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 (122189)	12/11/2000 9:49:52 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

I think this is what you are referring to: The grounds for contesting an election under this section are: (a) Misconduct, fraud, or corruption on the part of any election official or any member of the canvassing board sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election. (b) Ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute. (c) Receipt of a number of illegal votes or rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election. The key issue was "rejection". Because the number of undervotes was 1.6% it was lower than the statewide average of 1.9% and the national average of 2%. This meant that it was completely reasonable to conclude that the undervotes were true "no votes" and no reason to believe they were votes cast for a specific candidate. The burden of proof was on the Gore people to prove they were legal votes and they failed to do so. So ruled judge Sauls. EP