From: Tom Whore (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 09 2000 - 09:23:04 PPET
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Chuck Murcko wrote:
--]Sheesh. What I'm wondering is this:
--]It's (almost) the 21st century. Why is it going to take Oregon longer to
--]count its votes than it'll take Florida to recount theirs? And with 1/3
--]the ballots to count? Oregon had a head start with a mail only ballot
--]for crying out loud. What's the problem here?
The Gore fence sitters for one thing. They were waiting to the last
possible moment to cast thier vote. If gore was showing signs of needing
the push they voted for gore else they would vote nader.
As nader said, and rightfully so in opr, Gore cost hom the election, not
the other way around:)-
Ther were also a lot of Measures and such ont he ballot that needed
carefull reading. Things like Measure 9 which if passed would prohibt any
mention of homosexual or bisexual acctivity in a publicaly funded school
else the school would loose funding. This covered k thru community
coledge. Sounds like it should have been cut and dry but the vote now
stands at 51% against the ban and 49% for it.
My thoughts are it should take as long as they need to count each and
every vote, because this years only shows what ive been bellyaching about
for a while, votes count and voting for your own choices is important.
So let it take a week to tally and check and recheck. The coutnry will
still be here
/"\ [---=== WSMF ----http://wsmf.doesntexist.com===---]
X ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/ \ Against HTML Mail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 09 2000 - 09:28:40 PPET