If elections were valid before websites existed

[Marnieworld]

then how can an election be invalid now just because a candidate's site is "down"? Now it is debatable, and being debated everywhere on the internets today, whether Lieberman's site is down because of a "hacking" or down due to a desperate pathetic campaign ploy. Regardless though it should be irrelevant that the site is down because they are irrelevant as far as the electoral process.

It's not like someone couldn't vote. It's not like a person can't find their appropriate polling place. It most definitely is not because someone waits until an election day to make up their mind and they always go with the candidate who's website is functioning best.

Stop the debate about hacking or not hacked. It's irrelevant- end of story.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

1. It's a stalling tactic - they can allege that Ned supressed the vote

then start a bunch of lawsuits and investigations

[robinlynne]

2. ah we're just bored, or don't want to talk about about the two terrible

wars, or the polar bears starving, or the people starving, or....