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

[Fritz]

This law about signatures on the ballot is really silly.  I think the law itself could be challenged as unfair or unconstitutional.  I mean, if the voter intent is clear, why should a signature invalidate it?  If the ballots were not hand-recounted, how would anyone even know?  And finally, how are the voters supposed to know?  I voted in Minnesota, and I saw no signs advising about this law.  I say count every ballot if the intent is clear, only ballots with unclear intent should be challenged.  The end result of a re-count should be that more votes end up being counted, not less.

[Fritz]

Day 2 ballots:

1. Coleman
2. Franken
3. Coleman
4. Coleman

Day 1 ballots:

1. Franken
2. accept
3. reject (depending on how the remainder of the ballot was marked)
4. Franken
5. Franken
6. Franken
7. Coleman
8. Franken
9. Barkely
10. Barkely
11. reject

[Fritz]

Ok, this is worse than the thumbprint thing.  The Coleman campaign is challenging ballots simply because they are clear McCain/Franken votes and is challenging McCain ballots that simply left the senate race empty, arguing that it shows “intent.”
http://the-uptake.groups.theuptake.org/en/videogalleryView/id/1341/

Here's a fun game courtesy of the Coleman folks: Guess why Franken's people challenged the ballot!
BALLOT C
BALLOT D

Okay I give up, whats the argument?  Those are clear Coleman votes.  Looks like both sides are putting out really stupid challenges.

[Fritz]

So, whats the story on the lawsuit?  Does the case have any merit?  How long will it be until its ruled on?