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: Joe NYC who wrote (22139)	12/11/2000 3:47:52 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, 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. Great. Let's get on with it then. If the USSC blocks the recount, Bush's presidency is doomed. Why is Bush fighting it? Scumbria

To: Joe NYC who wrote (22139)	12/11/2000 3:58:55 PM
From: jjayxxxx	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

OT I am coming to conclusion that no matter what the decision is, Gore loses. Because the SC is cognizant of this, decision will be for Bush 7-2 or better. The add'l 2 or more justices will find a reason to vote with the majority, such as the 'equal protection' argument (i.e. no standards = unequal votes) or the 'no new law' argument (i.e. can't set new standards). Pure WAG, but what the hey? I haven't heard anyone talk about the following problem with only recounting the undervote: If dimples can count in undervote, then they should also count in regular vote, thereby rejecting any ballots that have both a dimple and a regularly punched out chad for two different presidential candidates (i.e. switching those ballots to the 'overvote' category). This is why all votes should be tallied rather than just the undervote. JJ

To: Joe NYC who wrote (22139)	12/11/2000 4:41:01 PM
From: dougSF30	Respond to of 275872

Joe, Re: election stuff... Previously... 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> ------------------------------------- Regarding the first, of course the correct decision is that the USSC has NO jurisdiction over this state matter. Scalia himself believes there is no federal right of presidential suffrage, which would render any equal protection argument null and void. Needless to say, he and his cohorts are big States' Rights folks-- until, surprisingly, now. All USSC case law supports the FSC decision. Guess they'll be throwing out election codes in most of the states if they render a decision here. The USSC could set the standard themselves, and if they chose Texas, it's game over for Bush. Regarding item 2, I said that the argument that 'since it is close, call it a draw and give it to Bush' makes no sense. Obviously there is no precendent for splitting electors, but if someone makes the argument that it is a DRAW, they would need, at least, to actually flip a coin, not just choose Bush because he's "ahead" in the draw. Doug