Another day, another set of recount news that doesn’t seem to get us close to a result. To this pointy-headed blogger, this seems like it’s going to be a battle of the challenged ballots when it comes down to it. On that front, I second what Joe at MNCR said:
But a view from inside the recount operation shows just how the Coleman operation is working: not just challenging questionable ballots, but challenging ballots that are clearly Franken votes for the sake of challenging Franken votes, tamping down any possible gains Franken might make in the official tally.
Emerging accounts indicate that ballots with clear intent — an X instead of a filled-in circle, with no other confusing marks, for example — are being challenged by Coleman-affiliated observers. One account indicated that a Coleman observer challenged a clear Franken vote because apparently, “the dots were too big.” In another case, a Coleman volunteer challenged a ballot and was told by the attorney on hand that it was a clear Franken vote, but if they wanted to challenge it “tit-for-tat”, to go ahead.
This goes along with what Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com was saying a little bit ago: Team Coleman may be artificially buffering their ballot lead by frivolously challenging ballots. A ballot challenged is a ballot that goes uncounted for now and while (hopefully) those ballots, if truly frivolous, will quickly be reinstated as a Franken vote when reviewed, it helps Coleman’s public-political position to be able to go into the challenged ballot process with a vote lead.
Like I said yesterday, with over 3000 challenged ballots, this is going to largely depend on how frivalously each camp has been challenging ballots. If, for example, Team Coleman has been instructing their challengers to be extremely aggressive (and there is some evidence of that), then perhaps more of their ballots will go Franken than Franken’s will go Coleman. Maybe…
Meanwhile, the State Canvassing board’s ruling on absentee ballots may have an upside according to Lori Sturdevant:
The official word from the State Canvassing Board Wednesday was that It would not add rejected absentee ballots to the U.S. Senate race recount. But the discussion surrounding one small subset of those rejected ballots — those that were mistakenly rejected on Election Day by local election judges — strongly implied that, one way or another, those ballots eventually will be added to the vote totals of GOP Sen. Norm Coleman and DFL challenger Al Franken.
They should be. An election judge’s error should not bar any legitimate ballot from being counted.
So, what say you fair readers? Is Norm Coleman Frivolously Challenging Ballots? Should Mistakenly Rejected Absentee Ballots be Counted? Am I just a moonbat? Let’s hear it!
Yes wrongly rejected absentee ballots should be counted, there is nothing second class about an absentee ballot. The error of a clerk, even well meaning should not negate a vote.
The great challenge in my mind is to count absentee ballots rejected because the voter was wrongly dropped from the registration list. Folks in our precinct who showed up to vote and found themselves mysteriously dropped from registration simply re-registered to vote as ostensibly new voters. Had they voted absentee their votes would have been rejected.
Both sides are obviously very frivolous with their challenges… all wrongfully rejected ballots should be counted.
I await a petition, a phone number… with numbers of people voicing the opinion that all legal and decipherable votes should be counted, perhaps it would make a difference? The degree of frivolity seems to be leaning heavier on Coleman’s people so far (from all accounts). Didn’t Coleman turn down a chairmanship in order to spend time on this. I hope someone is interviewing the counters to see if they’ve received any odd phone calls at home. Put nothing past the Republicans, as they know they have leverage if caught. And where is the lawsuit standing? It seems to gone off the radar as suddenly as it appeared.
-happy thanksgiving, btw-
I see both sides doing this. The 4 reasons to reject an absentee ballot are stated pretty clearly. If a rejected absentee ballot meets all criteria, then sure count it. But lets be honest, it doesn’t matter what happens. The loser of the canvassing decision will come up with a reason to fight this in court. And when that happens, all of Minnesota loses….regardless of who sits in the Senate seat.
Coleman could not be a chairman of any commitee…he is in the minority party……
Happy thanksgiving! Yes, speaking as an absentee voter (confident as I can be that I did it correctly) I certainly hope, I insist in fact that all valid absentee votes are counted. I am disappointed the canvassing board has put it off to a legal battle, this election will go on and on and on I guess. Who would have predicted the number of
challenges when you and I and the majority can easily and clearly identify voter intent on, I would guess the majority of “challenges” are clear, The examples shown on some reports of Colemans challenges when the ballot included a McCain and Franken vote stand out. But I’m not surprise. Nor am I surprised to see Coleman’s lead increase as the challenges increase, I think the tactic they are using is to make sure they win the recount excluding challenges, and we will be honored by a new news conference, with a new declaration of Coleman as winner, calling on Franken to concede without subjecting the canvassing board go through the 5000+ challenges… The best Christmas gift this year will be to see a Franken victory after Colemans 5 or 6 self declarations of victory. Again, keeping my fingers crossed!
The claim by this and other lefty blogs like 538 that Franken’s challenges are more frivolous is comical. Of course your sources say that — your sources are all pro-Franken people. I’m sure if your sources were pro-Coleman people, we’d be hearing how all of Franken’s challenges are frivolous.
Coleman end up winning by about 100 when all is said and done.
As the recount seems to be making the winner less clear than before, the most fair way to decide the outcome would be a funoff election like they will soon do in GA.
As this won’t happen they need to follow the law which seems to leave absentee ballots out of the recount process (legislature should update election law regarding voting absentee). I don’t understand what makes the one subset of rejected ballots more worthy of review than the others.
If it were up to me I would inform voters through all news outlets on how to check on whether their absentee ballot was counted, than provide info on how to challenge to those who believe they vote was wrongly rejected. I would leave this up to individual voter initiative to address in the month of Dec, keep both campaigns out of it as much as possible, and declare a winner by mid Jan.
After this entire affair is over, perhaps the legislature needs to address the issue of how to deal with improperly rejected absentee ballots. For now, a court order to the counties to review all the rejected absentees should not be out of the question. Someone who absentee voted properly should not see their vote disallowed due to another person’s error.
Yes Sunshine..the goal is to win excluding challenges…have you seen the Meeker 51 yet? Challenges by Franken that have zero merit. Excluding challenges Coleman is up by 140.
Paul S.
You stated…
“Folks in our precinct who showed up to vote and found themselves mysteriously dropped from registration simply re-registered to vote as ostensibly new voters. Had they voted absentee their votes would have been rejected.”
Uh, no. If they were not on the registration list they would have never received their absentee ballot in the first place.
Wrongfully rejected ballots should be counted but it is my prediction that they won’t be. The state of Minnesota, both parties, do not want to admit that the system is flawed and that increasing numbers of absentee voters are going to be disenfranchised as we move into the future because of antiquated procedures. It is very likely we will have a Senator who did not get the most votes, when you consider the number of absentee voters who are students attending college in another state, and who these students were likely to have voted for on their rejected ballot. I personally know of two such students whose ballots were rejected after all the trouble they took. There’s an interesting display at the Star-Tribune web site illustrating the multiplicity of ways in which an absentee ballot can be rejected; it’s almost like running an obstacle course to submit such a ballot successfully.
I was a Franken challenger in out state MN. I challenged what I thought would be rejected over votes, but I believe they will be counted when they use the higher standard of “voter intent”. Likewise with the rejected absentee ballots. The argument is simple, all ballots have to be counted using the higher standard and if voter intent can be discerned they will be counted.
There were frivolous challenges on both sides. Of course the Franken people will say that the Coleman campaign has frivolously challenged ballots, thats what they get paid to do. Both sides are guilty, what this race will really come down to is the canvassing board. Don’t expect a big change in the numbers as a vast majority of challenged ballots have clear voter intent. As far as improperly rejected absentee ballots, you use the example of college students. How about the military personnel? I’m sure they vastly outnumber the amount of “students” that voted by absentee, how will they vote? This is just another attempt by the Franken folks to delay the inevitable. I just hope this thing doesn’t end up at the United State Senate.
Maxus,
Coleman was running for Chairman of the NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee). Its the most partisan position as their only concern is to work at the Democrats failing, so they can elect more Republicans. He would raise money and travel the country stomping for Republicans.
Its a 100% chance that working bi-partisan would be set on a back burner for political party gain.
He had to drop his bid as it would been presumptuous for him to get elected to a position before he wins his re-election.
While they screwed up the first time, by rejecting ballots they should NOT have,
then NOW have the opportunity to rectify that mistake.
They have a DUTY to rectify their mistake.
In Jr High civics class you are told every vote matters, every vote counts.
To do any less a 2nd time is a willful criminal disenfranchisement of Americans.
When you put it in those terms DJZ, how would you feel about Klobuchar heading the DSCC? She’s apparently working her way up to that. Well, she cant be it in 2012 as she has to run for re-election which gives her 2014, a year that should be pretty damn bad for us and where we’ll lose some seats. Although, if you look at our pick-ups this year, the only one where we possibly could lose would be Alaska as all the other seats are seats we can keep. And if Franken wins, that’s a for sure 2014 loss. So hmmmm, maybe I’m not rooting for Klobuchar as DSCC head anymore, she doesn’t have any cycles coming up where she can do well, they’re all defense.
I gave up being naive several decades ago.
Yes, there are plenty of frivolous challenges on both sides, the camps have said they’re not averse to getting together and eliminating many of these, which is the grown-up thing to do.
I really think election will come down to the improperly rejected absentee ballot envelopes, and frankly, this shouldn’t be that hard to fix. I seem to recall that SOME counties had contacted SOME of their early absentee voters who had defects on their envelopes, and urged them to come in and fix that. If only some counties did this, than not’s treating every voter on an equal basis.
A process must be developed to examine ALL rejected absentee ballot envelopes, notify those voters, and afford them the opportunity to “cure” the defect in their absentee ballot envelope, so the enclosed ballot can be counted. All counties.
Here in WA we vote mostly all by mail, and in this county, here’s what happens with a defective ballot envelope:
Q. Will my vote still count if I forget to sign my ballot envelope?
A. The affidavit on the back of your ballot return envelope must be signed for your ballot to count. If you return your mail ballot without signing the oath on the back of the envelope the elections office will contact you by mail and attempt to call you by telephone. You will need to return a signed oath prior to the day before certification of the election for your ballot to be counted. If your unsigned envelope is returned within three business days of certification or you have not responded to the Auditor’s mailing within three business days of certification, the County Auditor will again attempt to contact you by telephone. (Note: this is one reason it is a good idea to provide your telephone number when you submit a Voter Registration Form.)
http://wei.secstate.wa.gov/spokane/Pages/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.aspx
According to our local newspaper, other defects can also be corrected:
County elections officials will count more ballots on Friday, but have until Nov. 24 to arrive at a final count. Before that final count, voters who forgot to sign their ballots (envelopes) or who scribbled a signature that doesn’t match the one on their registration form will be given a chance to fix the problem. They can either mail in an affidavit they’ve been sent or go to the Elections Office to “cure” the signature.
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=17708
The election in question here in WA is also super close, less than 1/10 of 1% between the top two candidates, so again, like the Franken/Coleman election, it may literally come down to a handful of votes, making it all the more important that EVERY valid vote is counted.
Also, can anyone tell me why a witness is required on an absentee ballot envelopes there? So, if you do everything right, and your signature on your envelope exactly matches the one on file, BUT, your witness scribbles their signature so that it doesn’t match the one on file, your ballot envelope is rejected?
I guess it comes down to how one should interpret that “naive” comment, John.
If there is a rule = or law & an ethic to uphold, then that is the basis we must operate from
as our starting point. Throwing in the towel because of past trends or disappointments is simply not acceptable.
You don’t go in with one ideal, but expect to be trounced & kicked in the teeth.
Else that was never your ideal to begin with. Or you have surrendered them.
“Whipped” & the bullring is already in the nose, waiting to be led.
I’m the only one in this world. Can please someone join me in this life? Or maybe death…
Hello. I am Jenny. Im new to the forum and just wanted to say i welcome all of you and hope we will have some fun here together