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

[MarkWarner08]

Can we all agree that many Coleman challengers are complete fucking morons?

Only if we can all agree that Franken challengers are complete fucking morons.

Coleman's people are not morons, in any case.  They're engaged in a petty case of tit-for-tat frivolous challenges with Team Franken.  Part of it is petty revenge, part of it is PR: Coleman doesn't want Franken to dramatically outpace them on challenges, or the running tally (which doesn't include challenged ballots) will start showing a Franken lead.

But none of Franken's people are ridiculous as the Coleman people in Fillmore county who basically believe that all votes for McCain must also be for Coleman. As someone else pointed out if you're going to use that logic then you better just declare Franken the winner as Obama won Minnesota.

Actually, yes, plenty of Franken's people are as ridiculous.  I heard the argument that a vote for Obama must be a vote for Franken too over a week ago.

Get this thing over.  Both sides are beyond ridiculous.

Oh, for all intents and purposes, this thing is over.  Even Franken's people admit that Franken is behind by nearly 100, and with those disqualified ballots staying disqualified, he's pretty much toast.

If those 12,000 ballots are counted, Franken may prevail. Otherwise, he likely loses. Now that the former head of the WA Democratic Party is advising Franken, I'm sure they'll find a way to inject those rejected ballots into the overall total.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Remember his case with the ballots wasn't really rejected, the Commission just ruled it wasn't in that jurisdiction. He just needs to take it to an actual court.

[Flying Dog]

How long will it take for a court to make a ruling on this? (Providing Franken brings it to court.)

[Sam Spade]

Too bad the Star-Tribune is not smart enough to release that this isn't a Senate race challenge (another recount actually)

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Morrison_LittleFallsW2_challengedballot1.pdf

Either the Star-Tribune are idiots (again) or the SOS is.  Btw, this Doty challenge in the Doty-Lemieur race sucks as well.

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Morrison_Pierz_challengedballot1.pdf

[Sam Spade]

Check page two of this ballot:

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Olmsted_W3P6_challenged%20ballot%2041.pdf

[Sam Spade]

No, Obama is not Jesus...

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/LacQuiParle_Madison_challengedballot4.pdf

[Lunar]

Check page two of this ballot:

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Olmsted_W3P6_challenged%20ballot%2041.pdf

How does a judge loving sexual abuse constitute an identifying mark i wonder?  Unless it is proven that only one person knows about the Judge's ... uh, dark side, but even then, the judge himself could have written that.

[Sam Spade]

Check page two of this ballot:

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/media/ballotPDFs/Olmsted_W3P6_challenged%20ballot%2041.pdf

How does a judge loving sexual abuse constitute an identifying mark i wonder?  Unless it is proven that only one person knows about the Judge's ... uh, dark side, but even then, the judge himself could have written that.

What is a pedifile anyway?  Is this someone who cuts his toenails too short?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

[Lunar]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

The Franken campaign has argued this but I remember reading that the judges generally feel that it's not sufficient proof (you and your friend might agree to write your friend in for everything or you might be writing in your sixth grade teacher)

[Sam Spade]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

The Franken campaign has argued this but I remember reading that the judges generally feel that it's not sufficient proof (you and your friend might agree to write your friend in for everything or you might be writing in your sixth grade teacher)

I tend to agree with the judges (ignoring statute for a moment).

Your ballot should not be thrown out simply because you have the gall to write in your own name or someone else you know for a position where you don't like the alternatives.  Maybe it would be different if the ovals weren't colored in, but I still think it's not a reason for disqualification.  Keep in mind the "Lizard People". 

One of the things that most annoys me with the lever system in New York is how difficult it is to write-in a name for a spot.  I so wanted to vote for "Daniel Patrick Moynihan" in the NY Senate race in 2006, but it requires filling out a separate card and some other procedure, which is useless.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Apparentely the Coleman campaign person in my precinct didn't consider my write-in for Bill Ayers to be an identifying mark. Or the StarTrib just didn't get that ballot.

[Lief 🗽]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

The Franken campaign has argued this but I remember reading that the judges generally feel that it's not sufficient proof (you and your friend might agree to write your friend in for everything or you might be writing in your sixth grade teacher)

I tend to agree with the judges (ignoring statute for a moment).

Your ballot should not be thrown out simply because you have the gall to write in your own name or someone else you know for a position where you don't like the alternatives.  Maybe it would be different if the ovals weren't colored in, but I still think it's not a reason for disqualification.  Keep in mind the "Lizard People". 

One of the things that most annoys me with the lever system in New York is how difficult it is to write-in a name for a spot.  I so wanted to vote for "Daniel Patrick Moynihan" in the NY Senate race in 2006, but it requires filling out a separate card and some other procedure, which is useless.

At least you have the option of writing in candidates in New York. Stupid Texas.

[Sam Spade]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

The Franken campaign has argued this but I remember reading that the judges generally feel that it's not sufficient proof (you and your friend might agree to write your friend in for everything or you might be writing in your sixth grade teacher)

I tend to agree with the judges (ignoring statute for a moment).

Your ballot should not be thrown out simply because you have the gall to write in your own name or someone else you know for a position where you don't like the alternatives.  Maybe it would be different if the ovals weren't colored in, but I still think it's not a reason for disqualification.  Keep in mind the "Lizard People". 

One of the things that most annoys me with the lever system in New York is how difficult it is to write-in a name for a spot.  I so wanted to vote for "Daniel Patrick Moynihan" in the NY Senate race in 2006, but it requires filling out a separate card and some other procedure, which is useless.

At least you have the option of writing in candidates in New York. Stupid Texas.

I thought they had that silly system where you move a dial to enter letters (remember Sekula-Gibbs?).  Or maybe that was just Harris/Fort Bend County

[Sam Spade]

Apparently, Franken's campaign says they will withdraw "some" challenges.  I personally have no doubt both campaigns will, eventually...

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35329829.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUnciaec8O7EyUsr

[Lief 🗽]

Probably someone pissed about a ruling the judge made.

This brought up an interesting question: Does it count as identifying the ballot if someone writes themselves in for all the minor offices? (As many have done. Almost all Coleman supporters interestingly.)

The Franken campaign has argued this but I remember reading that the judges generally feel that it's not sufficient proof (you and your friend might agree to write your friend in for everything or you might be writing in your sixth grade teacher)

I tend to agree with the judges (ignoring statute for a moment).

Your ballot should not be thrown out simply because you have the gall to write in your own name or someone else you know for a position where you don't like the alternatives.  Maybe it would be different if the ovals weren't colored in, but I still think it's not a reason for disqualification.  Keep in mind the "Lizard People". 

One of the things that most annoys me with the lever system in New York is how difficult it is to write-in a name for a spot.  I so wanted to vote for "Daniel Patrick Moynihan" in the NY Senate race in 2006, but it requires filling out a separate card and some other procedure, which is useless.

At least you have the option of writing in candidates in New York. Stupid Texas.

I thought they had that silly system where you move a dial to enter letters (remember Sekula-Gibbs?).  Or maybe that was just Harris/Fort Bend County

I think they only let you write-in candidates if someone declares as a write-in candidate after the deadline to get your name on the ballot (or if you didn't get enough signatures or something). So, in races without declared write-in candidates (which was everything but President this year), you can't do a write-in. Which meant I had to vote for some random Republican for some random judge because there was no Democrat.

[Keystone Phil]

Which meant I had to vote for some random Republican for some random judge because there was no Democrat.

Skip the office.

[Sam Spade]

Which meant I had to vote for some random Republican for some random judge because there was no Democrat.

Skip the office.

Yep.

[Ronnie]

Coleman is leading by 340 votes.

Franken is on his last legs.

[agcatter]

I thought it was 270.  Doesn't matter however.  It's already been determined that the final results will be Frankin by 27 votes.  You know, regression analysis by the world's foremost statistician.  Just ask him.

[Ronnie]

I thought it was 270.  Doesn't matter however.  It's already been determined that the final results will be Frankin by 27 votes.  You know, regression analysis by the world's foremost statistician.  Just ask him.

http://ww2.startribune.com/news/metro/elections/returns/2008/recount/msenco.html

[Хahar 🤔]

I thought it was 270.  Doesn't matter however.  It's already been determined that the final results will be Frankin by 27 votes.  You know, regression analysis by the world's foremost statistician.  Just ask him.

You know what he said.

[muon2]

Can we all agree that many Coleman challengers are complete fucking morons?

Only if we can all agree that Franken challengers are complete fucking morons.

Coleman's people are not morons, in any case.  They're engaged in a petty case of tit-for-tat frivolous challenges with Team Franken.  Part of it is petty revenge, part of it is PR: Coleman doesn't want Franken to dramatically outpace them on challenges, or the running tally (which doesn't include challenged ballots) will start showing a Franken lead.

Having returned recently from MN, I would agree that this is the most accurate interpretation of the goings-on.

[© tweed]

I thought it was 270.  Doesn't matter however.  It's already been determined that the final results will be Frankin by 27 votes.  You know, regression analysis by the world's foremost statistician.  Just ask him.

if you "just ask him" he will tell you that the MoE on his analysis is such that it only makes Franken the smallest of favorites.  stop distorting what the dude said.

[Lunar]

I thought it was 270.  Doesn't matter however.  It's already been determined that the final results will be Frankin by 27 votes.  You know, regression analysis by the world's foremost statistician.  Just ask him.

Jesus that comment is asinine considering that Silver said a few days ago (and I posted in bold in reply to your last snarky comment) that Coleman currently comes ahead slightly in his model. Silver no longer predicts a Franken win

Silver no longer predicts a Franken win

Silver no longer predicts a Franken win

It was a probability based model, it was going to change as more data was inputted.

Sorry for the overdone dramatics, but c'mon man