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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (62340)	12/4/2000 5:48:02 PM
From: Dave B	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria, It has become obvious that all judicial decisions relevant to this case are being made based on political considerations (for both sides.) Okay, so which ones were the corrupt ones? By name, please. Thanks, Dave

To: Scumbria who wrote (62340)	12/4/2000 5:53:40 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Scumbria; I haven't seen much evidence of judicial decisions being made on the basis of political considerations, at least yet. The FSC action re the Florida Secretary seemed reasonable to me, as did the USSC ruling basically demanding a clarification. As far as the judge who had earlier ruled that the Secretary had to use discretion when accepting late vote tallies, that seemed fair. The latest ruling simply says that Gore didn't have enough votes shown uncounted to make the full manual recount worthwhile. In short, Gore just didn't have the votes. Should be interesting, though. I'm beginning to suspect that this thing will be over in time for the electors to be chosen according to the traditional technique, so the Florida legislature won't be called in to save the bacon. I do believe that Gore would like to force the election to be as tainted as possible, and so will try to keep the courts running around late enough... A "constitutional crisis" would be bad for the President, and so, by the simple logic of the two party system, good for the party not in office. Not exactly very statesmanlike, but there you have it. -- Carl