State Canvassing Board faces big challenge today

  • Article by: By PAT DOYLE, KEVIN DUCHSCHERE and BOB VON STERNBERG
  • Updated: December 18, 2008 - 8:54 AM

Members of the Canvassing Board will hear a Coleman charge that some ballots have been counted twice.

  • 126
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
andyk47Dec. 17, 08 9:35 AM

I feel like I have a front row seat to the Great Minnesota Senate Election Theft!

18
63
nmachenDec. 17, 08 9:36 AM

How about "Recount Day 2 to begin this morning" instead?

10
19
bmd6060Dec. 17, 08 9:47 AM

The rule should be simple: If your to stupid to fill in a circle, your vote doesn't count.

32
61
mbowlerDec. 17, 08 9:47 AM

The deliberation is completely transparent, out in the open. What election theft? The real theft would have occurred had the recount not been allowed to go forward as with the Florida 2000 Presidential Election.

58
29
jastkeDec. 17, 08 9:49 AM

This begs the question...which candidate do you think is trying to steal the election? Y'know, I think we're all pretty tired of this type of comment by now. If you have evidence that something illegal is taking place I encourage you to call the police. If not, please keep your unfounded accusations to yourself.

71
10
gurquhartDec. 17, 08 9:57 AM

For the Coleman partisans who consider an election recount to be a "theft": I assume those of you who are football fans-- or fans of any sport-- are also deathly opposed to video replays of disputed plays, right? If you're a Vikings' fan, your team very possibly would be 7 - 7 now instead of 9 - 5, without those replays (several key examples of which benefited the Vikings in a couple of close games). You must also be opposed to appealing initial court decisions, challenging a cashier on a mistake while ringing up your purchases, and having your child question their teacher about a grading mistake on a school test or assignment. Your position appears to be "Initial decisions in any given situation are what should 'count', whether really correct or not. No appeals, do-overs or corrections should be allowed". Seems like a pretty questionable position to me.

62
18
andyk47Dec. 17, 0810:07 AM

Of the 202 ballots review so far, Coleman votes challenged by Franken, 59% have gone to Coleman, 13% to Franken and 28% to neither. That seems like an abnormally-high take away from Coleman. I don't expect those same numbers to hold for the Coleman-challenged Franken votes.

22
26
huphuphupDec. 17, 0810:08 AM

The rule should be simple: If you're too stupid to use correct spelling, you should not be allowed to post here.

46
23
dcpelantDec. 17, 0810:15 AM

The blogs, the editorials, the articles, etc. etc. We've all become news junkies with this god-aweful recount and we can't help it even though we really, really hates it. I have a feeling that when this is actually finally over we're all gonna have one wicked hang-over.

11
18
jastkeDec. 17, 0810:35 AM

.. except that instead of saying "abnormally high" I would just say high. I also think Coleman's pecentage of upheld challenges will be lower than Franken's because I expect that Coleman's campaign has made more unfounded challenges.

22
17

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT