Minnesotans split again -- on a new Senate vote

  • Article by: BOB VON STERNBERG , Star Tribune
  • Updated: March 5, 2009 - 5:00 PM

Independent voters are least likely to want a new election.

  • 159
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
bsnewsMar. 5, 09 4:15 PM

Of course the dems. don't want a revote, they know Al wouldn't have a chance.....

treetoadMar. 5, 09 4:19 PM

We should have done this to start with!

kevinm1Mar. 5, 09 4:27 PM

Minnesota followed the law, the lawyers are the ones trying as any good lawyer would is the create doubt. Well so far it hasn't worked.

danielfbooneMar. 5, 09 4:27 PM

It seems a little strange for the Tribune to be calling the election 'hopelessly deadlocked.' That may be what Coleman is trying to sell but it doesn't sound like the judges or any rational objective observers are buying.

goobydooMar. 5, 09 4:28 PM

The state doesn't have the money to be throwing at a new election. Let the courts (quickly) run their course and let their decision stand. This needs to end soon. The Dems don't want it because their guy is ahead and the Reps want it because without it, their guy loses. Stop the political games and do what's best for the state. NO SPECIAL ELECTION!!!

BucklawMar. 5, 09 4:29 PM

We have a legal process for the election and the recount. We have also had flip-flopping legal arguments trying to manipulate the process once the election was certified. Now it turns out that the flip-flopping did not produce the results the Repbulicans want so we're supposed to redo everything. Is that what we're saying??

The election was held and certified. The Republicans have done all they can to taint these results and undermine the election's credibility. The election is over. Let's not forget that Coleman claims he is doing this because he says he wants to ensure that every Minnesotan's vote is counted. B.S. We all know that if Coleman were in Franken's position -- i.e., the winner -- Coleman would not be refusing to accept the election results because he was "concerned" for Minnesota voters. We know what Coleman is concerned about. That's reason enough to end this now.

noinkMar. 5, 09 4:38 PM

Activist Aaron Bolinger says senators wield way too much power these days and that's not the way it is suppost to be. He says senators should be held accountable to the states themselves, and could therefore be rebuked for voting for bad legislation including free trade agreements and the Real ID Act. The U.S. needs to pass the U.S. Senate Accountability Act, this law correctly assumes that the Senate is part of the national legislature to represent the states, whereas U.S. House members represent the people district by district.

j_m_t_usMar. 5, 09 4:41 PM

If a re-vote isn't done, people will wonder if it's even worth while going to the poll anymore after seeing what went on here. Do a re-vote and hopefully learn from all the mistakes that were made.

grad_girl_1Mar. 5, 09 4:47 PM

Based on precedent, it would cost at least several millions of taxpayer dollars to conduct a re-vote. Did the pollsters point out this fact when they asked the question? Based on this story, it doesn't sound like they did not. I think they should re-conduct the poll and specify the cost to taxpayers when they ask. I'm sure there will be many more who are not in favor!! While they're at it, they also should have asked if Norm Coleman should be allowed to file another lawsuit if he doesn't win the revote.

allhailfsmMar. 5, 09 4:48 PM

It should not shock me anymore that the Reborn RightWing Strib calls this election "hopelessly snarled". It is perfectly in keeping with your persistent portrayal of Coleman as being somehow the wronged and reasonable party in this lawsuit. What happened to Colemans promise that he would end the suit early if the first stages did not show him gaining sufficient votes to win?


Comment on this story   |  


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