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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (86499)	12/9/2000 4:12:14 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

nadine, they ordered a recount of under votes in all counties. why? they felt compelled by the us supreme court to do so. they aren't doing b/c it is fundamentally right. they are doing it b/c the were FORCED to. but, that wasn't the issue i was addressing. al gore received the benefit of 2 FULL recounts that nabbed him 100s of votes in 2 counties. george bush gets nothing. fair? no reasonable person without an agenda can call that fair. the irony is that al gore will lose this election b/c he tried to manipulate a win ala bill clinton style. IF al gore would have demanded a fair statewide recount from the git go he would have had public opinion and the high road on his side. he also would have avoided the us supreme court calling selective recounts unfair (b/c THEY ARE!). that is why this fair undercount / unfair full recount situation is not FAIR. i believe al gore would have gotten such a count and it would have stood IF he had requested it initially. even if he didn't, heck, even i would sympathize with the guy after i got over the shock of the integrity and courage he would have displayed (as opposed to talk about). but, he didn't. he only cared about manipulating a win, bill clinton style. time will run out before the most accurate result can be sought. the current result is fair, but it isn't the most accurate result (btw, which would have also been fair). i've said from the beginning that a statewide recount with a consistent standard is the only FAIR way to contest the initial election results. al gore got greedy. in doing so, he gets what he deserves. and, btw, that is EXACTLY how i would expect al gore to act and it is EXACTLY why i can't respect his approach. now, the supreme court must decide between the two fair ways of deciding this election. 100% machine counts or statewide full recount (which can't happen now). imho, they MUST decide the former b/c the latter is impossible. declaring a winner by allowing a candidate to cherry pick FULL recounts is just unacceptable. i believe it will not happen. i hope it will not happen.