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 (8248)	11/28/2000 11:22:24 AM
From: Rashomon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30051

Hi Bosco -- It's just that the Palm Beach count by itself wouldn't have changed the result were it counted or not. The word on the AP wire is that it was plus 220 for Gore, which was not enough. Even a recount of Miami Dade using a "conservative" standard -- i.e. no dimpled chads unless there is a pattern elsewhere on the ballot of dimpled chads -- would be unlikely to give the election to Gore. (The recount there was stopped after heavily Democratic districts failed to add overwhelming votes for Gore, while heavily Republican, Cuban-American districts remained to be recounted; the county, in contrast to the other 2, had a nearly 50/50 Republican/Democrat overall split) Of course, any generous standard that counts dimpled ballots in heavily Gore counties and applies a statistical correction to the butterfly ballot problem gives the election to Gore. However, I wonder if the Republican Congress would accept that generosity?