Senate decision: Are we there yet?

  • Article
  • Updated: March 1, 2009 - 7:30 AM
  • 119
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
doctawallyFeb. 28, 0911:57 PM

Does anyone with a clear-eyed view of the current contest think Coleman has a realistic chance of overcoming the Franken lead? They are going to lose the 133 missing ballot issue, they are not going to leverage the possible duplicate ballot double counting for more than a handful of votes, if that. The pool of potentially countable absentee ballots is shrinking, and percentage-wise, has always been Franken-rich. There are simply not going to be enough votes for Coleman to make any difference.

ghostsoulsMar. 1, 09 1:33 AM

Who would have thought that Franken could comeback in the beginning when he was behind by so much, then not only catch, but overtake Coleman by this absurd margin. I have seen those ballots, like some have an "X" in front of Franken's name, and Franken says they are for him, but then when by the same standards the "X" is in front of Coleman's name, that isnt a vote for coleman, it's a rejection...... absolutely absurd, can't have it both ways, X's are for Franken, but same X's are against Coleman. This is how he took the lead. Double counting ballots, only that have Franken votes. I think I saw one that only voted for President, and somehwere on the ballot it said something about he was voting for the "clown", and Franken said it was clearly a vote for him because he was the "comedian". Come on now..... if you really and truly want a clear eyed view of the current contest, I think it is the wsj or the start tribune, that has all of the ballots in question 4,000+ and it lets you look at them, examine them and vote on them yourself. It also lets you see how that idiotic panel voted on them. Go look at all those ballots, and then come back and tell me Franken isn't doing something "hokey"!

olelarsMar. 1, 09 7:46 AM

At times Coleman represented Minnesota well and at times he voted to pay back the RNC that funded his accidental 2002 victory. I can't think of anything that Franken has done beyond debating well and knowing the issues. A potty-mouth past is hard to shake. I'm not sure that's enough to be a US Senator. All this said, just two years we chose Amy Klobuchar over Mark Kennedy and I would say that was a fine choice.

mnbear48Mar. 1, 09 7:52 AM

Elections should not be decided by courts unless there is clear cut proof of widespread proof of corruption or mismanagment which despite which this does situations not have. As a former election judge there is no such thing as a perfect tally because of the tendancy of some people not to be able follow directions or feel the need to screw around with their ballot to "send a message". Furthermore the Constitution spells out the remedy: the Senate of the Untied States is to be the final judge of Elections, Returns, and Qualifications of its members.

alwillMar. 1, 09 8:03 AM

It's time to solve this contest. There are important issues where this senate seat could be the deciding vote, and ours is empty! We tell our children every vote counts, what a joke!

bill9844Mar. 1, 09 8:23 AM


franklyfrankMar. 1, 09 8:31 AM

Coleman sued, Franken responded. There would have been no mutual shaking of the money tree if Coleman had accepted the honest results of the recount. The characterization in the is just another false equivalency.

lsmdesignMar. 1, 09 9:10 AM

Voter ID would have solved all of this, but our liberal legislature, doesn't want to stop the election fraud. He's worried that people in nursing homes will be disenfranchised, which is merely a scare tactic used to keep honesty out of the election process. With 4 Billion allocated from the Stimulus Bill to ACORN, the group that Mark Ritchie is familiar with and that has stolen elections in the past, the libs are thrilled to keep Voter ID from the people of MN. Remember, we are one of only a handful of states without it....aren't there nursing homes in the other states, too? If we want fair elections, we need to stop the election fraud. Voter ID is a start.

drichmnMar. 1, 09 9:14 AM

You are wrong on all counts.

Using the machine count does not cost Coleman 132 votes. Those were not all Franken votes. Franken would only gain 46. And, as has been stated many times, in previous recounts when ballots were lost they used the machine count otherwise you are throwing away valid votes. Plus that really sets up the possibility that some unscrupulous individual could disappear ballots to alter the count.

The witness testimony was NOT about ballots being run through the machine twice. The reason ballots were duplicated is because they couldn't be run through the machine. So obviously they couldn't be run through twice. She said that some ballots that went through the machine after being duplicated were not marked as a duplicate. No ballots in any precinct were run through the machine twice on election day.

It isn't county clerks that put registration materials inside the secrecy envelope it was the voter. In some counties that Coleman won they opened the secrecy envelope looking for the registration materials so they could count it, in some counties that Franken won they did not. So that means that Coleman had an unfair advantage on election night and got more votes from opening the envelopes.

motfuulMar. 1, 09 9:18 AM

1. No matter who ends up as Senator 40'some percent of the State will think he "stole" the election and we'll have to listen to that for years like we did with Bush. 2. Our current election laws need to be thrown out with the bath water and we need to start over. This would have been over long ago if we just had a run-off election with just the two candidates.


Comment on this story   |  


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