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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (8707)	12/10/2000 3:51:19 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Ron, go back and read my posts. I did not say that Katherine Harris broke the law. I said that she used her discretion in a way that just happened to benefit the candidate whose campaign she chaired. I also said that the FSC is the normal authority on whether she behaved properly and they thought she did not. I know you don't agree with the FSC's behavior but that is not the point under discussion. I think you are wrong about manual recounts needing to be of all the ballots. Several counties in Florida did manually examine the undervote in an effort to count carefully, and nobody has challenged their behavior. At one point, Miami/Dade announced their intention to do likewise but then changed their minds. If Katherine Harris had behaved as I suggested -- sent out a letter supporting all canvassing boards' efforts to count as carefully as possible, and allowing a few extra days, during which she had to wait for the overseas ballots anyway -- she would have had both sides mad at her, I don't doubt that for a minute. To my mind, that would have been proof of fair play. At this point, the Bush side loves her and the Gore side hates her. What does that say about her use of discretion?