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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: HighTech who wrote (111344)	12/11/2000 9:59:05 PM
From: zonkie	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I agree it is a wrong to assume that when a republican application for an absentee has been invalidated by the supervisor of elections for signing their name to incorrect data that it has to remain invalidated. All you have to do to make it legal is preform a class 3 felony on it and presto, it is legal. >>>>Second, with respect to the absentee ballots that were mailed out, the printer failed to put the correct ID number on the mailing to the requesters. The requesters did nothing wrong, they were simply made aware of(both democrats and republicans) that their numbers were inadvertently left off the APPLICATION, not the ballot. The correct numbers were then placed on the APPLICATIONS. Those numbers were available to the public to anyone who wished to look and were not social security numbers. Also, the ballots then submitted by real voters were never touched by those who made the corrections. Sour grapes my friend.<<<< As to your first statement about the postmarks if you will remember it is a state law about those postmarks. I'm not sure but I think if a serviceman was mailing a ballot from somewhere that didn't postmark he was supposed to have someone sign to witness his signature and date it. There were other reasons for the ballots being thrown out and there were a lot of ballots that should have been rejected if the law had been followed but weren't. I was simply using those examples to point out the absurdity (180 degree change of opinion) of the republicans claim that if a chad is not fully punched out it is an invalid vote.