Minnesota Election Could Be Decided Friday

The Minnesota Senate recount election will make a giant step towards a conclusion on Friday, when the state's canvassing board meets to determine the fate of improperly dismissed absentee ballots.

On Tuesday, Al Franken's chief counsel traveled to Washington D.C. to brief reporters on the current status of the election. He deliberately did not close the window on legal action if unlawfully rejected absentee voters were not counted.

"We purposely made a point not to appeal. We wanted to let this canvassing board have an opportunity to figure out where it wanted to go with these uncounted absentee ballots... we will await the hearing on Friday," said Mark Elias. But "if voters in Minnesota are disenfranchised, all options will be on the table. We will not walk away from hundreds, if not thousands votes that did not get counted because of administrative errors."

The Franken campaign is not the only one working the referees on this issue. Last week, lawyers for the Coleman campaign sent a letter to the Secretary of State, criticizing his office for asking that the canvassing board sort out absentee ballots that may have been dismissed illegally or unnecessarily.

"We therefore respectfully submit that Minnesota election officials are under absolutely no legal obligation to comply with this open-ended investigative action requested by the Minnesota Secretary of State, and your office has no jurisdiction to undertake these activities if a local election official chooses not to comply with the request," wrote Frederic W. Knaak. Earlier he argued: "We strongly believe that the requested activities, to be undertaken at taxpayer expense, are wholly outside of the jurisdictional scope of an administrative recount but, instead, constitute initial discovery steps in an election contest under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 209."

That Coleman's camp would accuse the Secretary of State of acting improperly may hinge on legal wording. From a public relations standpoint, it leaves the suggestion that the Minnesota Republican believes he would actually be hurt by more votes being counted. The state's recount process has had its fair share of administrative errors, including the misplacement or loss of hundreds of ballots. Certainly, these missteps have the potential to determine the winner of a race that -- according to the Franken campaign -- is currently down to a mere four votes.

The counties have sifted through the majority of the rejected absentee ballots, and the Secretary of States office has determined that out of a pool of 12,000, roughly 500 to 1,000 may have been unlawfully dismissed. On Friday, the canvassing board will decided what to do with this group and could very well punt on the issue. If that is the case, the United States Senate could pick up the matter of sorting out the recount victor -- as has been endlessly speculated in Minnesota's political circles and the press.

Comments

[wyntka]

Why is every picutre of Franken on HuffPo so zoomed in? Every time he just fills the frame. I love the guy and hope he wins, but I don't want to feel like he's trying to kiss the lens (or me) in every picture.

Zoom out people!! And go Al!!

[tombollocks]

Yeah, true. And why does Huffpo always use Greta Van Susterens's photos for Coleman? It confuses me...

[LeeCalif]

stopppppppppppppppppp .........

[williams411]

This is a message to all the pro-life people in here:

If you don't agree with abortion...DON'T HAVE AN ABORTION!!!!

[LeeCalif]

They are not pro-life.

They are Anti-Choice !!

[CR46]

I like Al and hope he wins and for the state of Minnesota Norm should find some(just a little bit) of dignity and step out of the race before he is convicted of accepting bribes!!!

[AndyDandy]

If AL wins it's going to be hilarious. Can't wait to see him in D.C. with all the old guys.... I have a feeling he wont be invited to the golf games lol.

[jamesspada]

I love these bloggers who say it's impossible to call a winner here. Sure it's possible--just COUNT ALL THE VOTES!!! Once that's done to everybody's satisfaction, whoever has one more vote is the winner. That's how our system works guys.

[uncomplicatedlife]

But what if there's still an unsatisfied party? How long does this go on? Eventually the courts will have to decide when it's over.

[jbeach]

That's a possibility that could be messy. But if all the votes have actually been counted, including the absentee ballots (of which some of the Coleman challenges, by the way, are completely ridiculous), then the court will basically be ruling against whoever is the sore loser.

I fully expect that, if all the votes including the absentee ballots are counted and Fraken loses, he won't take it to court. If roles are reversed and Coleman loses due to the expressed will of the people, I expect him to litigate it as far as he can go.

[avocats]

Exactly. A court will decide when it's over. There are rules, here, folks. Let's just follow them and see how it turns out.

[ProudNeoCon]

you mean to democrats sarisfaction.. I notice that Dems never called for "counting all votes" in the races they won...

[calickizzle]

Why? It would've been repetitive.

[avocats]

They called for counting all the votes in Florida in 2000, which they won; only the Supreme Court's decision to award the election to Bush stopped the count.

[fiorastar]

I'm a Democrat. I've been calling for counting all the votes in every election since I realized there were so many going uncounted for spurious reasons. Are you calling for not counting all the votes? Must be a Republican.

[bullwinkle88]

It's hard to count all the votes WHEN THEY CAN'T FIND THEM!

What the hell kind of half-assed organization does Minnesota have? I'd expect this nonsense in Fla. or Mississippi, not Minnesota.

[midwestdoc]

The headline is misleading. We really don't know what's in those absentee ballots, or even whether there are about 250 of them or about 750. A decision will be made on Friday which may affect the election results. Despite the spins of the campaigns, we aren't sure which way it will affect the results, and we certainly don't know whether it will be decisive.

On another question: somebody here has proposed that Franken drop out of an election which he may have narrowly won "because he's the bigger man". This assumes that elections are about the sort of things Rod B thinks they're about. Most of us (and I think this includes Franken) think this senate vote matters because it will decide things like how many children are left to die due to our terrible health care system. Pretending that doesn't matter and dropping out of the legitimate process to look high-class wouldn't be being a "bigger man". It would be being a self-interested coward.

[wjousts]

The most important factor here is democracy. By your logic a benevolent dictatorship would be okay with you? Franken didn't win, nobody did. The best thing for democracy is not and the perception of democracy in America is not to drag this on for months until the supreme court finally decides it. The best thing is to fix the problems that lead to these situations in the first place.

[midwestdoc]

wjousts- You don't get it. I agree that the procedures of democracy can be ultimately more valuable than the particular outcomes, even life-and-death outcomes. What I'm saying here is that the procedures of democracy should be followed. What you're advocating (dropping the procedures because you're bored) could only make sense for a candidate who didn't believe the results were important for real human issues. Who'd want a candidate like that anyway?

mh01 at least agrees that the policies followed by a government matter, although putting what seems to me a perverse religion-based emphasis on one of the issues.

[avocats]

Nobody won? While I agree that it's criminal to have these problems unsolved election after election (wasn't 2000 sufficient notice? if not, how about 2004?), how can you say nobody won? It is highly unlikely there was a tie, so someone probably won. The question is, with the bumbling idiots of both parties running the election, how to figure out who got the most votes. (Lost ballots? Are you SERIOUS? How ahrd can it be?)

[mh01]

And others would say this vote matters because it will influence, however minimally, how many unborn babies are slaughtered by our abortion industry. Quite a few more, i submit, than children left to die due to lack of health care.

[cotasm]

mh01,
Typical.... just like a conservative. Pro-life from conception to birth, then you're on your own!

BTW, abortion isn't slaughtering babies, but nice try on imagery. By the time it can be considered a baby, most states outlaw abortion (without serious health reasons). Prior to that, it's a slaughtering of a collection of cells that you wouldn't be able to discern from a cancer cluster.

[jbeach]

Let's say that's true - why is it an either/or?

The alleged Pro-Life movement would have a lot better standing, if it actually cared about *preventing* pregnancies that least to abortion, AND about children's lives after they were born.

[calickizzle]

Of course, if abortion was outlawed, that would simply lead to a greater number of children left ot die due to lack of health insurance!

[isadora]

The repubs' favorite hot button. If Coleman is guilty what does it matter? He's "pro life" like the air quoting John McCain mocking women's health concerns, the grossly racist (and just as grossly hypocritical) rapist Strom Thurmond, the hateful Jesse Helms and the Southern Baptist minister triggerman who shot the three civil rights workers to death in Mississippi. Heroic (to republs) Jerry Falmwell took his pro-life credentials to Africa where he both praised apartied and extolled the virtues of expoting it back to the United States of America. Phyllis Schlafly, a long respected Republican moral leader and pro-life angel visited the values voters (Republican) event last year and declared that "There are too many Mosques in the United States.

Pro-life seems to be pro-possible corruption (pending FBI investigation, pro-rape (if the victim is an underaged African American,) pro-apartied (in the USA!), and pro-religious bigotry. Pro-life is a hot button, as Edgar Alan Poe writes "Only this, and nothing more."

[GQB]

Gore dropping out (not fighting 'til the last drop of blood) was the high road.
And it put the country on the low road.

Fight on, Al.

[joeperc]

Wrong Wjousts!! Don't make the mistake Al Gore made. Fight til every legit vote is counted, win or lose. Go Al!

[wjousts]

Yeah, and who cares what damage gets done while your at it!
No result is acceptable at this point. The election was a tie. It doesn't matter who goes to the senate next year, at least half of Minnesota is going to believe the other side stole the election. For the sake of sanity somebody needs to back down.

[DIAGER]

What type of damage can be done counting votes?

Not counting them is how this country got STUCK WITH BUSH.

If Franken doesn't go to the mat on this one, he's an idiot.

[BillMelater]

LOL, Coleman is that you?

[cotasm]

wjousts has no idea what "democracy" means if he thinks someone should commit a Gore. I thought we've had soldiers die to guarantee the right for each and every one of our votes to be counted... yes, I believe I read that somewhere. ;)

[littleblackcat]

And since the entire COUNTRY is suffering from a surfeit of repukelicans and will continue to suffer the damage caused by them for decades, Coleman needs to get his crooked, corrupt butt out of the picture. The nation needs to be under the governance of a party that has some intelligence. We are standing neck-deep in repub stupidity.

[AtomicMan]

he's good enough, he's smart enough, and gosh darnit, people voted for him!

[kingofscotts]

Sure sparky,

In a year when just about all you needed was a "D" after your name to win and in a state that Obama carried handidly Franken still couldn't pull of a victory (or if he is to be found the winner he couldn't even pull off a victory of any significance.)

Of all those that voted for Obama a large percentage said "no thanks" to Franken. Wonder why? I don't.

[tepperman]

I love how people like to rewrite history. Gore wanted only 4 counties recounted while Bush said if you are going to recount only 4 you have to recount them all. That is the truth. And numerous full recounts later Bush did Florida.

[Myshkin57]

Nope. The only full state recount that I've seen on record went to Gore. Bush actually won after the 4- county recounts would have been completed. Gore only wanted 4 recounted because it would not have been likely to get a statewide recount until they showed that there were discrepancies.

[SimJack]

Yep, and Bush has been doing the whole country since then.

[Dave935]

Tepperman: That is G.O.P. spin. The Gore campaign was following Florida law. They were not seeking to limit a recount to four counties, but only seeking to demonstrate need for a statewide recount by demonstrating that there were problems in those counties. This is intended to save the state the cost of a statewide recount in the absence of problems in the designated counties, which are a sample of the electorate.

The media blew coverage of the Florida election. Although either Bush or Gore could have won under different standards of determining voter intent by examining the chads and dimples, The Florida judge was going to order that all over votes and under votes be counted, before the Supreme Court intervened. In the over votes was Al Gore's winning margin, where some voters had punched Al Gore's name but also written in his name. These were legal votes with clear voter intent that clearly demonstrated a Gore victory, but were rejected by machines as over votes. The over votes would have rendered the chads irrelevant.

You are the one who is re-writing history.

[wjousts]

As much as I'd love to see Al in the senate, it's about time for him to be the bigger man and let it go. The result of the election was a tie and no amount of recounting is ever going to resolve things fairly and to everybody's satisfaction.

[proudliberal4truth]

If it was a tie, why in the h*ll should Fran ken surrender the will of half the voters of Minnesota? Does a tie go to the repub in MN? The concept you're talking about baffles me.

[wjousts]

So Coleman should surrender the will of the other half of the voters in Minnesota? There is no good solution to the problem, but Coleman was ahead in the initial result and this can't go on forever. We need better laws to ensure more accurate vote tallies, better voting equipment (with better paper trails) and to cover these situations, but we can't apply them retroactively.
It's time to give it up on this one and fix the system so it doesn't keep happening.

[CitizenKane16]

If it's a tie, why is it that Franken should just lay down and give up the ghost? You're not making a lot of sense. The fact that Coleman is actually fighting for votes to NOT be counted means that he's trying to disenfranchise voters and suppress their will - not legal.

[wjousts]

Because he's the bigger man.

[reggieb]

count. every. vote.

[SURRYMARK]

So Franken being only four votes up is a miniscule margin, but are you saying that four votes = a tie, and therefore Franken should give it to Coleman? That's a serious question - what you think?

[wjousts]

So you seriously think those 4 votes are a real and accurate tally? If you count them again do you seriously think you'll get a 4 vote margin again? No count is 100% accurate and this one certainly isn't even close. There is no way to determine the rightful winner here.

[kingofscotts]

"So Franken being only four votes up is a miniscule margin"

Four votes????

The only one saying Franken is ahead by four votes is Al Franken and his lawyer puppets.

The state says a completely different thing and so does the Coleman camp (which is to be expected).

Only in Frankens warped mind is he ahead by four votes.

[Atlas Scruggs]

Omg, this is precisely why everyone considers libruhls wussies. So we won the election, you can have it; and hey, why not give us an eight year nightmare while you're at it.

[wjousts]

We didn't win, that's the point.

[Mutande]

To those people who have so little imagination that they have to resort to name calling -- you're nothing but a bunch of jerks.

[brantl]

I guess that you just exemplified your point.

[WorkingClass]

When it gets to the supreme court the repub - I mean Coleman will be appointed.

[oncesung]

wait, wait, wait, wait....doesn't it go to the Senate for sorting out? Not the SC?

[DocRockk]

yes it does...the NEXT Senate, after the inauguration.

[macweenie]

Don't you mean aNNointed?

[dakotawoman]

Is it just me, or is that the worst photo of Coleman, ever? Poor man.


All those fanatics who claim that they see public figures shape-shifting into their reptilian alien forms under pressure must be having a field day. I mean, if you look closely you can almost see the reptile bulging out of his cheecks and neck and jaw. He is even starting to look green there.

What a hoot. What a fiasco.

Gosh, Minnesota is usually much more well-organized than this; all we Norwegian Lutherans run a tight ship, don'tcha know. How did they let this monster of mess loose?! Oh, wait, there WAS that whole Jesse Ventura thingee. Ooops. I withdraw my statement.

[philosopherkingtomas]

Coleman will win and then have to resign for illegal acts and the Governor will replace him with Franken!

[WSAY]

No - he will be replaced with a Republican, unfortunately.

[oncesung]

Wow! Won't that be a hoot~!

[truth seeker]

This seat will be decided by the Senate. Hmmm, I wonder who might win that vote ... LOL

[JailNeoconVicts]

The Republicans. Because the spineless Democrats roll over every time, no matter what.

[BlueOnBlue]

Democrats haven't been spineless. They just haven't had a workable Senate majority.

Next year, when the Democratic majority pushes through all of its legislation, remember to credit them for having such steely spines.

[catmandont]

On important stuff like protecting their senate cronies the Democrats show great courage. When it comes to minor things, like ending the war, that's when they roll over.

[BethStuart]

Perhaps a runoff election between Franken and Coleman would have been a better idea given there were three candidates running on Nov. 4th

[powder chowder]

I aggree, that seems like the fair solution. If it's this close there should be a run off.

[milo h minderbinder]

Except that's not what MN state law allows.

There's a law in the state, and it can't be ignored just because something seems more "fair".

[BlueOnBlue]

Democratic candidates do not do well in runoffs. Many Democratic voters are tied up with work or going to college and won't show up for a special election, while Republicans can count on their retirees to come out in droves. For proof, look at the runoff in Georgia. Chambliss would likely have won under any circumstances, but the margin of victory was assured by who did not turn out..

[oncesung]

Yeah. You're right on this one.

[crazyv]

Instant run off is the way to go. It is much more democratic (small d) allows for a greater expression of opinions and allows people to vote for somebody they believe in without feeling like their vote is wasted.

[paulacvdw]

Yeah. If the voters show up

[rabiddog6708]

This could end up in court regardless if Al or Coleman wins. Coleman could win only to be kicked out of Senate for ethics violations he is under investigation for.