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: Gersh Avery who wrote (3016)	11/29/2000 11:04:12 PM
From: CatLady	Respond to of 3887

"That should produce precicly the same percentage results for the state as the first electronic count." Well, no, the percentage won't be the same, because different types of voting machines were used in different counties. The punch card system has a much higher rate of undercounted ballots than optical scanners. What I've read is that optical scanners tended to be used more in republican counties and punch cards used more often in heavily populated Dem. counties.

To: Gersh Avery who wrote (3016)	11/30/2000 12:02:16 PM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3887

> A fair recount would include the entire state, not just the heavy democratic counties .. < That tired, same argument is so over-repeated by the Republican spin doctors. Yes, it would be fair to have recounted the whole state. Yes, Bush had the same opportunity and legal right that Gore had to request recount(s). No, Bush did not make the request for any county recount. *So the point is really moot. It could* have been done. But Bush did not choose to do so. The onus is on him for that. And only on him.** If you view the breakdown by county here - sun-sentinel.com - it should be more than obvious to anyone why those particular counties were selected for recount requests. The numbers are glaring. > The point is that, after two weeks of Gore trying to milk as many votes in his favor as he can, he still didn't get enough votes. < That too, is the same tired spin that simply doesn't wash. What is factual is that after these weeks there are still votes unreadable by the machines that have yet to be counted once. That spin could more than easily be flipped around to say the reverse - that Bush has been trying these weeks to keep all the votes from being counted. Don't you have thoughts on why Bush is so afraid to see all these counted? > As for Bush asking for a recount of all of the ballots, I would guess that they are betting that there would not be enough time to do that before 12/18 .. The current certification would then still be in effect. < Of course. Exactly. It's just another roadblock and delaying tactic of Bush's. Now, of course Gore wants to win. But he also wants to see the votes counted to see if he wins. He just wants to know. Doesn't anybody else just want to know? I know I do. I would really like to know who actually won. Either way. It is highly disturbing to me, as well as frightening, that the Republican side is doing everything in their power to prevent uncounted votes from being counted. The Republicans don't want to know for sure because it might, just might yield a result they don't like. Later, when all this is said and done and long over, people will look back and see that there was a tremendous effort undertaken to keep average, everyday peoples' votes from being counted. That simply should not be allowed to happen, no matter who is eventually the final winner. If Bush is successful in blocking the counting of these uncounted ballots will history look back and say he was the President who won by suppression?