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: Dan B. who wrote (106082)	12/8/2000 5:04:55 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Which is more respectful of the voter's intent? To say, if the machine couldn't read it, it's not a vote? or to say, let's get as full and accurate a count as possible? Certain counties did manually count their undervotes and the results were accepted. But the largest counties couldn't possibly have done it without an extension from Harris, one she was clearly not going to grant. I'm not sure if she could have ordered a recount or an undervote count, but she clearly could have encouraged it. Instead, she stalled and used all the powers at her discretion to prevent it. I just found a very interesting interactive guide to the Florida election on the New York Times/Election 2000 site. It shows Florida counties, how they voted, what kind of machine they used, what the percentage of undervote was. Did you know that several counties in Florida threw out more than 12% of their ballots?