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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 3:27:21 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:"1. The FSC did not order the inclusion of partial recount results. They ordered the completed Palm Beach recount included, and the complete Miami Dade recount to be included (which consists of the partial count already done, and the count (to be done) of the 9000 ballots from the remaining precincts." I think they did. They included the 168 Gore votes that were the result of an incomplete hand recount of all Dade votes. These were from very heavy Gore precincts for whatever reason. The 9000 undervotes you were refering to were set aside and were not to be counted until later if at all. Some leaks occured, in our paper, it was said that 40% of these undervotes (9000) were counted before the USSC stopped the recount Saturday. To a lot of peoples surprise in the media, Bush had actually gained 41 votes. This is where it was estimated that Gore could pick up 800 votes. So even if the hand recount all the undervotes in the state, there is no good evidence that Gore would gain any votes... Also in PB county, the certified final hand recount (by Tereasa Lepore) tally for Gore was 174 votes yet MSNBC and the Dems, including the FLSC are still claiming 215 more votes for Gore. Seems some people just want to pull votes out of thin air to keep it closer... Jim

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 3:43:58 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Doug, Having watched today, the only question is, will Rehnquist have the decency to do the right thing, perhaps dragging Kennedy with him, leaving Scalia to wallow in his own inconsistencies, with the company of his lackey Thomas, and the increasingly senile O'Connor. If I had to guess: 6-3 to remand to Florida Circuit court to set a more specific standard I am coming to conclusion that no matter what the decision is, Gore loses. If they send it back to allow recount, but with standards, it will be either SOS Harris of judge Lewis. I believe judge Lewis set a standard of no dimples in his count of Miami Dade county. If that's the case, Broward county and Palm Beach county would have to be recounted, and Gore will lose in neighborhood of 400 votes just in those 2 counties, and it will only go downhill from there for Gore. To those who think it's within the error bar, and we should just give it to Bush: Huh? In a tie, you split the votes. Give bush 13 electors, and Gore takes 12. And based on this answer, I nominate you to be the justice of the Supreme Court of State of Florida. <g> Joe

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 3:49:26 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

*RE:"3. The U.S. Media has been INCREDIBLY biased toward the GOP in this entire affair. MSNBC and Fox are the worst, with CNN approaching evenhandedness. 'Liberal media' my ss."** ROTFLMAO...good one...

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 3:54:27 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

3. The U.S. Media has been INCREDIBLY biased toward the GOP in this entire affair. MSNBC and Fox are the worst, with CNN approaching evenhandedness. 'Liberal media' my ss.* Sure, starting off with all of them giving Florida to Gore with Bush actually ahead back on election night. If you believe the media is for the GOP, I have a bridge to tell you about.

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 3:58:47 PM
From: Gambit	Respond to of 275872

"In a tie, you split the votes." Only when you play games with 2 year olds : )

To: dougSF30 who wrote (22135)	12/11/2000 7:25:23 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

OT, dougSF, your post actually gives further ammunition, not less, to my argument that a full manual recount of all "undervote" ballots in every county of Florida has NO CHANCE of giving Al Gore the election. But first, your errors: on Miami Dade: They ordered the ... complete Miami Dade recount to be included (which consists of the partial count already done, and the count (to be done) of the 9000 ballots from the remaining precincts. No, here's what page 35 of the decision says: "As to Miami-Dade County, in light of our holding that the circuit court should have counted the undervote, we agree with appellants that the partial recount results should also be included in the total legal votes for this election." On p.15 they refute the argument that only full recounts can be counted: "Appellees [i.e., Bush] contend that even if a count of the undervotes in Miami-Dade were appropriate, section 102.168, Florida Statutes (2000), requires a count of all votes in Miami-Dade County and the entire state as opposed to a selected number of votes challenged. However, the plain language of section 102.168 refutes Appellees' argument." Yes, they do "order" that the rest of Miami-Dade be re-counted, but that is just there for appearance sake. There is no teeth to this "order," since they demand on page 4 that the partial recount results be considered part of the certified results: "For the reasons stated in this opinion, we find that the trial court erred as a matter of law in not including (1) the 215 net votes for Gore identified by the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board 6 and (2) in not including the 168 net votes for Gore identified in a partial recount by the Miami-Dade County Canvassing Board." The decision then goes on to say that only additional votes for Gore, but not for Bush should be counted in Miami-Dade: "The circuit court is directed to enter such orders as are necessary to add any legal votes to the total statewide certifications and to enter any orders necessary to ensure the inclusion of the additional legal votes for Gore in Palm Beach County [23] and the 168 additional legal votes from Miami-Dade County." That's what it says, count only "additional votes for Gore." In addition to the obviously biased instructions ("votes for Gore") the court decided that another democratic county's canvassing board, Leon County, should count Miami-Dade's votes -- apparently they liked Leon County's 2:1 Democratic majority for Gore much more than Miami-Dade's anemic 8:7 majority. As for the number of undervotes out there, please explain why > 1% of people in punch-card counties did not vote for president, while only 0.3% of people in optical-scanning counties didn't. Punchcard voting systems are much more confusing to the average person than optically scanned fill-in-the-blanks ballots. But even using the most liberal divining of intent possible, as practiced by the Broward County canvassing board, only an additional 0.3% of votes could be counted. And, by the way, if you exclude the counties with complete hand recounts (Palm Beach and Broward), the remaining "punch card counties" had 1,305,260 votes for Bush and only 1,127,663 votes for Gore. So even if I give you the Palm Beach recount and Broward recount, Gore will lose votes in the rest of the state. Gore's only hope was this Fla. supreme court decision which said that partial county recounts are OK, even though they ordered an impossible attempt at a full recount, just to make it look good for the US Supreme Court. Petz