It's not really that close now, nor IMNSHO, will it turn out to be that close. As much as I respect Nate Silver's political analyses, there are some fundamental flaws with the regression analysis that he used to get that 27 vote difference. First off, he's basing it on a non-random sample. Second, the past precinct results aren't necessarily predictive of future ones (mainly due to the fact that precincts have different make ups and the basis for challenges isn't constant). Finally, common sense suggests that a prediction of a difference of teens for something on the order of magnitude of millions is essentially zero -- that analysis is a virtual coin flip.
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
With all due respects to various pollsters and posters who predict a razor thin possible Franken margin when the official recount ends, the mere fact of a razor thin margin almost guarantees the election will result in court action by the loser. As the following latest link shows. http://www.grandforksherald.co...icles/rss.cfm?id=94801
And while the actually recounted votes may not be in dispute, there are thousand of disputed and rejected votes the Minnesota election board will not touch, as the Minnesota election board jumps onto let the courts decide bandwagon. Both sides are already getting their attorneys in place for such a lawsuit, are already raising funds to pay for it, while neither side will admit they plan a court challenge.
There is an excellent change, that when the gavel bangs to convene the next congress, we still will not know who won the Minnesota Senate seat.
And while the actually recounted votes may not be in dispute, there are thousand of disputed and rejected votes the Minnesota election board will not touch, as the Minnesota election board jumps onto let the courts decide bandwagon. Both sides are already getting their attorneys in place for such a lawsuit, are already raising funds to pay for it, while neither side will admit they plan a court challenge.
There is an excellent change, that when the gavel bangs to convene the next congress, we still will not know who won the Minnesota Senate seat.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,023
- 14,428
- 146
It's beginning to look like Al Franken may NOT win this after all:
http://www.modbee.com/24hour/politics/story/513042.html
After absentee ballot loss, Franken eyes options
By BRIAN BAKST , Associated Press Writer
last updated: November 27, 2008 04:22:53 AM
ST. PAUL, Minn. ?
Minnesota's U.S. Senate showdown is veering down a path toward the courts and possibly the Senate itself after a panel's ruling on rejected absentee ballots dealt a blow to Democrat Al Franken's chances.
For the first time, his campaign on Wednesday openly discussed mounting challenges after the hand recount involving Franken and Republican Sen. Norm Coleman concludes. That includes the possibility of drawing the Senate into the fracas.
The state Canvassing Board denied Franken's request to factor absentee ballots rejected by poll workers into the recount. He sought to overturn the exclusions in cases where ballots were invalidated over signature problems or other voter errors. Coleman's campaign maintained the board lacked power to revisit those ballots.
Franken entered the recount trailing Coleman by 215 votes out of 2.9 million ballots. As of Wednesday night, Coleman was up 292 votes, including results from Nov. 4 and recounted ones.
All told, 86 percent of the ballots have been recounted. However, about 4,740 ballots have been challenged by the two campaigns that could fall to the canvassing board to rule on.
The ruling wasn't a complete victory for Coleman. The board left open the possibility of examining ballots that were set aside for errors outside of the voter's control.
Secretary of State Mark Ritchie estimated that 12,000 absentee ballots were rejected for various reasons - some legitimate, some not. That represents between 4 percent and 5 percent of all the absentee ballots cast.
Franken's campaign had made the push to factor in rejected absentee ballots key to its recount strategy, even going to court to force county officials to turn over data on voters whose ballots didn't count.
Marc Elias, the legal chief for Franken, said the campaign won't appeal the board's ruling but it could seek intervention of another kind once the recount wraps up.
"Whether it is at the county level, before the Canvassing Board, before the courts or before the United States Senate, we don't know yet. But we remain confident these votes will be counted," Elias said.
The board's decision drew a response from the Senate's top Democrat, Majority Leader Harry Reid, who called it a "cause for great concern."
"As the process moves forward, Minnesota authorities must ensure that no voter is disenfranchised," Reid said in a statement. "A citizen's right to have his or her vote counted is fundamental in our democracy."
The Senate has in rare cases inserted itself into elections, including a 1996 Louisiana race and a 1974 New Hampshire contest. The body has the power to determine its members' qualifications.
Along with the Dec. 2 runoff in Georgia, the Minnesota race is one of two unresolved contests and could determine if Democrats build a majority large enough to fend off GOP filibusters.
Coleman campaign manager Cullen Sheehan objected to the notion of Senate involvement. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell joined in the criticism.
"The recount process in Minnesota is being handled by Minnesotans, not D.C. politicians," McConnell said. "And while neither side will agree with every twist and turn or every decision, I would hope that Washington partisans would refrain from injecting themselves into what is, by design, a non-partisan process."
The board's vote followed a discussion where some members expressed frustration over the possibility that some ballots were disqualified improperly. But even they acknowledged the matter fell outside the board's duties. Two Supreme Court justices, two district judges and the secretary of state make up the board.
Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson said Franken's request for an absentee ballot review would have to wait for a court challenge that is likely to follow the recount. The loser can file what is known as an election contest.
Board members agreed to seek legal advice and meet again soon to decide whether local election officials should sort through the rejected ballots. That would help determine whether any that were actually accepted didn't get counted and whether any rejections fell outside the rules for disqualification. But the board didn't address what would happen with those ballots.
Coleman attorney Fritz Knaak said the campaign would not take issue with the counting of absentee ballots that were wrongly disqualified or overlooked, but he said he thought that such ballots comprised "an extraordinarily small number."
While I'd like to see Franken win to help the Dems gain a larger majority in Congress, it's looking like it will take another court battle for him to do so.
http://www.modbee.com/24hour/politics/story/513042.html
After absentee ballot loss, Franken eyes options
By BRIAN BAKST , Associated Press Writer
last updated: November 27, 2008 04:22:53 AM
ST. PAUL, Minn. ?
Minnesota's U.S. Senate showdown is veering down a path toward the courts and possibly the Senate itself after a panel's ruling on rejected absentee ballots dealt a blow to Democrat Al Franken's chances.
For the first time, his campaign on Wednesday openly discussed mounting challenges after the hand recount involving Franken and Republican Sen. Norm Coleman concludes. That includes the possibility of drawing the Senate into the fracas.
The state Canvassing Board denied Franken's request to factor absentee ballots rejected by poll workers into the recount. He sought to overturn the exclusions in cases where ballots were invalidated over signature problems or other voter errors. Coleman's campaign maintained the board lacked power to revisit those ballots.
Franken entered the recount trailing Coleman by 215 votes out of 2.9 million ballots. As of Wednesday night, Coleman was up 292 votes, including results from Nov. 4 and recounted ones.
All told, 86 percent of the ballots have been recounted. However, about 4,740 ballots have been challenged by the two campaigns that could fall to the canvassing board to rule on.
The ruling wasn't a complete victory for Coleman. The board left open the possibility of examining ballots that were set aside for errors outside of the voter's control.
Secretary of State Mark Ritchie estimated that 12,000 absentee ballots were rejected for various reasons - some legitimate, some not. That represents between 4 percent and 5 percent of all the absentee ballots cast.
Franken's campaign had made the push to factor in rejected absentee ballots key to its recount strategy, even going to court to force county officials to turn over data on voters whose ballots didn't count.
Marc Elias, the legal chief for Franken, said the campaign won't appeal the board's ruling but it could seek intervention of another kind once the recount wraps up.
"Whether it is at the county level, before the Canvassing Board, before the courts or before the United States Senate, we don't know yet. But we remain confident these votes will be counted," Elias said.
The board's decision drew a response from the Senate's top Democrat, Majority Leader Harry Reid, who called it a "cause for great concern."
"As the process moves forward, Minnesota authorities must ensure that no voter is disenfranchised," Reid said in a statement. "A citizen's right to have his or her vote counted is fundamental in our democracy."
The Senate has in rare cases inserted itself into elections, including a 1996 Louisiana race and a 1974 New Hampshire contest. The body has the power to determine its members' qualifications.
Along with the Dec. 2 runoff in Georgia, the Minnesota race is one of two unresolved contests and could determine if Democrats build a majority large enough to fend off GOP filibusters.
Coleman campaign manager Cullen Sheehan objected to the notion of Senate involvement. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell joined in the criticism.
"The recount process in Minnesota is being handled by Minnesotans, not D.C. politicians," McConnell said. "And while neither side will agree with every twist and turn or every decision, I would hope that Washington partisans would refrain from injecting themselves into what is, by design, a non-partisan process."
The board's vote followed a discussion where some members expressed frustration over the possibility that some ballots were disqualified improperly. But even they acknowledged the matter fell outside the board's duties. Two Supreme Court justices, two district judges and the secretary of state make up the board.
Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson said Franken's request for an absentee ballot review would have to wait for a court challenge that is likely to follow the recount. The loser can file what is known as an election contest.
Board members agreed to seek legal advice and meet again soon to decide whether local election officials should sort through the rejected ballots. That would help determine whether any that were actually accepted didn't get counted and whether any rejections fell outside the rules for disqualification. But the board didn't address what would happen with those ballots.
Coleman attorney Fritz Knaak said the campaign would not take issue with the counting of absentee ballots that were wrongly disqualified or overlooked, but he said he thought that such ballots comprised "an extraordinarily small number."
While I'd like to see Franken win to help the Dems gain a larger majority in Congress, it's looking like it will take another court battle for him to do so.
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
BoomerD's link as well as my previous one somewhat shows why the courts will be the next step. The State Canvassing board seems reluctant to rule on which disputed ballots should or should not be counted, and when compared to the likely margin of victory, the number of disputed ballots are huge, and its why this Minnesota Senate race is likely to be punted to the courts immediately after the official recount results are
released.
released.
Throckmorton
Lifer
- Aug 23, 2007
- 16,829
- 3
- 0
I know you think you're clever, but why would they go away without the election being actually over? Well Al Gore did, actually stopping votes from being counted, but Franken didn't.
Imagine if Begich went away when he "lost".
What is it with know nothing vapor heads like you who would short circuit the statutory democratic process and be stupid enough to bitch about it? Please go back to whatever backwater dictatorship spawned you. :thumbsdown: :|
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
This year, Missouri did it right, they checked, double checked, and triple checked, finally Missouri was called for McCain and no one was saying unfair.
When its a close election, there is nothing wrong with the person on the short end of a close vote asking for a recount. Be that person a democrat, a republican, or independent.
There is nothing partisan in asking that every vote being properly counted. Its the only way to insure fairness, and many a republican on the short end of the initial count has prevailed in the recount.
I somehow doubt winnar111 would ever want to lose the recount right for a republican, so consistency, and in this case Minnesota State law demands a recount.
When its a close election, there is nothing wrong with the person on the short end of a close vote asking for a recount. Be that person a democrat, a republican, or independent.
There is nothing partisan in asking that every vote being properly counted. Its the only way to insure fairness, and many a republican on the short end of the initial count has prevailed in the recount.
I somehow doubt winnar111 would ever want to lose the recount right for a republican, so consistency, and in this case Minnesota State law demands a recount.
I agree to a degree, personally I find a recount to be acceptable, heck even two, but taking this to court after yet another loss only makes you look worse and taints you from the outset...if you lose the recount/s then leave.
But remember dems will back this move as it brings them even greater control if he is successful....if it was a republican you can bet many on this board would be shouting down anyone in support of that effort.
You're wrong about that. I'd be for the most accurate, fair count regardless.
I would object if the only ones doing the counting were Diebold (now Global Election Systems). :shocked:
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
To bozack,
I just want to stress that many of us, even someone as partisan as me, are fully enlisted in the fair and complete counting of votes. And even if some of us want one party or the other to win, we still stress the most important factor is the fair and complete counting of votes. Its what democracy is about.
Every two years, 1/3 of the Senate is up for reelection. And most of the time, the winner is known by the morning after at the latest. The election of 11/4/2008 was unusual because 4 Senate races and over 10% were too close to call the morning after and thus required recounts. And like the election itself, recounts are not perfect processes, but its still the best process we can come up with.
Oregon was settled first, the republican incumbent, and IMHO, a fine man, got caught in a rising democratic tide. As the careful recounting process progressed over a period of days, the democratic challenger opened up a wider lead than than the number of remaining disputed and uncounted ballots. At which point the Republican conceded. And the democrat won, not because he stole the election or had a better set of lawyers, but because, majority rules, he had the most votes.
Next settled was Alaska, And again a recount was needed. While it is somewhat questionable how fine a man Stevens was, the recount process proceeded, and Begish won because it became clear, he had the most votes. And then, in a fine act, Stevens conceded.
The next to be settled will likely be Georgia. While it was clear, even on election eve, that Chambliss had the most votes, an anomaly in Georgia required a full 50% or more to name a winner. And an independent able to poll a significant percentage of the vote in a three man race, left the GOP incumbent a full .1% shy of 50%. And by Georgia law, it thus requires a runoff election between the top two vote getters, which are
the republican Chambliss and the democrat Martin. This runoff election will occur on 12/2/2008, and given its a two person race, one candidate will be North of 50% or more. And while I hope Martin will win, and both parties are putting a fortune into funding the runoff, I have to say its likely Chambliss will win by a wide enough margin to produce a Martin concession. And as a partisan dem, I will have to accept that, because the people of Georgia will have chosen and majority rules.
Maybe sadly, Minnesota is going to be far more complex. And putting all partisanship aside, we again had a three person race. But unlike Georgia, there is nothing in Minnesota election laws about a run off election. However, by Minnesota law, a recount is REQUIRED if the margin of victory is under .5%. And by the morning of 11/5/2008, the Coleman lead stood at some 724 as I recall. Or only 50% of the 1450 or
so votes required to exceed .5%. And the anomaly no one could escape noticing was that the sum of Senate votes was far less than the sum of Presidential votes.
Now we must note four things before we can properly understand the metrics of the Minnesota recount.
(1) We are still in the midst of the first recount. A very slow process by Minnesota law.
(2) The Minnesota initial count was tabulated by electronic voting machines, but unlike the Diebold type of electronic voting, there is also a back up paper record. And in the honest Minnesota process, its the paper record that is now being examined. Simply because electronic machines are subject to alignment scanning errors further complicated by a circle rather than a dot being required. As long as the voter intent is clear, both the Coleman partisan judges and the Franken judges have little ground to dispute the ballot. But there are also chain of custody issues and other issues that have resulted in the number of disputed ballots to grow to some 12,000 while the Coleman lead has shrunk to some 200. And Franken might even lead by some tiny number when the recount is over.
(3) While the Minnesota canvassing board, the folks in charge of the recount, are seemingly honest, they are somewhat caught between a rock and a hard place. On one hand they are being deluged by a pile of totally partisan appeals by both the Coleman and Franken campaigns, so they are loathe to side with either camp and thus lose their bipartisan credibility. On the other hand, the Minnesota Canvassing board knows they are ducking the fundamental issue, namely how to honestly count the disputed paper ballots that will almost certainly decide the election.
(4) Which simply means, in this unprecedented contest with nothing in the past to guide them, the Minnesota canvassing board is deliberately punting the questions to the courts. And thereafter its going to get ugly and partisan. And sad to say, the results may not be fair or accepted. And is not likely to be resolved soon. That too is sometimes part of the election process because nothing designed by man is perfect. The time will come for partisanship, I am sure it will be bitterly debated on P&N, but that time is not here yet.
I just want to stress that many of us, even someone as partisan as me, are fully enlisted in the fair and complete counting of votes. And even if some of us want one party or the other to win, we still stress the most important factor is the fair and complete counting of votes. Its what democracy is about.
Every two years, 1/3 of the Senate is up for reelection. And most of the time, the winner is known by the morning after at the latest. The election of 11/4/2008 was unusual because 4 Senate races and over 10% were too close to call the morning after and thus required recounts. And like the election itself, recounts are not perfect processes, but its still the best process we can come up with.
Oregon was settled first, the republican incumbent, and IMHO, a fine man, got caught in a rising democratic tide. As the careful recounting process progressed over a period of days, the democratic challenger opened up a wider lead than than the number of remaining disputed and uncounted ballots. At which point the Republican conceded. And the democrat won, not because he stole the election or had a better set of lawyers, but because, majority rules, he had the most votes.
Next settled was Alaska, And again a recount was needed. While it is somewhat questionable how fine a man Stevens was, the recount process proceeded, and Begish won because it became clear, he had the most votes. And then, in a fine act, Stevens conceded.
The next to be settled will likely be Georgia. While it was clear, even on election eve, that Chambliss had the most votes, an anomaly in Georgia required a full 50% or more to name a winner. And an independent able to poll a significant percentage of the vote in a three man race, left the GOP incumbent a full .1% shy of 50%. And by Georgia law, it thus requires a runoff election between the top two vote getters, which are
the republican Chambliss and the democrat Martin. This runoff election will occur on 12/2/2008, and given its a two person race, one candidate will be North of 50% or more. And while I hope Martin will win, and both parties are putting a fortune into funding the runoff, I have to say its likely Chambliss will win by a wide enough margin to produce a Martin concession. And as a partisan dem, I will have to accept that, because the people of Georgia will have chosen and majority rules.
Maybe sadly, Minnesota is going to be far more complex. And putting all partisanship aside, we again had a three person race. But unlike Georgia, there is nothing in Minnesota election laws about a run off election. However, by Minnesota law, a recount is REQUIRED if the margin of victory is under .5%. And by the morning of 11/5/2008, the Coleman lead stood at some 724 as I recall. Or only 50% of the 1450 or
so votes required to exceed .5%. And the anomaly no one could escape noticing was that the sum of Senate votes was far less than the sum of Presidential votes.
Now we must note four things before we can properly understand the metrics of the Minnesota recount.
(1) We are still in the midst of the first recount. A very slow process by Minnesota law.
(2) The Minnesota initial count was tabulated by electronic voting machines, but unlike the Diebold type of electronic voting, there is also a back up paper record. And in the honest Minnesota process, its the paper record that is now being examined. Simply because electronic machines are subject to alignment scanning errors further complicated by a circle rather than a dot being required. As long as the voter intent is clear, both the Coleman partisan judges and the Franken judges have little ground to dispute the ballot. But there are also chain of custody issues and other issues that have resulted in the number of disputed ballots to grow to some 12,000 while the Coleman lead has shrunk to some 200. And Franken might even lead by some tiny number when the recount is over.
(3) While the Minnesota canvassing board, the folks in charge of the recount, are seemingly honest, they are somewhat caught between a rock and a hard place. On one hand they are being deluged by a pile of totally partisan appeals by both the Coleman and Franken campaigns, so they are loathe to side with either camp and thus lose their bipartisan credibility. On the other hand, the Minnesota Canvassing board knows they are ducking the fundamental issue, namely how to honestly count the disputed paper ballots that will almost certainly decide the election.
(4) Which simply means, in this unprecedented contest with nothing in the past to guide them, the Minnesota canvassing board is deliberately punting the questions to the courts. And thereafter its going to get ugly and partisan. And sad to say, the results may not be fair or accepted. And is not likely to be resolved soon. That too is sometimes part of the election process because nothing designed by man is perfect. The time will come for partisanship, I am sure it will be bitterly debated on P&N, but that time is not here yet.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,081
- 136
Well, I grew up there and I'm not sure I agree.
Of course, the Navy Kalifornicated me so I probably have 2 or 3 different types of brain malfunctions.
Engineer
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 39,230
- 701
- 126
Franken opens first lead in Mn. race....
Edit: Nevermind, it's too early to tell anything. I posted first without reading enough. My apologies.
Edit: Nevermind, it's too early to tell anything. I posted first without reading enough. My apologies.
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To shortylickens, just one post away from lifer, despite all brain possible malfunctions,
you do have some remaining rationality. I too was born in Minnesota, so I share your pain.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter