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

[Sam Spade]

Coleman has just (narrowly) moved ahead of Franken again on Intrade.  I guess the Intraders were expecting Franken to be making up more ground in the recount than he has to date.

Anyone betting on this one on Intrade should be doing so for amusement purposes only.

[Sam Spade]

Updated per SOS and per Star Tribune, where SOS not covered.  Lead Coleman +136 in Strib, +126 in SOS

39 counties are in 100% according to Strib, whereas SOS says only 36 counties (and two have no results), but I see no reason to doubt Strib here.  Exceptions are 1 precinct in Beltrami, all of Swift and Wantowan.

17 counties are partially in.  Kittson shows no results on SOS, but is almost full on Strib.  Hennepin, Nicollet and Polk are given more results on Strib than on SOS.  On these counties, do not trust the numbers in parentheses for accurate results of what "has been" counted.

31 counties have not reported results yet.  13 of them say they should have or should have had results by today or tomorrow.

Without determining what the Strib numbers are from Hennepin (and where they come from), I can tell you that the present results in on the SOS skew strongly Coleman in Hennepin, skew strongly Franken in Ramsey and basically what's left of St. Louis is Duluth proper, which oddly enough, didn't vote much different than the rural areas here.

I may, given my own personal time, try and analyze the precincts to determine whether the challenged ballot is likely to be 1) a ballot counted for a candidate and challenged or 2) an overvote or blank vote challenged, but more than that I cannot say.

Considering 42% according to SOS is in today, with 51% of precincts (46% according to Strib, 55% of precincts), unless the guys decide to take a day off, we should be somewhere near 60% tomorrow.

All for now...

[Sam Spade]

Day #2:

1) Coleman - I'm curious what interpretation of the "identifying mark" provision has been, but doesn't it need to identify something first?  To me it looks more like a scribble, which doesn't identify anything.
2) Franken - weak argument
3) Coleman - weak argument
4) Coleman - exact same situation as the Lizard People.  Henceforth...

[Sam Spade]

STrib now has Coleman ahead by 130 votes. Franken challenged a ton of ballots today, too, now with 901 challenges to only 416 for Coleman.

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

Some Franken person in Renville County challenged 476 ballots, which is probably every blank vote or overvote (only 6000 votes).  Kind of a lol moment.

[Sam Spade]

As a reminder, these are the counties we can possibly expect results from today, including those already being counted.

Aitkin
Benton
Carlton
Kanabec
Lac Qui Parle
Martin
Meeker
Mille Lacs
Wadena

Counties - Recount Not Started

Becker (Nov. 24)

Blue Earth (Nov. 24)

Brown (Nov. 24)

Dodge (Dec. 1)

Goodhue (Nov. 24)

Jackson (Nov. 24)

Koochiching (Nov. 24)

Lake of the Woods (Nov. 24)

Le Sueur (Dec. 1)

Mower (Nov. 24)

Rock (Dec. 3)

Scott (Dec. 3)

Sherburne (Nov. 25)

Stevens (Nov. 26)

Todd (Nov. 25)

Wilkin (Nov. 22)

Winona (Dec. 3)

Wright (Dec. 3)

[Sam Spade]

STrib now has Coleman ahead by 130 votes. Franken challenged a ton of ballots today, too, now with 901 challenges to only 416 for Coleman.

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

Some Franken person in Renville County challenged 476 ballots, which is probably every blank vote or overvote (only 6000 votes).  Kind of a lol moment.

As I expected, the 476 ballot challenge was a misprint.  Only two were challenged.

[Sam Spade]

Presently at 131.  An urban precinct removed one vote for Franken and added one challenge for him (probably about the vote).  Challenges are presently at 416 for Coleman, 430 for Franken.

[Sam Spade]

MN SOS to Star Tribune: Guess who's wrong?

Both are right.  It merely has to to with the fact that the Strib is reporting unofficials in certain counties (see St. Louis, Hennepin) ahead of the SOS.

As for the challenges, I expect both sides to engage in a certain amount of stupid ones which will be resolved before the final battle.

That's why my handy little list of what has been challenged will be quite important.

[Sam Spade]

As I predicted, the incompletes will go a separate post for now.  I may rectify this situation on the weekend.

Incomplete Counties

County %Complete Coleman (Count) CHG Franken (Count) CHG Shift Challenges Anoka 98%P, 98%V 82,230 (80,893) -60 66,747 (65,676) -42 F+18 C66, F93 Becker 29%P, 26%V 8,390 -11 5,990 -11 NC C13, F12 Crow Wing 98%P, 96%V 16,098 (15,402) -5 13,019 (12,632) -6 C+1 C11, F10 Dakota 62%P, 55%V 102,595 (55,983) -101 85,201 (47,098) -87 F+14 C92, F96 Hennepin 63% 67%P, 68%V 237,525 (168,527) -166 329,249 (186,680) -196 C+30 C254, F252 Kanabec 0% 90%P, 91%V 3,739 -8 2,978 0 F+8 C2, F7 Kittson 0% 97%P, 100%V 1,077 +2 1,165 -3 C+5 C1, F3 Ramsey 47%P, 43%V 92,816 (29,853) -45 142,069 (71,588) -10 F+35 C62, F53 St. Louis 86%P, 79%V 38,248 (30,389) -33 64,381 (50,235) -55 C+22 C153, F90 Stearns 70%P, 79%V 36,208 (28,653) -11 26,147 (20,768) -8 F+3 C13, F13 TOTALS 758,218 (317,832) -195 848,307 (316,599) -133 F+62 C323, F334

[Sam Spade]

From Benton County, where Coleman challenged 25 ballots and Franken challenged 31 ballots.  This is a good example of "challenging gone wild", as I doubt most of the challenges to already cast ballots will be upheld and many of the challenges to new ballots will likely fail.

Benton
Challenges with or without Changes (C-26, F-23)
0010 – One vote challenged by Coleman. Two votes challenged by Franken.  Two votes removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably the Coleman/Franken ballots.
0030 – One vote challenged by Coleman.  Two votes challenged by Franken.  Two votes removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably the Coleman/Franken ballots.
0035 – Three votes challenged by Coleman.  One vote challenged by Franken.  One vote removed from Coleman.  Three votes removed from Franken.  Probably the Coleman/Franken ballots.
0040 – Two votes challenged by Coleman.  One vote challenged by Franken.  One vote removed from Coleman.  Two votes removed from Franken.  Probably the Coleman/Franken ballots.
0045 - One vote challenged by Franken.  One vote removed from Coleman.  Probably the Coleman ballot.
0050 - One vote challenged by Franken. Probably a blank/overvote challenge.
0055 – Three votes challenged by Franken.  Three votes removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably the challenges are Coleman/Franken ballots.  Probably one vote removed from Coleman/Franken.
0065 – One vote challenged by Franken. Probably a blank/overvote challenge.
0070 - One vote challenged by Franken. Probably a blank/overvote challenge.
0085 - One vote challenged by Coleman.  Two votes challenged by Franken.  Two votes removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably the Coleman/Franken ballots.
0090 – Two votes challenged by Franken.  Two votes removed from Coleman.  Probably the Coleman ballots.
0095 – Four votes challenged by Coleman.  Three votes removed from Franken.  Probably three challenges are Franken ballots.  Probably one challenge is a blank/overvote challenge.
0100 – Two votes challenged by Coleman.  Two votes challenged by Franken.  Two votes removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably three challenges are Coleman/Franken ballots.  Probably one challenge is a blank/overvote challenge.
0105 – One vote challenged by Coleman.  Three votes challenged by Franken.  One vote removed from Coleman.  One vote removed from Franken.  Probably two challenges are Coleman/Franken ballots.  Probably two challenges are blank/overvote challenges.
0110 – Two votes challenged by Coleman.  Two votes removed from Franken.  Probably the Franken ballots.
0113 – One vote challenged by Franken.  One vote removed from Coleman.  Probably the Coleman ballot.
0120 – Eight votes challenged by Coleman.  Eight votes challenged by Franken.  Eight votes removed from Coleman.  Seven votes removed from Franken.  Probably fifteen challenges are Coleman/Franken ballots.  Probably one challenge is a blank overvote/challenge.

Changes without Challenges (C+1, F-1)
0111 – One vote added to Coleman, one vote removed from Franken.

[Sam Spade]

Unfortunately, I'm only up to Crow Wing on today's update.  I'm partially being held back because I'd like to analyze the challenges on the completed counties (of which I'm through Chisago).  Maybe more tomorrow.  I expect counting to slow down then.

[Sam Spade]

Unfortunately, I'm only up to Crow Wing on today's update.  I'm partially being held back because I'd like to analyze the challenges on the completed counties (of which I'm through Chisago).  Maybe more tomorrow.  I expect counting to slow down then.

Bump.  Now up to Hennepin/Grant in analysis.  Precinct-by-precinct analysis is quite interesting really.

[Sam Spade]

Coleman just gained a bunch of votes out of Duluth.  I'm frankly quite surprised.

It's because Coleman just challenged a big chunk of votes there, 57 more than Franken has (137-80). Challenged ballots aren't included in the totals, but I imagine the vast majority of the disparity will end going to Franken. (Coleman probably just has an overzealous vote-challenger there.)

What's kinda funny is that this total right now is nearly balanced out by Meeker County (9500 votes).  Anyway, there will be some overzealous challengers everywhere, which is precisely the reason why I'm breaking it down precinct-by-precinct.

[Sam Spade]

This one is far from over with, folks.  Although I wonder, in the end, if that much actually changes - at least that's what my present precinct analysis tends to lean towards (just because I suspect so many of these challenges are a joke).  Franken may need to have new ballots added to mix, I suspect.

[Sam Spade]

Everyone's challenging everything that moves now.  Most of these challenges will probably be cleared up before review because I suspect most are rather frivolous.  I don't think there's really any obvious pattern, although, you know, my work on the numbers grows...

From SOS (which is ahead of Star-Tribune this time):

81.40% Precincts, 74.19% Votes

Coleman -1051 (909114), Franken -1008 (890899).  (Coleman - 43 = 172 votes ahead)

Challenges: Coleman 1400, Franken 1401

[Sam Spade]

Star Tribune has 1624 Coleman Challenges to 1501 Franken ones

I only see 1,535 Coleman to 1,501 Franken.

[Sam Spade]

It will be interesting to note how those ballots vote in comparison to Becker's certified results, which were Coleman 50, Franken 36, Barkley 13.

[Sam Spade]

Franken's measurement comes from what their election observers say the ruling was by the judge-person on election day and the obviously lame ones from both sides.

It will be interesting to note how those ballots vote in comparison to Becker's certified results, which were Coleman 50, Franken 36, Barkley 13.

It might have been 46 votes.

From precincts in the Lake Eunice and Spruce Grove townships.

Lake Eunice:
Coleman 48, Franken 37, Barkley 13

Spruce Grove:
Coleman 54, Franken 32, Barkley 14

[Sam Spade]

Franken's measurement comes from what their election observers say the ruling was by the judge-person on election day and the obviously lame ones from both sides.  They have the accurate assumption that very few initial rulings will be overturned.

I said the gap was *probably* 50-100 votes based on present SOS results.  If Coleman's lead according to SOS is 172, then the Franken statement would validate this observation.

Star-Tribune says St. Louis finished today.  Does this Franken statement include those results?  My guess is yes, but I want to make sure.

The numbers left in Hennepin should skew heavy Franken.  SOS says 71% is in, Star-Tribune says 81%.  Therein lies the best chance to gain votes from current numbers because the precincts left from Ramsey will be about 50-50 between Coleman and Franken.

Obviously, the remaining counties left skew Coleman.

[Sam Spade]

This article seems to indicate that the 46 votes came from a discrepancy between election night and the recount:

http://www.dl-online.com/articles/index.cfm?id=39596&section=homepage

In that they noticed the numbers were too low from already-counted ballots, but not recounted ones.  Frantically searching around, officials found them.

So, in other words, likely no net gain for anyone?

[Sam Spade]

Yes, that would be my intuition.  Assuming no funny business.

Well, as the numbers above indicate, "funny business" would probably go one way.

[Sam Spade]

lol 7-1

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The eight wards of Crystal were:

Franken 45.67%, Coleman 35.56%, Other 18.87%.

Kind of ridiculous, but not exceptionally ridiculous.  5-2-1 would make more sense.  Eh, but who cares...

[Sam Spade]

There are many reasons why I want this election to be over, and the shrill partisanship of the Dems on this board in their love for Al Franken is certainly one of them.

Wow.  Perhaps the first time you and I have agreed wholeheartedly on this one verin. 

I will post why once the recount is over. 

[Sam Spade]

Update #1:  The State Canvassing Board unanimously rejected Franken's motion that rejected absentee ballots be included in the recount.

Of course this seems obvious too:  "During the discussion, the board members stressed that they weren't rejecting the merits of the arguments made by Franken's attorneys. They also made it clear they expect the issue to be litigated separately from the recount procedure."

They're also going to try and cut down on the challenges before the Canvassing Board meets and get rid of some of the pointless ones.

In all honesty, I was going through the new Dakota/Hennepin challenges last night.  If these numbers reflect numbers in other counties, at minimum 90% of these challenges are not going to go anywhere, IMHO, so this is good.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35126884.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUnciaec8O7EyUsr

Update #2:  Apparently Itasca County (Franken 47, Coleman 38) will open up the recount to count three absentee ballots that had been neglected or mistakenly rejected.  Naturally, I suspect these ballots may be "challenged". 

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35074544.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUxWoW_oD:EaDUiacyKUnciaec8O7EyU

[Sam Spade]

And you thought challenge *overkill* was bad before...  I'm hoping this is a misprint, otherwise I'll have as much *fun* as with Hennepin.

Sherburne
Vote Changes
Coleman -433, Franken -426

Challenges
Coleman 452, Franken 422

...help...