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 (122188)	12/11/2000 9:24:58 PM
From: Gary Ng	Respond to of 186894

Winsock, Re: The standard is a "a clear indication of the intent of the voter". See section 101.5614(5) I believe Scalia will address this issue in the ruling as he has asked some question about it and I kind of feel that he has some different interpretation of this section. gary

To: Windsock who wrote (122188)	12/11/2000 9:41:14 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

Re: "The standard is a "a clear indication of the intent of the voter". See section 101.5614(5)" Nice one but out of context. First off you wouldn't know if there was clear indication of the intent of the voter unless you examined the ballots. You need a reason to examine the ballots after the election is certified. No handcount is called for unless there is evidence of fraud, machine malfunction or natural disaster. No evidence of any of those things, so no legal reason to look at the ballots and "discover" clear intentions(by who's definition?). That's what judge Sauls ruled if you care to recall. Either way, they'd have a hard time completing it by tomorrow when the votes must be submitted to the House. EP

To: Windsock who wrote (122188)	12/11/2000 11:02:22 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Windsock, RE:"The standard is a "a clear indication of the intent of the voter". See section 101.5614(5) leg.state.fl.us You may not like the standard. You may not find it convenient for your desire that Bush win. But the Florida legislature passed the standard before the election." --- DO you really think the USSC will buy that tomorrow? The standard seems to be that individual canvassing boards make up their own standard. On top of that, there are many diferent voter mechanism variations across the state. I think this confuses the USSC and brings in the equal protection card...as in due process. I wonder if they will just throw up their hands and say...that's it, case closed, can't fairly hand recount the whole state...take Nov. 7 results, better luck next time. Jim