.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

Norm Coleman

After all the money, and all the legal wrangling, Norm Coleman actually falls 87 votes further behind in the last of the Minnesota recount.

posted by mikevotes at 1:11 PM

7 Comments:

  • Yet the seating of Senator-elect Franken is still nowhere in sight....

    Next stop MN Supreme Court. What's the vibe in MN, Todd?

    By Blogger -epm, at 1:38 PM  

  • Pawlenty said he wouldn't sign until appeals were completed.

    With him looking at reelection in 2010, I think that's the pressure point.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 2:35 PM  

  • I was just wondering about the timeline with regard to walking this through the MN Supreme Court. I figures there's 10 day to file this, 14 days to counter, 9 days for something else. I just don't know how much clock running team Coleman can do in their gigantic "F-U" to MN voters.

    Heck, I don't think the ECC is even finished with this case. There are still a couple of pending rulings, I believe.

    Pawlenty won't be on the hot seat to sign anything until that's exhausted.

    By Blogger -epm, at 2:49 PM  

  • Officially no, but I would think Coleman losing ground today after all the court stuff has to tip the pressure a bit.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 3:44 PM  

  • Quote found on Daily Kos:
    "It took Norm Coleman nine weeks to prove they Franken's lead should have been 87 more than the State Canvassing Board said it was."

    Thought:
    Thousands of absentee votes were rejected because a voter wasn't registered or didn't apply for an absentee ballot or didn't fill in the absentee ballot legibly/correctly. Yet the GOP continues to insist these be counted (presumably for Coleman). Isn't this voter fraud? Isn't this the kind of thing the GOP pisses it's pants about? Should the Democratic caucus start pushing the meme that the GOP is aggressively pushing voter fraud to over turn an election?

    By Blogger -epm, at 8:41 AM  

  • epm wrote:
    "Thousands of absentee votes were rejected because a voter wasn't registered or didn't apply for an absentee ballot or didn't fill in the absentee ballot legibly/correctly. Yet the GOP continues to insist these be counted (presumably for Coleman)."

    Yes, it's a little thin, isn't it?
    Coleman also wanted absentee ballots allowed in cases where the signature on the ballot was not the name of the voter - i.e. someone else cast the ballot. They even brought people in to explain how they had voted for their wives, etc. and how outrageous it was that "their" vote had been taken away.

    Aside from that, the biggest election day delays were caused by Republican "observers" who insisted on intense examination of the credentials of everyone that didn't look "Republican enough".

    As a registered voter, I have never had to provide any credentials beyond giving my name, though I always make sure to bring them. This last election, however, I was challenged by an extremely cross Republican woman who glared at me suspiciously and went over my DL with a fine-tooth comb. Finally, I pulled out my passport and voter registration card to lay the issue to rest, which only seemed to increase her suspicion.
    These "observers" have no power whatsoever. They are a courtesy to the Parties. But they badly abused that courtesy in this last election to deny the vote to as many people as possible and to make voters run an unpleasant gauntlet.

    A lot of minorities will remember which Party tried very hard to keep them from voting.

    By Blogger Todd Dugdale , at 9:02 AM  

  • The observers are becoming a bigger and bigger issue. Their authority comes largely from the degree to which they can assert it over the election officials.

    I think that's a scandal that's coming, and there's really no great justification for them.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 10:43 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home