Skip to comments.Murkowski (The Winner?) Desperate: Wants Her Day In Court
Posted on 12/03/2010 10:09:03 AM PST by RileyD, nwJ
By Thomas Lamb | 12/03/10 | 1:43 AM EST |
I find it telling that Lisa Murkowski wanted to intervene in the Joe Miller vs. State of Alaska case because she felt that she could lose.
Kendall said Murkowski was at odds with the state over its deciding not to count another 2,016 ballots for her.
Many of those did not have the ballot ovals filled but had her name written in. Others, according to attorney Scott Kendall, had "Lisa M." written in or various misspellings.
Video link for spelling bee here in body of article.
(Editor's note: notice the misspelling of Murkowski (an actual mistake) by the ad agency at the end of the video)
Considering she wants to have 2016 votes that the State of Alaska determined were not votes to be counted, you have to ask; did Lisa Murkowski cheat on passing her bar exam?
Because no lawyer in their right mind would try to get a court to overturn votes that are contradictory to what a politician spent a gazillion dollars on to make sure didn't happen.
The court allowing Murkowski to intervene has the look of a conniving politician who is desperate to hold on to something given to her early on. And while A.P. glossed over Kendall's remarks, votes that were challenged and not counted were misspellings like Murcowshit.
Talking about correct spelling: Desperate... ;^)
How about disparate? Don’t know if it would be appropriate in this case, but I figured I’d muddy the waters a little bit.
I’d like to hear some final numbers and see a final ruling on what will be counted. Otherwise I’m not convinced that she “looks” desperate. Obviously her lawyers wanted in on the case so they can press their positions on anything they don’t like. And it only makes sense she wants every vote she can get because you don’t know what rulings will come later.
Lisa the Liar is desperate to keep what her daddy gave her.
What is the current status on this fiasco??
Still in Court?
Yours is the most reasoned analysis. Of course she has an interest in the litigation; even if we all hope she loses, the fact that she intervened hardly communicates any sense of desperation.
There won’t be any final numbers until the court makes its ruling and you that will likely be appealed by one side or the other.
Well, I believe that is what this litigation is about, at least partially - final numbers. As I understand it, Miller is challenging "x" number of ballots because of spelling errors, or other documentary inadequacies. I'm not positive, but he may also be trying to challenge some of the rulings he lost prior to the election, like the placement of the write-in lists in the polling places.
Having said all that, Murkowski leads in preliminary numbers by almost (or perhaps a bit more than) 10K votes. I can't envision a scenario where Miller makes up that kind of ground, not in a race where there were only 255K cast in total. I think his challenge can best be described as Quixotic.
Has anyone come up with a number, based on past election turnout, how many of Murkowshit’s numbers were crossover Rat voters? Just curious.
Have the Military and all absentee ballots been counted yet?
I haven't seen them yet. And, given the remoteness of AK, it's quite possible they don't exist. I can't imagine that there was a lot of exit polling done at the polls themselves.
Logically though, I'd have to presume that it's a sizable number if for no other reason that the few votes that the Dem in the race actually got, just 60K out of 255K.
I think that they have, but by no means take that as a definitive answer. I could very well be wrong.
Lose with honor, Joe, and eventually your day will come.
Yes, that's the camp I'm falling into. I have no problems with conservatives fighting fiercely in court to protect the electoral process. But, I'm not sure if challenging spelling is a long-term winning strategy ESPECIALLY when you're down 10K votes. That's a lot.
Of course you are right. Wonder if voter turnout was the same as usual or higher.