Picture of the Day - 2
Notice the caption says "former."
(Former Republican Sen. Norm Coleman sits pensively during a court delay before the start of the Senate vote recount trial Thursday, Feb. 26, 2009 in St. Paul, Minn. (AP Photo/Jim Mone))
posted by mikevotes at
3:08 PM
6 Comments:
Well, of course, he hasn't been a senator since 5 January. And Franken is the senator-elect, certified by the election board... It's only by Franken's being senator-elect that the ECC is involved at all.
By
-epm, at 3:05 PM
I know, but you would think they'd do the courtesy if they thought there was any chance left.
By
mikevotes, at 5:04 PM
There really is no chance left for Norm; that's why he is now promoting the idea of a "do-over".
I firmly believe he would lose a "do-over". Coleman has very much alienated the Independents who voted for Barkley. He has moved further right and revealed himself to be beholden to the failing GOP. As the GOP has become increasingly crazy, he has associated himself with that craziness and blown the false idea that he is some kind of "moderate" free of Party dictates.
On top of that, there is the obvious corner that Coleman has painted himself into: if the Minnesota election system is so irrevocably and fundamentally flawed (as he claims), then why should we have a new election under that flawed system? And why was this horribly flawed system okay when Norm won last time in a plurality? Why is this system okay when it elects idiots like Bachmann, but "tainted" when it elects Democrats?
Of course, Franken has done well to keep his mouth shut in the interim. He has negated a lot of the fears that Coleman tried to inspire, and thus he has come through this looking better if it were to come to a "do-over"...which it won't.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 8:23 PM
I am a Minnesotan and I have been an election judge since 2004. It sincerely pisses me off every time I hear anyone call our state's election system "flawed". It is hands-down THE BEST system in the country and the world.
The recount proved it by showing such a minor difference in the machine/human counting of millions of votes. The only reason for the difference was because of "voter intent", which a machine could NEVER discern (unless all voters were smart enough to know how to mark an oval and follow the voting rules--unfortunately, even in Minnesota, they are not.)
By
Anonymous, at 9:09 AM
Yes, bruceo, it's a pretty damn good system. I wasn't saying it wasn't. I was saying Coleman contention is that it is flawed, but not flawed enough to prevent a "do-over".
The vast majority of Minnesotans agree with you and I on the election system. That's precisely why, on Nov. 5, Coleman made several strong endorsements of that system and expressed his complete confidence in it. In fact, his premise was essentially that the system is so good that we really didn't need to have a recount in the first place.
Coleman has moved from "no recount needed", to "recount absolutely needed", to "must challenge recount in court", to "do election over". And probably an appeal of the court challenge decision, too.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 11:04 AM
Not to step in because I have not been following all the details of this, but pretty much everyone out there who is watching is calling it over.
The battle at this point seems more about delgitimizing Franken and keeping him out of the Senate as long as they can rather than really winning.
(The national folks are still pouring in money. Cornyn was talking about it on Fri at CPAC.)
By
mikevotes, at 12:54 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home