Who is the bigger sore loser?

[Torie]

Miller has already lapped Coleman, and then some.

[Torie]

Miller suing to overturn the voter intent standard (any misspellings nix a vote, and he apparently does not like cursive handwriting either) would be a frivolous lawsuit (e.g., to deviate from that would be unconstitutional),  and he intends to do that apparently, and that makes him way, way out there.

[Torie]

Miller suing to overturn the voter intent standard (any misspellings nix a vote, and he apparently does not like cursive handwriting either) would be a frivolous lawsuit (e.g., to deviate from that would be unconstitutional),  and he intends to do that apparently, and that makes him way, way out there.

It's not frivolous to sue the state to make it adhere to the letter of state law, which appears to require the person written in match the name on the list.   Federal standards might overrule that, but just based on Alaska state law, he has a case.

I agree - a losing one - based on both Alaska and Federal precedents. Any ambiguity in the statute (and it is ambiguous), will be resolved in a way that hews to Court precedents; otherwise the statute will be overturned. Miller loses either way.

[Torie]

At this point, I kind of desire that Miller sue, and go down in flames. He has proven himself extremely annoying, and needs to be further humiliated. What a dumb. Ideally, Murkowski will be just short of getting a plurality of the unchallenged ballots, and Miller can litigate the issue of whether cursive handwriting is unacceptable or not.