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: Alighieri who wrote (129758)	12/15/2000 3:25:16 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570741

When the contestant opposing the recount takes an active role aimed at frustrating and filibustering the recount, I contend that it approaches cheating. On the football field the opposing coach can't stop a review of the play. Al, the NFL allows for one replay of a call, that has a limited time limit. If the opposing coach tried to stop a revew of the call after the game from going to the league office to overturn the result he would not be cheating. FL law calls for certifing the election by a certain date. The FL Supreme Court took it apon itself to allow extra rounds of "reviewing the call". Tim

To: Alighieri who wrote (129758)	12/15/2000 3:50:29 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1570741

Al, When the contestant opposing the recount takes an active role aimed at frustrating and filibustering the recount, I contend that it approaches cheating. There is a difference between recount and manufacturing of votes. Gore never proposed a fair recount. You may want to read the opinion of Justice Bryer. 2 of the the 4 justices that wanted the counting to continue past the 12th said that the so called "recounts" would have to thrown out. Broward county was a travesty of justice. The reason it was so easy for Bush to sustain opposition to recounts is because what Gore proposed was so unfair. If Gore ever proposed a fair recount (rather than opportunistic hunt for votes), the public opinion would have forced Bush to agree to it. If the FL SC didn't blow 12 days of the contest phase in their protest extension, there might have been time for a fair recount. I think it would have been much easier for Bryer and Souter to find 3 more justices to back a fair recount they were proposed in their dissent (dissent of the 5:4 majority ruling which said all had to stop on 12th). The other 2 justices who also wanted recounts to continue (Ginsburg and Stevens) didn't agree to the provision of Brier opinion that asked for the recount to be fair. They wanted to continue the FL SC questionable "recount". Joe PS: There you have it. I got drawn into this mess again. I will try to resist the temptation and stay away from this election mess.