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: Rambi who wrote (109300)	12/10/2000 11:30:16 AM
From: Constant Reader	Respond to of 769667

Remember the arguments earlier this year about the census? There was much discussion about what is "fair," what constitutes an "accurate" count, and the need to use unproven hypothetical assumptions about supposed undercounts to achieve a predetermined desired result. (Any other result being by definition at best inaccurate and unfair or, at worst, racist, inaccurate and unfair.) Without those statistical "corrections," Democrats will lose far more congressional seats than Republicans, especially in the states losing a congressional district or two. In those states gaining districts, without an artificial increase in heavily Democratic urban districts, the Republicans stand to gain most from reapportionment. Does this sound familiar? Remind you of anything else?