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: Dave Gore who wrote (105053)	12/8/2000 12:36:12 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Look, in a hand recount, you ascertain the undervotes and then inspect them manually. If you find a straight ticket for the Democrats and a dimple at the top spot, shouldn't that be a vote for the Democrat at the top spot? Of course it should be. Beyond that logic even, if there's only one dimple in one race, and known faulty machines were used for voting, that's a vote! It's every bit as technical as what the Republicans desire in Seminole and Martin counties. If you've got 100 dimples the odds are very, very slim that one hundred people changed their minds. Perhaps one or two might have begun to vote and changed their minds. But why would, anyone but the Bush Campaign, want to take away 97 valid votes becuase two or three might have changed their minds but, technically, still ended up casting a vote? When you consider frail, elderly and disabled veterans and the like it's better to err on their side rather than the rare undecided one. The undecided one has a responsibility to vote undecided. If they did not, then that's their fault--is it not? Look, for the most part, this doesn't happen in other elections. Most candidates in a close race where a recount is at play, set back and let the respective cavassing boards do their duty, as they are trained to do. Bush has been a cry baby about this; nothing more, nothing less. A candidate in a close race has a right to ask for a hand recount if the law so allows it. And hand recounts are in place in states which rely heavily on punch-card voting. So it goes with the territory that Gore should have gotten a full and respectable hand recount upon his request. It's only fair.