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: lawdog who wrote (110440)	12/11/2000 11:29:37 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

If Bush wins, the ballots will be burned before anyone has a chance to get them.

To: lawdog who wrote (110440)	12/11/2000 11:29:58 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 769670

Plans to seal the ballots? Support the media in its attempt to get the truth. In a democracy, we cannot tolerate the suppression of the truth. A democracy depends on publication of the truth. An informed electorate needs the truth. The Gore supporters and the Nader supporters can agree on this principle. This fight will energize the supporters of democracy. Suppression of the truth cannot stand.

To: lawdog who wrote (110440)	12/11/2000 11:39:23 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

As I understand it, the ballots will be sealed out of normal operating procedure. It'll require a court order to release them for public review. Under Florida's 'Sunshine Laws' and the United States Freedom of Information Act, reviewing the ballots should not become a problem, so long as CIA-type operatives don't gain access to them first while they're in storage. How the ballots will be protected is an important concern. I would think, however, that the requests to view them will be rapid and there won't be a long timeline and that we'll likely see several competing organizations reviewing them together. Future solution: Recently, someone on television mentioned a good future solution to this kind of mess. It goes as follows: Whenever an electoral college state is in play via a near-tie, and could affect the results of the election, and if the candidates are 1,000 votes apart no recount is necessary. Why? Because then the winner of the national popular vote would be declared the president. I like this, as the national popular vote ought to at least count for something.