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 : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen who wrote (64058)	12/9/2000 9:27:16 PM
From: UnBelievable	Respond to of 99985

I Would Imagine That's The Case It will be interesting to see when Mr. Gore acknowledges the fact. It is more interesting than OJ or Monica <gg>

To: Stephen who wrote (64058)	12/9/2000 10:36:23 PM
From: KymarFye	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

Hard to avoid conventional wisdom that Gore's back to severe longshot status, but still seems more like a gamble than a trade to go long on the expectation of a clear and immediate Bush victory. Among other things, it remains less than an absolute certainty that the US SC has already shown its hand. FWIW, from the Washington Post, written before the US SC ruling: Supreme Court precedent provides that a justice will vote for a stay if he or she believes not only that Bush would suffer "irreparable harm" without a stay, but also that there is a "reasonable probability" that the court would accept Bush's appeal, which takes at least four votes, and that there is a "fair prospect" he would win, which takes five. In short, if the court grants Bush's stay, it could mean that a majority of the court believes there's at least a shot that the Florida court would ultimately be reversed. Alternatively, it could be that only four justices believed that, but a fifth justice agreed to go along with the stay out of respect for the views of his or her colleagues--a "courtesy fifth." In short, Gore's in trouble, but the issue may not have been decided. If a single Justice from the majority leans in its direction, but is still persuadable, he or she might still have voted for the stay either on the basis of arguments that are not everyone's main focus (Scalia's statement about violation of integrity of the evidence; his demand that counting proceed, if at all, only after a standard has been fixed), or merely out of courtesy.