MN Sen Recount (UPDATE: Stuart Smalley certified winner, lawsuit forthcoming)

[Lunar]

Canvassing board just did Lizard People - did not award the vote to Franken

They said it was an identifying mark - the person's name could have been Lizard People.


WHAT?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

per 538

[Lunar]

To me, the Lizard Ballot was an exception because the person clearly broke from his pattern of filling in the bubble for Write-In for the senate race.

Secondly, if Silver is right, then it was rejected because of an identifying mark, not because of an overvote (which would make sense).

[Lunar]

Nate Silver has it at Coleman +1 if anyone cares.  But it assumes that the current rates of pick-up continue.

[Lunar]

Nate Silver has it at Coleman +1 if anyone cares.  But it assumes that the current rates of pick-up continue.

God, I hope this happens.  If Coleman won by one vote, it would mean total chaos.

That number doesn't include the fifth-pile absentees.

Ironically that would be by far the best for Democrats as I said previously.

Republicans look like they stole the election - Democrats aren't stuck with someone so unappealing nationally.

[Lunar]

Insane.  All each party has to do is look at the county and refuse to accept any absentees from a county that favors the other side.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/in-minnesota-six-inches-of-confusion.html

1. The counties are prohibited from sorting through or counting any rejected absentee ballots on their own, or under the recommendations of the state's Canvassing Board;

2. Instead, the two candidates, the Secretary of State, and the county auditors and canvassing boards should implement a process for identifying and counting wrongfully rejected absentee ballots. But -- and here's the kicker -- both of the candidates and the local elections officials must mutually agree that any given absentee ballot has been rejected in error. If such a consensus emerges about a particular ballot, it will be opened, counted, and the revised results will be forwarded to the state's Canvassing Board.

The Court further requires that this process be completed by 4 PM on December 31st. Nothing in the ruling, however, would appear to preclude either campaign from challenging the results of the election at a later date.

The process established by the Supreme Court is likely to be contentious and cumbersome. The sheer number of parties it involves in the process, when coupled with the lack of guidance it provides to them, creates an environment in which fatigue and partisanship are likely to prevail over Minnesota Nice. The most burdensome part of the process, of course, is the requirement that each individual ballot must be mutually agreed upon to have been rejected in error before it is opened and counted.

[Lunar]

I'm a spineless sell-out!

But yeah, let's talk about the ballots.

[Lunar]

I was about to post that.

42 42 42!

I will be a God among Gods if that turns out to be the victory margin.

[Lunar]

I am now a passionate advocate AGAINST rejected absentee ballots being counted.

Why?  Star Trib predicts a 48 vote lead for Franken tomorrow, shockingly close to my initial prediction of 42.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36589859.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUec7PaP3E77K_0c::D3aDhUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiU

[Lunar]

If Franken comes out ahead, Coleman’s campaign might actually want to count the dismissed absentees (although they might risk lawyers being reprimanded in exchange for blatantly refusing to count them from liberal areas).  Even though there is a 95%+ chance that Franken would gain more than he would lose from including the ballots, Coleman needs as much uncertainty as possible at this point...unless he is going to use the narrow margin as justification for something else.

[Lunar]

If Franken comes out ahead, Coleman’s campaign might actually want to count the dismissed absentees (although they might risk lawyers being reprimanded in exchange for blatantly refusing to count them from liberal areas).  Even though there is a 95%+ chance that Franken would gain more than he would lose from including the ballots, Coleman needs as much uncertainty as possible at this point...unless he is going to use the narrow margin as justification for something else.

What are you thinking of here?

Coleman’s campaign right now has been obsessing over “duplicate” ballots (which is their latest challenge to the state’s Supreme Court).  They claim there are about 100 that have been counted twice.  Maybe their case would be less compelling if his margin was higher.  Or, alternatively, keeping the margin as low as possible increases the odds that the duplicate ballots could push him over the top.

[Lunar]

What Coleman is referring to is the 113 ballots that simply went missing in a Minneapolis precinct. At first it was assumed those ballots were initially just counted twice, but then it was proven the numbers don't add up. So as strange as it sounds, those ballots did simply go missing. The Canvassing Board has basically agreed to just use the original count in that precinct. Coleman however continues to cling to the argument they were double counted. His arguments really are similar to J. J.'s Bradley Effect arguments and just as taken seriously by anyone besides his campaign, but it's his last argument.

If that is what he is talking about, then I hope he wins his lawsuit and they don't count any absentees because he'll win by exactly 1 vote since didn't Franken gain 47 in that precinct?   Thus the election will be stolen, Democrats everywhere will be outraged, Republicans will look bad, and Franken won't be an unappealing face for the Democrats in national politics.

Luckily for Franken supporters, not gonna happen.

[Lunar]

Trust me, it's better for Franken to win than to have Coleman win with one vote due to legal shenanigans.  Franken's presence in the Senate as a high-ranking representative of the Democratic Party will hurt the Democrats.

Although you did invest money into Coleman's campaign, if he wins by 1 vote, you might have been a deciding factor in his reelection!

[Lunar]

I see Coleman was a WAY bigger embarrassment to my state than Franken.

Of course.  But Coleman doesn't come across as personally distasteful to the average voter.


Why the frick do you think Franken did so much worse than the average Democrat, despite running possibly *the* best advertising campaign of any Democrat this cycle (yes, better than Obama's IMHO as someone who viewed more TV ads than anyone else here).

Coleman is relatively likable and he's not a far right-winger.  As far as Republicans go he's somewhere a notch to the left of Mainstream Democrats (perhaps Webb could be an equivalent comparison).

I know you hate Coleman for disgracing Wellstone and I guess Miami is obsessed with his turncoat behavior on medical marijuana, but a lot of senators have done worse things than that.  What really pisses you off is you have a Bush-supporting Republican.

And I was talking to Ronnie.  It's not about who represents Minnesota (the fact that Franken and Ventura are even electable does enough), but who's mug Bill O'Reilly and others throws on his screen whenever a certain prospective Democrat engages in some stupid antics unbecoming of a senator.

and again, I've read 1-2 of Franken's books (can't remember).

[Lunar]

I see Coleman was a WAY bigger embarrassment to my state than Franken.

Of course.  But Coleman doesn't come across as personally distasteful to the average voter.

This is your opinion. And I'm pretty sure that is irrelevant in the grand scheme. What does matter is what Minnesota thinks of Al Franken, and he, at this point, has received more votes than Norm Coleman.

It's not my opinion any more than simple analysis of polls is my opinion.  Everyone knows a generic (D) would have done FAR better than Franken and that Coleman wasn't that popular.

If your point of view represents a substantive minority of this forum (and I don't think it does), I could try and break down the polls for you to prove Franken's personal distaste brought him down.

[Lunar]

indeed, that's not "down" at all.

Especially because Coleman's best argument, which is sketch, at best, results in a net loss of 46 for Franken.

[Lunar]

Supreme Court shot down Coleman's last argument.

Franken winning is an inevitability assuming the rejected absentees don't favor Coleman which would be freakish.

Merry Christmas?

[Lunar]

And Sam's a Blue NY almost instantly

Waiting for the secret info though!

[Lunar]

And Sam's a Blue NY almost instantly

Waiting for the secret info though!

Do you have a life outside this forum? 

Just joking...

or are you?
it's taken a while to work up the effort to do stuff due to hangoverdom

[Lunar]

Well a vote in Minnesota cost $25 dollars - not counting post-election legal fundraising.

But since both sides had 36 million, I'm not sure what the extra money would have done

[Lunar]

So much for my (our) theory that the Franken campaign's counts of what the recount looked like without frivolous challenges included a lot of wishful thinking.

I never quite bought into that.  It was suspect to the question that some people recorded the on-sight election judge's original opinion on the matter incorrectly, but how many would intentionally do that to the campaign?  And I wasn't quite of the belief that the Franken campaign would skew the numbers 20 points in favor of itself on this sort of number since they were long intentionally vague whenever things didn't necessarily favor of them "under 100" instead of specific numbers and so on.

But yeah.  This race is donzo + a dozen lawsuits that won't go nowhere + some absentees that Coleman will hedge on but will add to Franken's total

[Lunar]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

ahaahahah

[Lunar]

Wow, the first mainstream outlet (that I've noticed) has proclaimed Franken the likely winner.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/28/franken-should-be-seated_n_153796.html

Way to be on the breaking edge of the wave HuffingtonPost!

However, there is this historical peach for those of us who prefer the Louisiana way of things:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

Stop depressing me, Lunar.

As a Democrat, I didn't want him to win either.  But you were the one calling the race for Franken on this thread long before the facts came in.  Might as well get used to it.

Having 59 seats is bad for Dems for another reason - every single race in 2010 will become a referendum on 60.

[Lunar]

Stop depressing me, Lunar.

As a Democrat, I didn't want him to win either.  But you were the one calling the race for Franken on this thread long before the facts came in.  Might as well get used to it.

Having 59 seats is bad for Dems for another reason - every single race in 2010 will become a referendum on 60.

They cant make every race that way.  There is a good chance that Democrats could lose a seat and then it wouldn't be 60. 

Oh, they can make that argument in every race and they will.

[Lunar]

The Democrats have... one "vulnerable" seat in 2010 in Reid's seat?  I suppose the hopeful people might look at CO, IL, NY, HI, CT, and WI?  2010 is largely the year of Republican defense.

I mean, the ratio of Democratic seats to Republican seats in 2010 compared to other years (due to coincidence) is staggering, although slightly less so thanks to CO-DE-IL-NY which recently became open.