Recount: No hanging chads, but plenty of hang-ups

  • Article by: PAT DOYLE and MIKE KASZUBA , Star Tribune
  • Updated: December 21, 2008 - 4:03 AM

An end to the recount seems so close, yet resolving the issue of rejected absentee ballots is far off.

  • 79
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
drichDec. 20, 08 9:58 PM

only because Coleman keeps suing.

45
11
memorylaneDec. 20, 0810:41 PM

We need another 6 - 12 years of his service. I love him. I usually don't believe in "career" politicians. But, Norm is an exception. We need him badly in Minnesota.

15
64
gpaulmDec. 20, 0811:02 PM

In true form, Minnesotans will ultimately greet their new Senator Al Franken with the same trust and regard that they held for the late, great, Paul Wellstone. Minnesota is a unique and wonderful state, not rules by fear, but rather by optimism. Norm Coleman is a good man, well above average in the Republican caucus. 2008 will stand forever as the year of change. Al Franken will serve proudly as Minnesota's contribution to the future of America. Thank you.

36
22
freedemDec. 20, 0811:11 PM

Florida's agony was ended with a shot to the head when the injuries were a lot more minor. If they had published the actual ballots that showed what was shown here Gore would have won easily. As happened some here and a lot more then many people checked the candidate's name and also wrote in that name below. Just counting those votes would have made a Gore win, but there was a whole lot more. A look at the challenge vs result shows that Coleman lost and he knows it, but is trying to run the Bush-Gore play book. Unfortunately for him Minnesota is not Florida, and the Internet has reached a critical mass that it had not even in 2004. That game at least will no longer work.

34
9
drichDec. 20, 0811:25 PM

does that alamo-girl.com link include something about ballots being counted twice for Franken too? That's some link!! Do you get paid by the click for getting people to go to that link? It's so irrelevant to everything your posting it about I can't see any other reason for you to be doing so. Maybe it surreptitiously puts malicious software on everybody's computer?

32
9
drichDec. 21, 0812:44 AM

It is quite lazy of you to only post a link and expect others to figure out what you're referring to. The onus is on you to explain how that gobbly-gook of information from some obscure internet website has anything to do with Franken, his lawyer, this recount, or Rahm Emmanuel as you have claimed in numerous comment posts in multiple stories.

4
0
drichDec. 21, 0812:45 AM

It is quite lazy of you to only post a link and expect others to figure out what you're referring to. The onus is on you to explain how that information from some obscure internet website has anything to do with Franken, his lawyer, this recount, or Rahm Emmanuel as you have claimed in numerous comment posts in multiple stories.

31
9
FF2RydiaDec. 21, 08 1:41 AM

I've had several college courses recently that either included information literacy in the course content or actually were an information literacy course taught by library faculty. Based on what I learned in those courses in terms of source evaluation, I have to say that the alamo-girl site is actually a very poor source. It appears to be a poorly formatted compilation of excerpts of media reports. If it was mainly from the actual Congressional Record, why not link directly (or at least include links) to the relevant pages of the record? There also happens to be the issue, in terms of evaluating the source, that it freely admits to having a bias; that may still be useful in a primary source, but this is a collection of quotations from secondary sources. In short, I'd be very cautious if I were to consider citing the alamo-girl site in any of my school work (don't think that's politically based; I would be just as cautious with a similar site having a similar bias against George W. Bush).

30
6
comment229Dec. 21, 08 5:54 AM

The only reason to compare this election with the Florida debacle is because of the nature of the ballots.... Florida's situation was worse because of the "hanging chads" and since we do not have that here, we have to determine "intent".... and the bottom line in all this, whether you are democrat, republican, or independent, is that we have to come up with a better voting method that is fool proof.... but it does make you wonder how bad it is when people cannot figure out a simple thing such as coloring in the ovals..... We ALL probably took standardized tests in school, and certainly very detailed instructions were given and we had very few errors mainly because the proctor always visually inspected the computerized answer sheets before compiling and submitting them....which is unethical (privacy issues) in a political election... do you want someone looking at your ballot before dropping it in a box or placing it in a reader? But maybe that is the only alternative? In other words, the reason for all the grief, is that we find the problems on the ballots later, after the voter has left the building.... maybe, we need to come up with a way to inspect the ballots immediately? I keep thinking about toll road coin hopper machines, that analyze the amount you put in the hopper and give a green light when it is correct... would something like that be appropriate and economical to use in an election? You slide your ballot in a reader, and get a green light to leave if everything is in order?

21
4
poobahDec. 21, 08 6:22 AM

The authors of this article are irresponsible and do this state a dis-service by suggesting the recount in Minnesota somehow equates with the recount in Florida. Does anyone truly believe "Minnesota's Senate recount has reached Florida-grade levels of confusion and controversy" as the authors state in this article? Let's get real. State election officials have conducted the recount as expeditiously as is possible while maintaining fairness. The canvassing board, Attorney General and Supreme Court have worked to swiftly resolve all challenges. Would the authors of this article, or anyone for that fact, be more satisfied if we were to skirt the legal process of the recount and forfeit the most accurate recount possible in return for a more timely conclusion? Shame on you, Kaszuba and Doyle.

33
2

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