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

[MaxQue]

Ballot #1:  Franken. The mark in only one hole with ink around. No arrow is oblivous.

Ballot #2: Coleman. That is not a Social security number, neither a name. Only somebody who didn't check where he puts his digits.

Ballot #3: Depends of the others choices. If the ballot is like that for all offices, count for Franken. If not, reject.

Ballot #4: Franken. That is legal under Minnesota Statutes and that is clear.

Ballot #5: Franken. The oval is not filled beside Write-in.

Ballot #6:  Franken. Intend is clear.

Ballot #7: Reject. Two ovals are filled.

Ballot #8: Franken. Barkley oval is not filled, this is a error, probably.

Ballot #9: Barkley. Voter had indented to vote for Franken, but he changed his mind, oblivously.

Ballot #10: Barkley. Coleman oval is not filled, this is a error, probably.

Ballot #11: Reject. Two ovals are filled. Underline argument couldn't be proven, that could a voter who fallen asleep.

[MaxQue]

Ballot #1: Reject. It is an identifing mark
Ballot #2: Franken. They shouldn't care about the kind of thing used.
Ballot #3: Reject. A ''X'' over the oval is oblivous and others votes don't have this.
Ballot #4: Coleman. The Bachmen or Badmen oval is not filled.

[MaxQue]

Look at how much time someone spent writing in unique names for each different judge position up for election:

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Bloomington_P25_challengedballot1F.pdf

(Unlike the ones where someone obviously signed their name as a write-in for half the offices, this one is a clearly valid vote, however.)

That is a proof of the stupidity of electing judges and you're wrong. He voted for the true candidate for a judge position.

[MaxQue]

What happens if we have a tie?  Anyone knows?

Coin flip.  No, really.  This is established in state law.

Just like Canada... except that is tradition  rather than law I believe.

Depends of where. In Québec, we redo the election. Like in Champlain, in 2003.