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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (86794)	12/13/2000 2:04:04 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne, I think we are mixing two arguments here, 'equal protection', and 'setting standards after the election' The question is, does unequal protection somehow become legal just because both parties agreed beforehand? I don't think so, which is why I think accepting the equal protection argument opened a real can of worms. As for the changing standards argument, I will always suspect that in an alternate universe where Bush was down by 300 votes after the automatic recount, the standards in place before the election -- local canvassing boards oversee the recount with observers from both parties -- would have been found acceptable and a statewide recount would have been negotiated with much less fuss. Gore would have been likely to gain and Bush would have had nothing to lose.