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 (101567)	12/4/2000 11:39:13 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Well, there is nothing in my post that I said was untrue. It is really difficult to say much that is damaging on the matter and make it stick. Sorry.........

To: Ellen who wrote (101567)	12/4/2000 11:57:10 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Ellen, here is a hypothetical question. Different state, let's say Colorado. You want Mr. Green to win the presidential election. The other candidate is Mr. Blue. Dimples don't count when the election occurs. You vote for Mr. Green. You do it by the book. You go to the polls, you punch the stylus through the card, you make sure before you push the stylus that you are voting for Mr. Green, you remove the card (ballot), you look to see if it's OK because if it isn't you know you can get another card, and seeing that it is OK, you place your ballot in the ballot box and leave. A week later, you see a live television feed of three people counting ballots that were rejected as valid votes by the automatic counter that counted your vote for Mr. Green. These three people are looking at the rejected ballots to see if there is a dimple, because they decided to do that after the election had already occurred. They want to see if anyone who screwed up a little bit actually meant to vote but didn't quite. One of the people is a Green supporter (your guy), and the other two are for the opposition's candidate, Mr. Blue. The Green supporter picks up a ballot, studies it closely, and says, "I can see no way to figure out who this person voted for." He then hands the ballot to the first Blue supporter. The first Blue supporter looks at the ballot briefly and says, "Vote for Blue" and hands it to the second Blue supporter. The second Blue supporter has been talking to a friend and is not paying attention. When the second Blue supporter is offered that ballot from the first Blue supporter, she is interrupted in her conversation with her friend, and looks over at the first Blue supporter and says, "What did you say"? The first Blue supporter says to her, "Vote for Blue." She then immediately says, "Vote for Blue" and puts the ballot down and continues her conversation with her friend. My questions to you are: Did the second Blue supporter commit fraud? Your vote, at that precise point, does not count. How would you feel about your vote for Mr. Green being nullified in that manner?