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 : Stock Attack -- A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (37776)	12/10/2000 11:05:15 AM
From: James F. Hopkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42787

Hi Lee; <OT> In one of my early post about this vote thing I predicted it would not resolve itself nearly as soon as the pundits were saying. In fact if it is settled by the courts without a re-vote it's going to cause a serious schism that will last for years. See if you can find the BOOK , THE BEST JUDGES MONEY CAN BUY" it's a shocker ( and documented) about just how corrupt so many of our Federal Judges are. it may be hard to find Message 14772478 The electoral vote thing is mostly a sham, but beyond that the "popular vote" can prevent a protest vote from being effective. IE your >> Heck I would have voted for the Roadrunner from Loony tunes, as long as it didn't say Al Gore on it OK lets look at that and turn it around , just say you wanted "Copper Head" out and on the other side is Mickey Mouse , Donald Duck and Peter Rabbit to pick from. ( while in your mind Peter Rabbit would not be as bad as "Copper Head" and the other two don't have a chance in hell so you vote for Peter. Meanwhile the "good old boys power club" who wants Copper Head but is afraid Peter has a chance so it was them who slip enough money to both Mickey and Donald who are to dumb to even know where the Money is coming from. The result is Mickey and Donald while they don't get a lot of votes do "split" the protest vote enough that Peter can't win hence there is no way to get rid of Copper Head, he wins ( like I've seen more than once) with out getting a majority but only 35% of the total votes. Poor Peter only gets 34% the other two "who were unknowingly shills for the Good old Boys" effectively spilt the remaining 31% making your protest vote worthless, however if there was a run off every one knows over 2/3 of that 31% spilt would go for Peter, and give him over 55%..none the less the "popular" vote thing has let "the good old boys club " retain power. -------------------- I know the above looks extreme but I have seen it happen right here in Texas, and not all taht long ago. -------------- No matter who you would now pick, the day will come that where there is not a clear 50%+ you will find that not having a run off will sooner or later bite you on the ass. Run off elections are the only way to resolve what would happen if the "shills" were out of the way. ------------ As for the Electoral Collage, that's a throw back to the "slavery days" and what most historians ( omit from History ) is not only was it based on "population" but "slaves" were counted even though they couldn't vote. This gave the Slave owners and masters an unfair edge, and at the time taht had a lot more to do with what the Civil War was about than the North's Pretense that they really wanted the Slaves to be free. ---------------- I know for a fact that even today there is pressure on the Temporary Census workings to "UP THE COUNT" as the grants from the Federal Gov depend on our population, so it gets down the fact that most Federal grants are unfairly distributed to the States who can staff the most effective "fudge factor" shit heads they can hire at Census time.( this also effects the Electoral Collage) Hence we wind up with a system that the most effective liars get enough of an edge to keep leading us down a crooked path. -------------------- What if Grants and the Electoral Collage were not doled out via something that's impossible to really check up on. Let if be the amount of people who take the time to actually VOTE. While that could be manipulated to some extent it could be checked a lot better, and you can bet you would see a rise in Voting. Jim