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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (35633)	12/6/2000 8:23:53 AM
From: PMG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

I have talked to a lot of friends about the case with these absentee ballot applications. None of them, including me, is holding for either party as we do not live in the US anyway. Almost all have said, that it was not fair to interfere in this process as the voters on the "right side" were given better chances to vote. ALL voters who send in incomplete ballot applications intended to vote for their party. So the argument falls flat that you deny Rep voters the right to have their intended vote counted. Not because that isn't the case but because this right was equally denied to the Dem voters whose ballots were not completed. A party may during their campaign do all to get their voters out to vote. But do election OFFICIALS have the right to interfere in this process? Of course it's a pity for the voters whose voices are not counted if these ballots are thrown out, but without this SELECTIVE help they wouldn't have had the chance to vote anyway. And if it's "one man one vote", isn't it equally unfair if especially the Dem applications were not completed? By moral measures it's clearly a dirty trick. Nobody could know in advance that this issue might rise to such importance but should that change the judge's ruling on it? From the law side... dimpled ballot were declared invalid even though they might have shown a clear intent. These ballot simply had a shortcoming. These absentee ballot have a shortcoming, too: the other (Dem) applications were "thrown out" out. Here is unequal treatment of voter from the AUTHORITIES. This is not allowed by the constitution. I do not suppose a small court to decide on this matter finally, but what would you like the US Supreme Court to decide in such a case? Can the highest institution of the American Democrazy ignore such behavior? I don't think so... I think at least ALL absentee ballots have to be thrown out. Even Judge Saul said that unequal treatment could invalidate the whole Floridian vote. PMG

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (35633)	12/6/2000 10:04:48 AM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Respond to of 50167

I am reading these two reports from EMC and AMAT CEO.. both are very positive about hteir targets so are we on this htread.. onwards to 3300...fwiw <<The head of the world's biggest chip-making equipment firm Applied Materials (NASDAQ:AMAT) predicted on Wednesday global chip demand would stay strong, shrugging off investors' concerns the industry may have reached its peak. "Long-term demand for chips is good and a lot of our customers are very committed to keeping their investments going," Chairman and Chief Executive James Morgan told Reuters in an interview. Morgan said the chip industry had diversified into many more product types than in the past, and that therefore it was less vulnerable to swings in sales performance of particular products like personal computers and mobile phones. >>