“It is pretty much of a longshot with that few ballots being put in play … We are disappointed. But we feel the court is wrong and we will appeal.”
It is worth noting that is has been about FIVE MONTHS since Norm Coleman said he would step down if he was not the leading candidate.
If you are on facebook, please join this group to send Norm home.
while I don’t support how this is dragging out, I would just say that in my heart of hearts, I believe Franken would be doing the exact same thing.
DTM, what’s the point?
In the real world, your guy Coleman is the jerk who’s putting politics over country.
If you don’t support it, just say so. Stop with the annoying petty games.
In my heart of hearts, if it was Franken’s friend under federal investigation for money laundered to him, you’d be jumping up and down talking about how he is unfit to serve.
Hey DtM: Let’s dispense with prognostication and conjecture. I know you guys don’t deal with facts much when they don’t fit your world view, but try, okay? You’re on a democratic blog here, let’s stick with reality based conversation.
At least he wouldnt be doing it after he said that if he was behind he would step aside.
And I do not believe it anyway — this continuing show (which is VERY expensive for the Repubs) is to keep the 59th dem senator from being seated. I dont think even Norm thinks he can actually win.
I honestly do not think Frankin would have gone beyond the legally required recount. The recount actually confirmed with more accuracy the result of the election to a degree better than more than 90% of all elections. Plus only Coleman and the Republicans have defined this as a scorched Earth political campaign rather than an election to be decided. This “Rush” style politics not a decision as to who will best serve Minnesota.
Norm is selling what little soul and any goodwill he had out for the GOP leadership just to delay Franken’s arrival. To think I didn’t mind the guy that much in the past.
Norm put this stuff to an end.
While Franken may very well have contested the Canvassing Board’s determination, but he would have done an infinitely better job in litigating his claims.
Coleman has essentially taken the position that it is his reading of the law that is determinative and not the court’s. He completely and deliberately failed to submit sufficient evidentiary proof based upon the Election Court’s ruling.
I believe that Franken would have covered both bases and would have submitted such proof in addition to arguing a position contrary to the Court’s. This is a crucial distinction and it shows the fundamental lack of seriousness in Coleman’s election contest strategy
Or that there are certain slim advantages to Republican cronyism and incompetence.