Coleman And Franken Make A Deal

Minnesota Public Radio reports that Sen. Norm Coleman and challenger Al Franken have struck a deal on disputed absentee ballots in their recount.

The plan they've submitted, which must be reviewed by the Minnesota Supreme Court, would count rejected absentees only if both sides agree they were wrongly cast aside.

The proposal draws out the process past the high court's end-of-the-year deadline. It could leave Minnesota without a decision on who won the race until after the new class of Senators is sworn in on Jan. 6.

Ritchie said concluding the work in time for the new session of Congress is not something he's at all concerned about.

"We've been really clear in saying our top priority is accuracy and transparency and the timing thing is just not our issue," [Secretary of State Mark] Ritchie said. "I want to put an underline, we don't care as long as it's accurate and we've done it in an accurate and transparent way. We don't care when it's done."

Coleman, meanwhile, lost a bid to have 16 discarded challenges reconsidered. His only current hope seems to lie in dubious legal maneuvers, such as using the Election Day results over the recount results in 25 specific precincts.

UPDATE: The Minnesota Supreme Court has granted a request from the Franken and Coleman campaigns to approve a framework for counting wrongly-rejected absentee ballots.

Comments

[honeydiva]

*sigh*

[wpiv926]

Can you say, Sen. Al Franken (D) MN

[Peggesis]

I dearly hope Franken wins, and that he--please!--stays out of small planes.

[beanpop]

Since I first heard Al on Air America radio here in Chicago I wanted him in the system.
It's hard to believe he just might get in.
Hahaha!!!
Come on Al, we're rooting for you!!

[UnknownSoldier]

I heard Al on the radio, and I heard a creep. The woman who came on after him was soo much better and so unCreepy.

Go Rhandi

[indypete]

Al a creep? Great scott... how can anybody come to that conclusion? All opinion, I know, but I found him to sound friendly and sincere, albeit very inarticulate. Much as I love Randi Rhodes, by the way, the reality is she is a bit more like "our" version of Ann Coulter than anything else. I would, however, like to see Randi and Ann in a steel-cage wrestling match!

[Yermammy]

I went to Huffpo and read a creep.

[jlounsbury59]

What can Republicans do to reverse the public perception that they always appear to be fighting to keep all the votes from being counted? This is a terrible public relations screw-up.

[GaiaTerra7]

Oh, now the sun is shining on what the rethugs have been doing for the past decade!

They only want certain people to vote and if others do manage to vote, then they want those votes to not count.

[Cunningham]

Nothing, because it's not a perception. It's reality.

[Querent]

Uh , , , maybe they could . . . stop trying to keep all the votes from being counted?

[ncberko]

This is unethical.
Votes shouldn't count or not count because candidates say they do, votes should count because they are votes. That's not to say that all screwed up ballots should be counted either. I think the best thing that candidates can do at this point is agree to trust the independent recount and not interfere.

[tcuoohjohn]

Coleman is done....an­d he knows it.

[FirstShirt]

Yeah, the final count obviously points to a mandate.

[Grunty1]

By your standards it does.

[kevenseven]

Remind me, how many votes did Bush lose by in 2000?

[vietveter]

I really, no I mean REALLY do not care how this turns out.

I do care that in 2008 we can not hold an election and know who won.

If the world is watching this fiasco, they are shaking their collective head.

It seems like we need a better system, or it seems to me like we need A system
I have an idea that would work better than this fiasco

VOTE AT MCDONALDS
YOU ARE THERE FOR 5 MINS' AND YOU GET WHAT YOU ORDERED
the result goes into their computer and you get a receipt

[whosyourdaddy]

Agreed. Isn't it just remarkable that most of are able to process a debit card thousands and thousands of times with never an error but the most important civic function we have turns into a circle-jerk.

[k6007]

If I didn't know better....­I'd think it was by design.

[liberalsrheros]

and with bank records your account is open to others to read. do you want your voting record vulnerble to like of a bush/cheney administration? they'd dress it up as homeland security, but clearly nothing would stop them.

the reasoning that we should look at banking systems for our voting system leads to DIEBOLD. NO THANKS.

yes, there are problems. i dont want to add the likes of e v i l uncle dick digging around our voting records.

[Antacid]

Don't worry, no one outside of the US except for US newsophiles even knows there is a recount. Most people probably don't even know where Minnesota is. It's still an absurd situation, but don't feel personally embarassed about it.

[rosemadder]

Guess what - I'm reading/writing this from the UK. Everybody's watching. Don't kid yourself.

[Querent]

I guess if you're a Republican, then most of your friends probably DON'T know where Minnesota is.

[Grunty1]

This election hasn't been a fiasco.

[vietveter]

Any time you need an attorney to count votes

IT IS A FIASCO

when was election day? oh yeah......­...... NOVEMBER

[Lemeritus]

There but for fortunre, Grunty1...

I'm with vietveter on this; our apparatus is a fiasco and STILL prone to jiggering.

[RTIII]

This is not a fiasco.

Ordering Chicken McNuggets is NOT the same thing as voting. In purchases, there are multiple checks and balances AND recourse if things are disputed; our elections deserve no less, and in fact much more security.
.

[walleymr]

at least this isn't happening with the presidential election again

[vwoom]

Hey, Coleman...­Franken, why not decide this with a "rock-pape­r-scissors­" duel!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock-paper-scissors

[mlaiuppa]

Bad move. You know Coleman wouldn't consent to this unless there was some advantage to him.

[CessnaDriver]

One of the things that sucks about this is that whoever wins will miss the Electoral College Joint Session on January 6. There is also the question of seniority-if Franken wins, he'll go into the senate as the lowest-ranking Senator in his class, because of the date of his swearing in being later than all of the other new Senators.

Question for the savants on Senate rules out there: If Coleman wins, but has a gap in service due to the late certification of election results, does he lose seniority? Does he lose days of service credit to seniority, or does he go to the back of the line?

[Querent]

No, he doesn't lose seniority. They don't count days. Seniority is only dependent on the date a Senator was originally sworn in, and rarely if ever would the fact one was delayed by a few days have any bearing on committee assignments or other questions of seniority. It might affect a senators position in the caucus picture, however.

[BarryChamplain]

Yikes, that headline scared me. For a moment, I was imagining: Norm gets to be Senator, Sunday thru Wednesday, and.. :-)

[DarkWitch]

I was thinking along the lines of one rules during the dark half of the year, one during the light half ;)

[Big0725]

It matters not when Mr. Franken takes his seat, just that he does. We have the Senate, House and the White House so it's our baby now.

[lovered]

Must be exciting. Its been a while for you guys. I guess we can let you have a litlle bit of fun. You aren't used to having power

[donaldw6]

And you guys weren't any good at it.

[k6007]

And, after all that practice..­..you guys STILL can't get it right.

[Cilantro33309]

The good news: we can only do better than "you guys".

After all, we're more afraid of tripping over the bar than having to jump over it....

[indypete]

And "you guys" aren't used to making a success of a country.

[Waitaminute]

So you are admitting the republicans had all the power. Now look how the country has suffered, since the ones that have been in power so long, they got USE to it.

[Gdebs]

It does matter. Al's seniority will start after all of the new senators by however many days his swearing in is delayed. That matters occasionally.

[whosyourdaddy]

And we're all expecting great things from you folks too. For one, I know that with the new kinder friendlier approach to terrorists, things will be much safer for us than the last 8 years. And with plenty of new taxes there will be a big boost in our economy. Can't wait.

[Grunty1]

[And we're all expecting great things from you folks too.]

For some reason, you guys always have no expectations for the people you vote for.

[PlantGod72]

AAAaaaa...­...go cry in your beer! As the Dem's and Progressives begin the serious and daunting task of UNBURYING this country from the fiasco of the PAST 8 years, you can sit back and heckle, cajole, and wallow in the slime of Republican hypocrisy and cynicism till you're good and sick of it.

Meanwhile, let the grownups take charge.

[sheila]

yeah, i mean who didn't feel super safe on 9/11? good point.

[carlgt1]

and we expected utter crap & chaos & crime & & death & stupidity & hypocrisy from the dittohead cadre of the past 8 years -- and unfortunately we got it in droves!

[stevietheman]

9/11 and the anthrax attacks happened on Bush's "watch". Not exactly safe.

[Scherzo]

Sounds to me like Coleman is throwing in the towel with this deal, especially in light of the interview yesterday in which he openly spoke of losing.

[Grunty1]

The GOP is probably urging him to call it quits since he will soon be indicted on corruption.

[iver]

So the GOP probably has an illegal inside feed from the Attorney General of the mounting evidence about Coleman's doings, and want to gear up the spin machine in a new direction. Norm will get a job in some rightwing "thinktank" and live happily ever after.

[johnnyjust]

A great example of why only electronic counts should count.

[ThunderclapNewman]

As always, you are exceptionally clueless.

Hand counts are always more accurate.

[Pennsanic]

Amen. Less room for e-cheating.

[indypete]

But after you count the hands you have to divide by two.....

[DannyEastVillage]

you mean because the electronic counting technology creates fewer problems?

whatever it is you're smoking, you need to change it.

[BillZBubb]

???? The "electronic" counts are often wrong. There is nothing "just" about legitimate votes being ignored, johnny. Unless of course you are a Coleman/Bush Republican.

[donaldw6]

That's what Mike Connell probably thought. Look how well it worked out for him.

[Oahspe]

Coleman's friends at FLS-DCI are the same group that was a partner to Connell in his Gov-tech firm. Namely, Tom Synhorst of FLS-DCI was a founding member of Connel's Gov-tech firm,along with Connell's wife,Heather. The FLS-DCI folks were the robo call company that also creates phony grass roots front groups for the GOP.

[Oahspe]

Todd Johnston, "Who is Michael L. Connell? Part I: The Atwater School of Politics," ePluribus Media, March 28, 2007.

[Grunty1]

Why are Republicans against counting votes?

[indypete]

Because vote-counting has a liberal bias!

[iver]

Cuz we only want votes to count in Iraqi elections, not in America.

[jerrypenguin]

During the settlement of the great Pacific Northwest, some Olympic Peninsula elections were decided by a contest. The candidates would climb up a greased pole, determine who could yell the loudest, throw axes, etc.

Reinstating this type of contest, would make election much more interesting. It may even remove lawyers from determining election outcomes.

[iver]

On the contrary, it is more interesting during the axe throwing part to have a target.