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: Ellen who wrote (99637)	12/3/2000 6:10:08 PM
From: md1derful	Respond to of 769670

Fair enough..I just think the issues are all clear and the trial is a few days away..don't even ask me what kind of a remedy will be sought...these little vote fraud things happen everywhere and the nitpicking in selected counties wears thin after a while...ok, go blast ME!!! doc

To: Ellen who wrote (99637)	12/3/2000 7:04:44 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I think you're arguing two different things. I understand your argument. However, the fact is that those voters actually voted. They actually cast actual ballots and the ballots were valid ballots and those votes were counted. Your argument is that those votes should be removed from the certified count if it is determined that the voter's applications for their ballots were somehow fraudulent. The other side of this is the argument that there is no proof that anything fraudulent actually occurred, and even if it is proven that something fraudulent occurred, the voters in question were not a part of it, and their actual votes are not in question. So to throw their votes out would not be fair to those voters.