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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (171938)	10/4/2005 8:42:32 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If we're going to pull shit like the late rule change on the Iraqi constitution, why can't we just declare victory, come home, then cluck-cluck when open civil war breaks out?

To: geode00 who wrote (171938)	10/4/2005 9:34:25 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The rules said for the referendum to fail, "two thirds of the voters/people in 3 provinces should reject it". This has not changed. What has changed is that "voters" have now come to mean "eligible voters" rather than "actual voters". This by itself is not as big of a problem, but see the next point. In order for the results to have validity, the rules stated that "more than half of all voters/people should accept the constitution". As the rules have changed, this part of the law means half of actual voters (as opposed to registered voters) should vote "yes". In other words, the word "voter" is interpreted in two different ways...and this is a problem.