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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: waverider who wrote (89702)	12/10/2000 2:40:31 AM
From: Peter J Hudson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Diamond, I honestly don't care who wins the election for president, but I agree with Bux. You say >>It is also clear you do not understand that there are biased interpretations about how to read the intent of the voter. << Is there any standard you would agree on to count the "undercounted ballots"? Would you agree to a recount if the criteria was swinging chad? The voter did everything right, but the chad did not detach. Should those votes be counted? The problem with the election debate is people start with their desired result and work backward to justify their case. Reverse the circumstances (swap Bush and Gore) and ask yourself what would be fair. I don't care about the outcome, but I think this election has been great for our country. Pete

To: waverider who wrote (89702)	12/10/2000 12:40:33 PM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Diamond wrote: What is really sad is your biased interpretation of the US Constitution. It is clear that I didn't even attempt to interpret the constitution and your claim that I did exposes your blind partisanship and lack of any understanding of the Constitution. The federal issue at question is whether the State Supreme Court interpreted it's own state laws correctly. The right to choose electors is planted firmly in the domain of each state and the 10th amendment of the U.S. Constitution confirms this. It says: Article X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Since the U.S. Constitution does not specify how votes are to be counted, this is a duty of each state and Florida put that that duty firmly into the hands of the canvassing boards. I'm not claiming that they are doing it perfectly in every case, but that is a matter to be determined after they have counted the ballots in the usual manner and in an election this close, the usual manner is to count them by hand. The courts are still there after the count has been completed for the purpose of contesting the validity of the count. This case is unprecedented in that one candidate is claiming that any vote the machine failed to read is to be buried until after the contest, at which point the Freedom of Information Act will allow researchers to count those ballots and determine if we have a bastard President or if we "lucked out" and elected the actual winner. Please try to put rational thought ahead of your partisan logic. Bux