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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Windsock who wrote (122133)	12/11/2000 6:35:51 PM
From: pgerassi	Respond to of 186894

Dear Windsock: The rule in place in Palm Beach from 1990 was two corner before the election. A dimple is not a clear indication of intent (does not have "reasonable certainty"). All else, is dancing around the issue. The current law is to count dimples for any future election unless overriden by the FL Legislature who has the last word. The PBC can't change the standard after the election. "With reasonable certainty" is contained in that same statute right after the quoted section. Dimples are not reasonably certain. Besides, I was talking about rulings before the election, not after. BTW, reasonable certainty is the opposite of reasonable doubt. The case can be made that a dimple, by its very nature, is able to be reasonably doubted and thus, not reasonably certain. It seems that the FSC conveniently forgot that section as well as most Democratically controlled Canvasing Boards. Pete