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.

Pastimes : What Can We Do To Bring The Country Back Together? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (131)	12/16/2000 5:56:18 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 181

A perfect example of why liberals need to be DEFEATED rather than compromised with. They will always consider this tawdry attempt by the Gore criminals to manufacture votes and steal the election after they had already lost to be "fairly and accurately counting votes". To a liberal the only "fair" vote count is a count in which he wins. They will now have their lapdogs in academia manufacture "reasonable" arguments against the Supreme Court decision until no one bothers to listen anymore. The Supreme Court saw a wayward state supreme court detach itself from the law and become an accomplice to an attempted robbery and power grab. They put a stop to it, and are prepared to live with the sick propaganda coming from the Left. Let the Left stake its specious claim, and suffer the long-term consequences...

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (131)	12/16/2000 6:56:45 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 181

I am not asking you to argue legal technicalities with a lawyer. I don't think we are talking about technicalities, I think we are talking about things that every person can understand. The argument advanced in the article that you cite is that the Supreme Court stopped the recount and thus, itself, made it impossible to complete by 12/12/00. The simple flaw in that argument, and it is not a technicality, it is the heart, soul and breath of the argument, is that the recount was proceeding without statewide standards. That was the violation of the Equal Protection Clause. That was why they granted the injunction. That was why they overturned the Florida Supreme Court. Whatever recount was completed would have to be completely redone. It would have been a nullity, a meaningless act. That was the flaw in Gore's argument all along. He argued, let's count the votes, and forget about an objective standard. A subjective standard is good enough. It can vary from county to county. It can vary from individual to individual. That argument was rejected as violating the equal protection clause because using a looser standard diluted the votes of those whose votes were counted using a stricter standard. That's not a legal technicality. You are certainly intelligent enough to understand it. As someone who is good at math and science, you should be able to follow it. If one person uses a loose standard to measure something and another person uses a strict standard to measure something, are the results comparable? Will they come up with the same result? And if not, does it matter?