess we will have to agree to disagree on that. I just wish Bush had let the recount be finished then file any suit he wished to, to contest the result, if he was not the then-winner. This could all be already close to over or over already. But, Christopher, I appreciate your willingness to answer and put some thoughts out there on these questions. I really did ask these questions to hopefully see what people think about this these particular things. Not really old enough to remember a lot about the Chicago history, but I do know it was corrupt, from what little I've read over the years since then. Your question to me: Would you truly be as outraged if Gore were ahead by 500 votes and the election was certified in his favor but Jeb had his people in place in all the precincts ready to recount thousands of ballots and Bush was demanding that the courts let his brother's troops loose to work on the ballots and find him a few hundred more votes? I wouldn't like it one bit but I would have to acknowledge Bush's legal right to request - and get - a recount in that situation. Your other question: Does it bother you that two members of the Florida Supreme Court were contributors to Gore's campaign but still decided to sit in judgment on his lawsuit rather than recusing themselves? No, because they are judges first - not party operatives. And their ruling which basically held up the right to vote and have it counted is consistent with their ruling history. Not to mention the constitution. Let's face it. This election is no longer about fairness, or voter intentions, or who gets to count what votes. It's about pure, unadulterated politics of the worst kind on both sides. Period. We need to use this one then to make the next one better. Can we do it?