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: RetiredNow who wrote (539295)	12/29/2009 10:24:14 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576159

It all came down to the butterfly ballot. Designed by and Dem and wrongly instructed on by a Dem.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (539295)	12/29/2009 10:54:12 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576159

I honestly believe the system did not work to put in the White House the man the people intended to be elected, as evidenced by the popular vote and as evidenced by the massive lawyering that Bush had to do to secure Florida. 1. Is there evidence that Bush's "lawyering" was any more massive than "Gore's"? After all, it was Gore who started the battle. 2. As others have pointed out, in this country the popular vote isn't the measuring stick, and that is with very good reason. The real anomaly in the 2000 vote began when they started hand-counting votes, leaving the process up to human judgments and the manipulation that can result. Nobody who watched this can believe that the panel in some of those South Fla. counties were fair because they clearly were not objective. At any rate, Marty Merzer's study is as definitive as you can get and the 2000 election was not about the electoral college; rather, it was about a voting system on the brink of collapse that finally did. If you want to argue about this you ought to go read the book first.