Minn. recount nearly done; next up, the lawsuits

[shira]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
To be fair, PokerGuy never offered that Dems were "better" at stealing elections, he just insinuated that they were doing so in Minnesota... using "shenanigans"...

It's basic, vague and accusatory rightwing rhetorical methodology.

As Stalin said: "I consider it completely unimportant who will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this ?- who will count the votes, and how." He was absolutely right. Those who control the vote counting process (in this case democrats) will control the outcome of a super tight election, and it will be done within the rules of the game. This isn't a "the dems always steal elections" kind of statement, it's simply how the game works. If this was a heavily repub area, this election would have gone to Coleman.

Flame on.

Well, if you believe these are the accepted rules of the game, but that in this particular game it just happens to be the case that the Dems are the referees, then why post about the "shenanigans" of the Dems?

Since you're acknowledging that if the shoes were on the Repubs' feet, they'd be doing exactly the same things, then your opinion is that the Dems are just as honorable as the Repubs, right?

Glad you're happy.

 

[Jhhnn]

From CSG-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast. It's when the rules change, are created, or are ignored AFTER the ballots are cast. In this case MN did poorly on many fronts. Unsecured ballots, changing "rules", and in one case using election night results instead of the hand recount results. It's a sham no matter who is eventually seated. So no, your assesment of my position is false(big surprise there) as you make your usual ASSumptions and then twist things into whatever premise you want. In this case, the whole thing was a mess and it was highlighted by the fact that there was a recount due to the closeness of the race. This is one of the big reasons people like me want IDs checked and other validations in place at the time the ballot is case(or before ballots are even handed out) - especially voter registration.

Nice shuck and jive.

When the polls closed in Minnesota, there was a set of votes that had been cast, in person and absentee. From that, a subset of "valid" votes was created, but the rules weren't properly applied in the creation of that subset. Yet you continue to defend that subset as valid, insist that a recount only consider the votes within that flawed subset. Which is why your selection of terms is deliberately vague-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast.

You defend the wrongful rejection of votes, done in violation of the rules. Very straightforward.

When the recount process starts from square one, applies the rules to all votes cast, you claim that the rules are being changed, created, ignored when in fact they're being applied as they should have been all along. Not very straightforward, at all.

And then you toss in the oblique reference to the red herring of "voter fraud" in an attempt to obfuscate even further.

I'll agree it's a mess, and that a runoff election would have been a cleaner and neater solution, as was done in Georgia. But the methods used are an issue of "States' Rights!", one of the great shibboleths of the Rightwing, so when things don't work out in your favor, you really don't have any sort of valid claim, at all...

 

[bozack]

its Minnesota, who cares.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Originally posted by: bozack
its Minnesota, who cares.

Umm because their US Senator will affect me.. Howz that for an answer genius?

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: bozack
its Minnesota, who cares.

Umm because their US Senator will affect me.. Howz that for an answer genius?

There is nothing that can be done at this point, they have already manufactured enough votes to seat Franken, it would be nice to think that the courts would do the right thing and put coleman in, but this is the year of the democrat so I am not holding my breath.

 

[CaptnKirk]

The question is not so much that they found all these aledged votes for Franken hidden away,
the question is why did Coleman attempt to hide them in the first place?

GOP lost - regardless of their attempts at election fraud to secure the win.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
To be fair, PokerGuy never offered that Dems were "better" at stealing elections, he just insinuated that they were doing so in Minnesota... using "shenanigans"...

It's basic, vague and accusatory rightwing rhetorical methodology.

As Stalin said: "I consider it completely unimportant who will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this ?- who will count the votes, and how." He was absolutely right. Those who control the vote counting process (in this case democrats) will control the outcome of a super tight election, and it will be done within the rules of the game. This isn't a "the dems always steal elections" kind of statement, it's simply how the game works. If this was a heavily repub area, this election would have gone to Coleman.

Flame on.

Well, if you believe these are the accepted rules of the game, but that in this particular game it just happens to be the case that the Dems are the referees, then why post about the "shenanigans" of the Dems?

I'd post about it regardless of dems or repubs.

Since you're acknowledging that if the shoes were on the Repubs' feet, they'd be doing exactly the same things, then your opinion is that the Dems are just as honorable as the Repubs, right?

Glad you're happy.

Neither side is honest or honorable, and nobody should be "happy" about that.....


Happy? Hell no, just because the democrats and republicans are equally scummy we should be "happy"? I think not.

 

[L00PY]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
... as predicted, pre-shenanigans Coleman wins, then after the votes are magically "found" and devined, Franken comes out ahead. Not surprising at all.

There's as much evidence for that as the other scenario. Franken won outright but Coleman's shenanigans hiding and excluding legitimate votes made it much closer than it should have been. Now that the election boards are doing an open recount, Coleman's deceptive actions are being revealed and the Republican plot to defraud and disenfranchise the voters will fail.

See how easy it is for you and others to make baseless accusations without any evidence?

 

[Paraguay11]

What about the 2,000 Somali votes in the North Minneapolis where a Somali woman pretended to be a translator and told all Somalis that a vote for Coleman was a vote for Hitler?

This election is completely buggered and at this point I think everyone just wants it over with.

I shook Coleman's hand when he was a democrat, I shook Coleman's hand when he was a Republican. No one ever brought that up before the election.

 

[classy]

I am a solid democrat and I don't want to see Franken win. Coleman seems like a good senator. I want good people in congress whether dem or republican. Just like I still would have liked to have seen Santorum in PA win over Casey.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
From CSG-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast. It's when the rules change, are created, or are ignored AFTER the ballots are cast. In this case MN did poorly on many fronts. Unsecured ballots, changing "rules", and in one case using election night results instead of the hand recount results. It's a sham no matter who is eventually seated. So no, your assesment of my position is false(big surprise there) as you make your usual ASSumptions and then twist things into whatever premise you want. In this case, the whole thing was a mess and it was highlighted by the fact that there was a recount due to the closeness of the race. This is one of the big reasons people like me want IDs checked and other validations in place at the time the ballot is case(or before ballots are even handed out) - especially voter registration.

Nice shuck and jive.

When the polls closed in Minnesota, there was a set of votes that had been cast, in person and absentee. From that, a subset of "valid" votes was created, but the rules weren't properly applied in the creation of that subset. Yet you continue to defend that subset as valid, insist that a recount only consider the votes within that flawed subset. Which is why your selection of terms is deliberately vague-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast.

You defend the wrongful rejection of votes, done in violation of the rules. Very straightforward.

When the recount process starts from square one, applies the rules to all votes cast, you claim that the rules are being changed, created, ignored when in fact they're being applied as they should have been all along. Not very straightforward, at all.

And then you toss in the oblique reference to the red herring of "voter fraud" in an attempt to obfuscate even further.

I'll agree it's a mess, and that a runoff election would have been a cleaner and neater solution, as was done in Georgia. But the methods used are an issue of "States' Rights!", one of the great shibboleths of the Rightwing, so when things don't work out in your favor, you really don't have any sort of valid claim, at all...

Again you do nothing but outright lie about my position. Nowhere in this thread have I defended the supposedly "wrongful rejection of votes" and in fact I have never done so. Just because I believe that ALL laws/rules should be followed does not mean I am defending wrongfully rejected votes. HOWEVER - the recount MUST follow the rules as set out at the time of the vote being cast(just like the initial counting must follow the rules as set). In this case there were rules that were changed, created, and ignored - it is an indisputable FACT no matter how much you morons want to try to twist it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: bozack

There is nothing that can be done at this point,

they have already manufactured enough votes to seat Franken

Awesome

Hope it royally pisses the righties off :thumbsup:

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: classy
I am a solid democrat and I don't want to see Franken win. Coleman seems like a good senator. I want good people in congress whether dem or republican. Just like I still would have liked to have seen Santorum in PA win over Casey.

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington list him as among the most corrupt senators in Congress.

Oh, and I'm originally from PA and Santorum was an unbelievable piece of shit. Not only is he a raging homophobe, but he was a supporter of teaching intelligent design. I would never vote for any person running for public office that supported teaching intelligent design, because it shows that they put ideology over reality.

There's a reason he was so utterly crushed in the 2006 election. An incumbent losing by almost 20 points is nearly unheard of.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: classy
I am a solid democrat and I don't want to see Franken win. Coleman seems like a good senator. I want good people in congress whether dem or republican. Just like I still would have liked to have seen Santorum in PA win over Casey.

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington list him as among the most corrupt senators in Congress.

Oh, and I'm originally from PA and Santorum was an unbelievable piece of shit. Not only is he a raging homophobe, but he was a supporter of teaching intelligent design. I would never vote for any person running for public office that supported teaching intelligent design, because it shows that they put ideology over reality.

There's a reason he was so utterly crushed in the 2006 election. An incumbent losing by almost 20 points is nearly unheard of.

Well in the case of Coleman, severe sorruption over "rent", I don't know if that would classify as being most corrupt. And in the case of Santorum believing in God as the creator is fine. And a good portion of Americans believe in God as the creator. And calling the guy a homophobe because he doesn't support the gay lifestyle is little weak in my opinion.

 

[Jhhnn]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
From CSG-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast. It's when the rules change, are created, or are ignored AFTER the ballots are cast. In this case MN did poorly on many fronts. Unsecured ballots, changing "rules", and in one case using election night results instead of the hand recount results. It's a sham no matter who is eventually seated. So no, your assesment of my position is false(big surprise there) as you make your usual ASSumptions and then twist things into whatever premise you want. In this case, the whole thing was a mess and it was highlighted by the fact that there was a recount due to the closeness of the race. This is one of the big reasons people like me want IDs checked and other validations in place at the time the ballot is case(or before ballots are even handed out) - especially voter registration.

Nice shuck and jive.

When the polls closed in Minnesota, there was a set of votes that had been cast, in person and absentee. From that, a subset of "valid" votes was created, but the rules weren't properly applied in the creation of that subset. Yet you continue to defend that subset as valid, insist that a recount only consider the votes within that flawed subset. Which is why your selection of terms is deliberately vague-

Again, I have no problem with the rules being followed as they were when the ballots are cast.

You defend the wrongful rejection of votes, done in violation of the rules. Very straightforward.

When the recount process starts from square one, applies the rules to all votes cast, you claim that the rules are being changed, created, ignored when in fact they're being applied as they should have been all along. Not very straightforward, at all.

And then you toss in the oblique reference to the red herring of "voter fraud" in an attempt to obfuscate even further.

I'll agree it's a mess, and that a runoff election would have been a cleaner and neater solution, as was done in Georgia. But the methods used are an issue of "States' Rights!", one of the great shibboleths of the Rightwing, so when things don't work out in your favor, you really don't have any sort of valid claim, at all...

Again you do nothing but outright lie about my position. Nowhere in this thread have I defended the supposedly "wrongful rejection of votes" and in fact I have never done so. Just because I believe that ALL laws/rules should be followed does not mean I am defending wrongfully rejected votes. HOWEVER - the recount MUST follow the rules as set out at the time of the vote being cast(just like the initial counting must follow the rules as set). In this case there were rules that were changed, created, and ignored - it is an indisputable FACT no matter how much you morons want to try to twist it.

Short memory, CSG, or just more obfuscation?

Reference this thread-

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y&keyword1=CADsortaGUY

Where you wrote-

My mind is made up - follow the rules as established when the ballots were cast. If a ballot is tossed it should not be suddenly counted during a recount as a recount should be a recount of the ballots allowed on election night. So while you likely can not think of every situation that might come up, there should be a way set up in the rules to deal with tossed ballots. At the current time there is NOTHING that suggests they should be allowed in the recount - thus they shouldn't be allowed. Yes yes, if they were "good" ballots they should have been counted in the first place but there is no proceedure for allowing them back in currently. Also, unlike Perknose and some others - I don't happen to think everything is as clean as they'd like to suggest. "finding" ballots and then the thing about not using the recount numbers and instead using election night's numbers? Uh hello? This is a recount - the recount numbers are what is supposed to be counted. You can't pick and choose which result sets you want to use - it's F'n ridiculous.

Well?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: bozack

There is nothing that can be done at this point, they have already manufactured enough votes to seat Franken,...

You'd think Coleman would prove it if he could. If you can, he's waiting to hear from you. If you can't, you're blowing smoke. :roll:

 

[MovingTarget]

Well, thus far I am satisfied as this process has been transparent and for the most part, functioned as designed in the event of a close race. Hopefully this won't be anymore dragged out than it has already been. We need a congress that can get to work with everyone present and accounted for...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: bozack
its Minnesota, who cares.

Umm because their US Senator will affect me.. Howz that for an answer genius?

There is nothing that can be done at this point, they have already manufactured enough votes to seat Franken, it would be nice to think that the courts would do the right thing and put coleman in, but this is the year of the democrat so I am not holding my breath.

Sheer idiocy. What you're seeking would be judicial activism at its worst.

<------- voted for Coleman

 

[Lemon law]

What we have here is a failure to communicate and an argument waiting for a justification from the Coleman fan club.

Some people like orange and other people like yellow, whenever yellow is selected over orange or vice versa, some group will be unhappy campers.

And after a full and totally open process, a complete Minnesota recount has now shown Franken has a small lead of some 225, but with some more votes to count, its possible Coleman could catch up and in fact re-take the lead.

But if any want to make fraud out of an open process, with courts yet to weigh in, has better have more than an excess amount of sour grapes in their intestines.

 

[MovingTarget]

Looks like Franken will finally be declared the winner.

http://www.reuters.com/article...e=RSS&feedName=topNews

 

[Fear No Evil]

I'm sure Franken will be as successful as a senator as he was in the radio business. Has he paid his back taxes yet?

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
I'm sure Franken will be as successful as a senator as he was in the radio business. Has he paid his back taxes yet?

Thats pretty par for the course as far as senators go. They are about as bad as that Plumber guy we kept hearing about this past year. I'm sure they are just lining up to pay their dues to the gvt like us plebs...

 

[Lemon law]

If Franken is certified the winner, its already guaranteed that Coleman will go to court and the GOP will filibuster Franken being seated in the Senate.

But unlike many sourgrape posters in this forum, Coleman had better have some solid logic to take to court, and at some point, the one on the short end of the stick may well run out of all court appeals.

Meanwhile, we should all let the process play out, sooner or later we will have a winner, trying to sneak one prematurely thought a back door is never good.

 

[PokerGuy]

Hopefully Coleman uses every avenue of appeal to drag out the process for a year or two, during which time the repubs need to make sure Franken is not seated. That will minimize the damage of having that idiot as a senator.

 

[Genx87]

Al Franken wins a senator seat and declared one of the biggest jerks in Hollywood in the same week. You sir may be having the best week ever.