Comments on: A Look At The Next Two Weeks http://mnpublius.com/2008/12/a-look-at-the-next-two-weeks/ Tracking Minnesota Politics Since 2005 Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:33:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sunshine123 http://mnpublius.com/2008/12/a-look-at-the-next-two-weeks/#comment-30679 Sunshine123 Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:57:37 +0000 http://mnpublius.com/?p=4349#comment-30679 I shouldnt be surprised, but Coleman wants to accept 10% of the mistakenly rejected ballots (probably verified to see if they were registered as republicans first) and add into the count a few hundred that were rejected for reason I shouldnt be surprised, but Coleman wants to accept 10% of the mistakenly rejected ballots (probably verified to see if they were registered as republicans first) and add into the count a few hundred that were rejected for reason

]]> By: The A-Train http://mnpublius.com/2008/12/a-look-at-the-next-two-weeks/#comment-30678 The A-Train Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:44:35 +0000 http://mnpublius.com/?p=4349#comment-30678 Have the technical problems stopped new posts? From the Star Tribune article today it appears -- albeit without the benefit of seeing any of the relevant ballots -- that the Coleman campaign is trying to derail the counting of wrongly rejected absentee ballots by exploiting the Supreme Court requirement that the two campaigns consent to the ballots that are reviewed. Coleman can potentially refuse to consent to counting any ballots he thinks came from DFL voters. Although we've heard a lot of gibberish about "disenfranchisement" in recent weeks, there is a very real possibility that the ballots of voters who did everything right will not be counted because Coleman doesn't want them counted. It seems that a little public pressure not to cherry pick which voters get to have their ballots considered would be appropriate at this time. http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36833124.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUs Have the technical problems stopped new posts?

From the Star Tribune article today it appears — albeit without the benefit of seeing any of the relevant ballots — that the Coleman campaign is trying to derail the counting of wrongly rejected absentee ballots by exploiting the Supreme Court requirement that the two campaigns consent to the ballots that are reviewed. Coleman can potentially refuse to consent to counting any ballots he thinks came from DFL voters. Although we’ve heard a lot of gibberish about “disenfranchisement” in recent weeks, there is a very real possibility that the ballots of voters who did everything right will not be counted because Coleman doesn’t want them counted.

It seems that a little public pressure not to cherry pick which voters get to have their ballots considered would be appropriate at this time.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36833124.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUs

]]>