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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (86670)	12/11/2000 8:15:33 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 132070

Nadine, I agree completely. Harris is the one who has abused her position, one which I've always viewed as the keeper of election integrity. But the election had limited integrity from the start because of the manner in which equipment was upgraded. Her being a pawn and using the position as a stepping stone I believe did more to create chaos (or invite it) than Gore and Bush camps together (because she could have butted them out by keeping the election integrity as the top priority rather than her own political agenda). Shame on her, I say.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (86670)	12/11/2000 9:52:40 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>> I do think a Secretary of State who didn't care who the winner was would have followed a different process following an election that was a virtual tie.<< nadine, 2 democratic counties were hand counted and gore still lost. a third democratic county had those precincts that voted nearly 75% for gore hand counted while neglecting those precincts that reduced the final tally to 53% gore. the odds of gore still losing after cherry picking three democratic counties is near 50%. and that is AFTER cherry picking to get MORE votes. yes, i was SHOCKED when gore picked up so FEW votes after his CHERRY PICK. btw, harris is a hack. however, i see no evidence that she changed the outcome of this election. bush won no matter what given the counts already submitted. sure, he would have won by less, but so what? is that a "fair" solution? is that a replay challenge? i think not. rather, it is like getting an extra 3 seconds added to the end of the game after you lose (legal in fl, though i believe illegal - rightfully so - at the fed'l level). bush is no saint. however, i'm amazed at the level of color that shades your view that he is worse than gore. maybe he is, but it is so darn close even partisans ought to rake BOTH over the coals.