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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (99514)	12/3/2000 3:42:13 PM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

have concentrated my readings on the Seminole case. And based on one court case I found, and the language used in the statute, it's a loss for Gore. Okay, why do you think so? Because the statute clearly states that the person providing the required information (which includes the voter ID #) must be the voter or a member of the voter's family or a legal guardian of the voter. Another statute states that "any person who requests an absentee ballot on behalf of an elector is guilty of a felony of the third degree." Another statute states that "A person who alters the voter registration application of any other person, without the other person's knowledge and consent, commits a felony of the third degree." What is your interpretation - or what language do you see - that leads you to your conclusion...?

To: greenspirit who wrote (99514)	12/3/2000 3:47:40 PM
From: md1derful	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Mike..I don't think repubs will riot if Gore wins...I know, for myself, I'll accept it and move on..I won't be happy, but I'll move on..you see, we repubs don't have jj's rentariot machine...we just whisper and back stab..but we're real quiet about it...nah, the repubs will suck it up if Gore wins....party and the other hysterical demolibs, like over estrinized nudniks will scream bloody murder if the reverse is true...I can deal with it!!! doc

To: greenspirit who wrote (99514)	12/3/2000 4:06:08 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Since you claim, "I have concentrated my readings on the Seminole case," I ditto Ellen's below question: Okay, why do you think so? Because the statute clearly states that the person providing the required information (which includes the voter ID #) must be the voter or a member of the voter's family or a legal guardian of the voter. Another statute states that "any person who requests an absentee ballot on behalf of an elector is guilty of a felony of the third degree." Another statute states that "A person who alters the voter registration application of any other person, without the other person's knowledge and consent, commits a felony of the third degree." What is your interpretation - or what language do you see - that leads you to your conclusion...?