Posted on 12/17/2008 6:00:25 PM PST by flintsilver7
Here's an example of a vote they say is clearly for Franken: http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/index.php?review_date=2008-12-17&index=35
Here's an example of a vote they say is clearly not discernable: http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/index.php?review_date=2008-12-17&index=25
Inconsistent much?
I don't know how long this information will remain out there. What they're doing is fraud.
(Excerpt) Read more at senaterecount.startribune.com ...
I would like to know how many in the millions did Soros give in prepaid credit cards, course I don’t expect the GOP to have any balls to go after this and then in 4 years they’ll be moaning about it again but never doing anything to stop it.
I think we have to keep some perspective here. There were almost 3 million votes cast in this senate election, and only a thousand or two ballots were found to be problematic. That’s far less than 0.1% of all the ballots, with the vast majority being successfully counted automatically to within a tiny margin of error (the hand recount will only change the tallies by 0.05% at most). There are always going to be a few idiots and easily confused people. That’s just a fact of life.
The problems are being magnified out of all proportion because of the election was so close that it’s essentially a tie, within the margin of error. 99% of the time, it wouldn’t matter because the margin of victory is almost never this tight.
In the end, I think that, whoever wins, the Minnesota election process will be considered to be a success. Apart from the wrangling over how to handle the erroneously rejected absentee ballots and one envelope of ballots going missing, there has been hardly a hiccup.
Analyzing the unclear ballots was always going to be a subjective process, but the law states that they do have to make an effort to determine the intent of the voter if at all possible, they are not allowed to reject them just because they weren’t filled in perfectly. I would not want to be doing their job right now. They could probably go through the ballots a dozen times and get thirteen different results.
And to the person who loses, it would only have taken another thousand or two voters to turn out for them to have put the result beyond doubt. How many missed opportunities were there on election day where supporters just didn’t make it to the polls for one reason or another?
IMO: The losing candidate only has themselves to blame.
Do you disagree with the board’s decision of Coleman getting the vote?
It’s right in the statute that a “mark” is an “X”... People who follow the ballot instructions are ignoring the law, except that the law allows acceptance of other marks if the intent is clear.
How is a voter supposed to know whether to follow the ballot instructions or the law, in your world?
That’s nice.
But the legislative body of Minnesota passed law that contradicts your view.
If you don’t like it, change the law...don’t try to pull an ex post facto scheme.
Why is it that you expect voters to follow the instructions on the ballot, but figure it’s okay to not follow what the law says about handling ballots?
This is why the old fashioned voting machines work so well. they are difficult to manufacture votes from voter intent.
You can change your mind until the moment of truth and you pull the lever back and the curtain opens. There’s no do-over’s, hanging chads, or voter intent.
Either you voted for the incumbent, one of the opponents or you didn’t vote in the race. Cut and dried. You have allowed the democRATs of your state to corrupt your voting system and you deserve al franken.
Perhaps you're missing the fact that Al Franken is a big fat idiot?
That’s funny. They also rejected a Franken challenge today over a Coleman vote where “Brett Favre” was the write-in selection for president. He claimed it as an identifying mark (I guess Mr. Favre could have been voting for himself, but it’s unlikely), but the board said it was a legitimate write-in and it stayed a vote for Coleman.
Franken’s probably steamed about that one because yesterday they rejected one of his votes — the famous “Lizard People” ballot as having an identifying mark claiming they could not be certain that there wasn’t someone called “Lizard People” living in MN!
No, the projection is changing every second. I don’t think the newspaper updates it properly.
It now shows Coleman by 159 and projects Franken to win by 96. I don’t think the projection is meaningful. Coleman only led beginning this process by 188.
I believe that 120 of those 800 were already counted in the recount
Coleman contends they had been counted twice by mistake
Current margin:
Coleman
+108
Ballots reviewed:541
Actually, the "Lizard People" ballot was rejected as an overvote, not an identifying mark, because according to the law you don't have to mark the circle AND write in the name.
If a voter has written the name of an individual in the proper place on a general or special election ballot a vote shall be counted for that individual whether or not the voter makes a mark (X) in the square opposite the blank....and...
Count all printed names with a mark made opposite them and all names written-in, not exceeding the number to be elected for that office.
And there's folks out there with a last name of "People," and someone's nickname could be "Lizard."
Ah — thanks for the clarification.
Norm now +48
I think this is not the correct lead. The withdrawn challenges are not in the count. Franken has withdrawn more challenges.
>>Do you disagree with the board’s decision of Coleman getting the vote?<<
NO! I just wonder why it is even listed there??
This was a “questionable vote”?
Wht was this listed?
“This travesty is an excellent example of the results of why the lefties attacked Diebold and the computerized voting machines. They wanted a paper trail that they could manipulate for their own purposes. In the automated process they cannot fix the process as they have on many manual voting machines (Shoup, etc) by either front end loading them or blocking off the lever of the opposition.”
Good point. A Republican in texas won a statehouse race by double-digit number of votes (25 votes) and there was no recount worth doing. Why? because re-adding the numbers in the computer wont give you a different result.
The Franken steal is a travesty.
I'll bet you $1,000 that your unfounded, partisan, cliche'd post is incorrect.
You're a bigger idiot than I could have imagined. (Nice apostrophe!)
clichéd
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.