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: TigerPaw who wrote (112476)	12/12/2000 3:38:53 PM
From: TripleT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

And humans can count ballots when they should not. No subjective ballot counting should be allowed and clear-cut standards should be in nailed into place with a spike and sledge hammer. However, it'll never happen because these laws would not allow manipulation to favor a demo candidate. TTT

To: TigerPaw who wrote (112476)	12/12/2000 3:42:20 PM
From: Knight	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

<As a hypothetical, if a voter started by pushing firmly, but not firmly enough to dislodge the chad but eventually broke through, wouldn't that voter be inclined to continue pushing through from that point on?> It's possible. However, there's no way to distinguish between the hypothetical case you mention and the hypothetical case where a voter starts to vote and decides not to do so. Because the interpretation of said ballot is ambiguous, the voter's intent does not meet the standard of "clear." At some point, you have to leave the burden on the voter to follow directions. Granted, the Florida standard of "voter intent is clear" is gracious, to some degree, to voters who make error. However, it uses the word "clear" and not "probable" and, hence, allows for much less subjectivity than has been alleged by those who support the looser standards.