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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan3 who wrote (129603)	12/13/2000 12:56:10 PM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 1570542

Dan, If the law favors GOP, it is written in stone. If it hurts GOP, it is unfair. Isn't that what the Supreme Court decided over the last two weeks? I wish they would have just come out and said that. (Actually, I guess that is what Justice Stevens said.) Scumbria

To: Dan3 who wrote (129603)	12/13/2000 1:35:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570542

You have a bit of a point but I think those ballots are at least closer to being a successful vote and to indicating who someone wants to vote for then any "pregnant" or dimpled chads. If you throw out all of the ambiguous chad votes I think Bush might win even without the Seminole county absentee ballots. (take say the machine recount votes - the Seminole county absentee votes). More generally I don't really want it both ways. If a vote is really unclear it probably should be throw out, whoever winds up president as a result of this. Tim