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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/1/2000 12:58:17 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 186894

exit polls were correct. I agree but you still have to vote correctly and that is why Bush won. In baseball a batter goes up with the intention of hitting a homerun but it just misses and he settles for a double. Same here! Some folks double punched, some didnt punch, some didnt punch hard enough and some punched for the wrong guy. Sidebar. The democrat's operatives in palm county handed out cheat sheets with the numbers to punch to vote straight democratic. They had #4 for Gore--guess what that was buchanan. They sent out corrections 2 or 3 days before the election. Some folks apparently didnt look at them and you know the rest. Now is that Bushes fault too. It is time to leave the fantasy word of Goreland and return to the real world where things are not always perfect.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/1/2000 1:01:36 PM
From: Gary Ng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, your comment about the election is the best I have read, including here and all those on the media I particularly like this : "If the current scenario holds, I believe Al Gore should concede and George W. Bush should accept Gore's concession and acknowledge the circumstances that he won. He should state that he has won on a technicality and state further that it is the only way that a government can function." "The sports analogy would be that in baseball, umpires make judgements - although they could be wrong - the judgements are part of the game. The umpires call can be reviewed on tape and be judged wrong - but the decision stand and the outcome of the game is not changed" regards, gary

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/1/2000 1:29:14 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, RE:"There is no doubt that Al Gore won the popular vote." Perhaps, but aren't their still another 1 million absentee ballots that won't be counted in California? RE:"There is also no doubt that Al Gore won Florida - and there is a big if - if you go by the definition the "Will of the people"." "Will of the people" is basically being used by Gore here to gain support. There doesn't seem to be anymore evidence of Gore winning FL than Bush winning FL. The key is after 4 tries, Gore has lost all the counts... There is nothing to suggest that if the whole state was recounted by hand that Gore would pick up more votes. There is evidence that Bush would pick up votes since Gore recounted 3 heavily populated and heavily democratic counties. He managed to expand the vote count and pick up some votes statistically because of it but in counties that went for Bush, Bush would likely pick up votes. If all the military ballots were allowed, Bush would pick up more votes. Palm Beach, Volusia and Broward counties, where there was a hand recount make up about 17% of the votes statewide. These are about 2:1 Gore. Gore couldn't make up the difference with these counties. Even with Dade thrown it he might not make it, might come close. Throw in the rest of the state and he most likely would lose by a lot more than the 930 or 537 he's lost by now. Jim RE:"He should state that he has won on a technicality" What technicality did GW Bush win on?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/1/2000 1:42:00 PM
From: maui_dude	Respond to of 186894

OT Mary, superb post. Maui. eom

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/1/2000 1:54:10 PM
From: deibutfeif	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, re:...going to give my opinion on the Presidential elections... Have to admit, my first reaction was "oh no, not more" but then I got to the end of your post and it was exactly what my friend and I discussed during this morning's walk: the margin of victory is less than the margin of error. Its unlikely that the error can be significantly (and confidently) reduced in finite time. So just accept the result for what it is - dissatisfying but final. But its a position that sounds disingenuous when presented by those of us who were Bush voters (not to say supporters, that would be too strong). Glad you, as apparently a Gore voter (?), put it forward. Bottom line - excellent post, thanks. ~dbf

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (120099)	12/6/2000 3:58:01 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

OT Hi Mary, RE: "Welcome back. I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts" Thank you RE: "voting mechanism are currently flawed and need to be modernised and improved." It should be investigated, but I wonder about the total cost to do this vs. how often this type of thing happens? For some reason $1B comes to mind? By comparison, the country currently spends about $5B every year on the foster care system. Maybe the laws need to be changed (in order to save $1B) and simply say, "if an election is close (<.5%), recounting shall be done, but not through manual recounting unless a device is faulty, where faulty is defined to be a machine error greater than .002%." RE: " Otherwise the emotions and the emotional manipulations are just too expensive for our society." I agree. Both camps (i.e. the spokesperson for each Party) used derogatory interpretations to the other Party's position. They could have taken the high road and stated their positions without the attacks. Unfortunately, negative comments leave a longer impression since it takes 7 positive comments to counter one negative comment. This could be why politicians use negative statements. Regards, Amy J