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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl R. who wrote (275)	12/6/2000 8:37:31 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Respond to of 644

The law (requiring all ballots be thrown out) is relatively new, and according to news media, there was one case in which the elected Mayor of a town was replaced by its opponent as a result of throwing out all the absentee ballots when some where mistakenly (or fraudulently) filled by others than those authorized by law.) I think it is a bad law, since if I was a low life politician and I knew ahead of time that in a given county, my opposition absentee ballots were going to go mostly to the opposition, all I would need to do, is apply fraudulently for some ballots for my own party and get all the absentee ballots thrown out. There must be a better way, but right now, that is the existing law, and the Republican "mantra" was that the FL-SC was trying to change the existing voting law, they will have a problem countering that. Of course, the Dems mantra was count all the vote, so they will have a problem with that as well. However, if the Dems do not get their "count all the vote", justice and fairness should be that the Republicans should abide by "don't change the voting laws" post facto. Zeev