# How's Al Franken's Senate bid going? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 12, 2008, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239 "2008-02-12T01:57:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![chorpler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chorpler/32/2888_2.png) [@chorpler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chorpler)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/281 "2008-12-06T11:54:52Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Of course they are, for the simple reason that until it’s been decided otherwise they remain as originally tallied. I thought they were removed entirely from the recount totals, which means NOBODY knows who’s ahead in reality, though Franken’s math seems to be the most impartial way to guess at the final outcome. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/47e85d/32.png) [@Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Lance_Murdoch)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/282 "2008-12-06T16:01:09Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Of course they are, for the simple reason that until it’s been decided otherwise they remain as originally tallied. The challenged ballots are not included in the totals so far. If all the challenges from both sides are rejected, it seems Franken will win by almost nothing. Coleman has more challenged ballots in the pot right now, but further withdrawals are possible. The bottom line is that Coleman’s 192 vote lead is illusory. By all accounts, most of the challenges are weak. Then there are the 133 missing ballots and the uncounted absentee ballots… ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/47e85d/32.png) [@Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Lance_Murdoch)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/283 "2008-12-06T16:20:41Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Wouldn’t that be nice and non-partisan? ‘The Democrat only lost by a couple of hundred votes, and we need a filibuster-proof margin - fuck democracy, seat the Democrat’. > > In other news, the state canvassing board has decided unanimously to abide by the Supreme Court decision ([cite](http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35126884.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUl)). Continuing in the proud traditions of Sore-Loserman, and with Coleman’s margin widening slightly with most of the recount completed, the Franken camp has promised further new and creative ways of getting the results they want - > > Regards, > Shodan There is no reference to any Supreme Court decision in the article you cite. Are you referring to Bush v. Gore? The court there said “Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities.” So that decision cannot be used as precedent in this or any other case. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/284 "2008-12-06T18:00:04Z")
> [@chorpler](#): > > The guy filled in the circle next to Franken’s name but wrote in “Lizard People” on all the races (as far as I could see). However, he also filled in the circle next to “Lizard People” on his other races, but didn’t fill in the circle next to his “Lizard People” write-in on the Senate race. Why they would count it as an overvote for writing in a name but then NOT voting for it? Of course, the whole thing is bizarre – why write in the name if you’re not voting for them? Though clearly somebody writing in “Lizard People” isn’t exactly taking the whole thing seriously. I agree with you. To me it is very clear the “Lizard People” guy intended to vote for Franken. If not, he would have filled in the bubble next to “Lizard People”, as he did in the Presidential race. Instead, he filled in Franken’s bubble. Is the voter an idiot? No doubt. But idiots’ votes are still supposed to be counted so long as the voter’s intent can be determined. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/285 "2008-12-06T18:36:06Z")
If you look at Drudge ,Coleman is winning in spite of getting screwed over at every occasion. Read a liberal site and Franken is leading in spite of the Repubs cheating. I will wait until the winner is announced. Only then will we know. To claim one side or the other is trying to win harder and dirtier than the other is a joke. Running for senate is a huge commitment. Who could just walk away now? ---
**Author:** ![Kevbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47774/32.png) [@Kevbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kevbo)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/286 "2008-12-06T18:39:37Z")
I have a fantasy where the election comes down to the lizard people ballot. It works it’s way up the ladder to to the supreme court where, regardless the outcome, the “lizard people” decision replaces the Scopes monkey trial as the one most likely to be remembered by high school civics students. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/287 "2008-12-06T19:37:25Z")
> [@chorpler](#): > > So has this been confirmed or refuted? I haven’t heard anything about it in the news – everybody’s still writing articles about the missing 133 ballots. I haven’t heard any confirmation of it either. The officials have said that they believe they were in that envelope erroneously marked 1-3, but I haven’t heard that they have found the envelope yet. They believe it is still somewhere in the warehouse where the voting machines are kept (and where they have been doing some of the recounting). That is a big old warehouse, with most of the floor space filled with the voting machines & auto-mark machines for blind voters, and the back half of it is filled with 20-foot high shelves full of boxes of archived city & county records & files. I can see where it could take a while to search that place! But the fact that they have now ascertained that at one time these ballots were in that mis-marked envelope seems like progress. They should find it eventually, and the Secretary of State has given them extra time to continue looking, up to next week when the Canvassing Board starts to meet. P.S. This same precinct is one that had problems on Election Day, with the officials there turning away students who live there, and refusing to allow them to register and vote. They claimed the documentation from their landlord was insufficient to meet residency requirements. (State Law lists a utility bill as one document to prove residency. In this large apartment complex, utilities are included with the rent, so tenants do not have separate utility bills. So the rental office prepared letters explaining this, and identifying the person as a resident of a specific apartment.) The poll workers rejected this, residents went back to the office and got new letters re-written to meet the objections, those were rejected for a different reason. The 3rd letter was finally accepted, but many residents gave up before this. See [here](http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/article/2008/11/28/screw-u-students-dinkytown-turned-away-polls-election-day.html) for a news story about this. It seems like there were significant problems with the Poll Workers in charge at this specific precinct. That has been noted, and they will be dealt with after the recount is finished. Also, life continues: the City Elections Clerk working on this is also facing City Precinct Caucuses coming up in 87 days, starting the next election cycle. And she is under orders to implement a new voting system then, using IRV, even though our voting machines don’t support it. So they may be doing manual recounting ob ballots next November, for 25 Minneapolis City offices. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/288 "2008-12-06T20:34:22Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > They believe it is still somewhere in the warehouse where the voting machines are kept (and where they have been doing some of the recounting). That is a big old warehouse, with most of the floor space filled with the voting machines & auto-mark machines for blind voters, and the back half of it is filled with 20-foot high shelves full of boxes of archived city & county records & files. I can see where it could take a while to search that place! Sounds like a great place to hide an Ark of the Covenant. ---
**Author:** ![shantih](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f6c823/32.png) [@shantih](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shantih)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/289 "2008-12-06T23:14:58Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Sounds like a great place to hide an Ark of the Covenant. _Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!_ ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/290 "2008-12-06T23:37:39Z")
> [@shantih](#): > > _Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!_ The Russkies might hear you! ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/291 "2008-12-12T20:27:51Z")
Some [good news](http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/minnesota-canvassing-board-sides-with.html) for Franken, as told by Nate. > [@](#): > > The state’s five-person Canvassing Board today issued two key rulings, both of which represent significant boosts to Franken. In the first ruling, issued at about 10 AM local time, the Canvassing Board determined that 133 ballots from Minneapolis’s 1st Precinct, 3rd Ward are in fact missing, and that therefore the results from the recount in that precinct will not be accepted. Instead, the state will revert to its original certified tally in that precinct. Had the state chosen to accept the results from the recount instead, Franken would have lost a net of 46 ballots, as the majority of the missing ballots apparently favored Franken in this highly blue area. > > In the second ruling, the Canvassing Board unanimously determined to recommend to the counties that they sort through their absentee ballots to determine which might have been rejected erroneously, and then resubmit their totals to the state after counting such erroneously rejected ballots. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/292 "2008-12-12T20:38:59Z")
That seems a little iffy. What’s the purpose of the recount, if when it doesn’t match up, you just use the original? Doesn’t that same logic invalid _any_ recount difference? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/293 "2008-12-12T20:49:31Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > That seems a little iffy. What’s the purpose of the recount, if when it doesn’t match up, you just use the original? Doesn’t that same logic invalid _any_ recount difference? I’m not sure I grok exactly what happened, but it looks like since 133 ballots went missing between Election Day and the recount, the recount is invalidated and the Election Day count must be treated as the more complete and accurate one. If they had determined that the extra 133 on Election Day were ballots that had been counted twice, the recount would have held as the more accurate count. It’s not the same situation as if the recount determined that 133 ballots originally tallied for Coleman were for Franken instead. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/294 "2008-12-12T21:02:44Z")
> [@Kevbo](#): > > I have a fantasy where the election comes down to the lizard people ballot. It works it’s way up the ladder to to the supreme court where, regardless the outcome, the “lizard people” decision replaces the Scopes monkey trial as the one most likely to be remembered by high school civics students. Unfortunetly, I suppose it’s unlikely that the case would be called _The People of the United States v. The Lizard People._ ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/295 "2008-12-12T21:20:58Z")
I, for one, welcome our new Lizard People overlords. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/296 "2008-12-12T21:29:41Z")
Um, **Sinaijon** , I don’t think you understand the rulings … there was nothing there that in any way meshes up with what you just said. They have lost a number of ballots and cannot complete the recount for that precinct. They could use an incomplete recount that reasonably would be expected to have not included some balance to one or the other candidate compared to the result that would have been if those ballots were found and counted, or they can let the original number stand. Both are imperfect options and they have decided that going with the original and only complete count is the less imperfect. The other is a bit more squishy IMHO. Sure it makes sense to review absentee ballots for possible erroneous rejections, but there is nothing in this ruling that mandates or standardizes that process. Also in the Nate link is that > [@](#): > > the counties that want to include the absentee ballots in their tallies would be allowed to. > > The Coleman campaign, however, is now asking the Minnesota Supreme Court to halt the counting of the absentee ballots until, per the Star Tribune’s reporting, “the justices can rule on the campaign’s request that they order counties to follow a standard procedure in identifying wrongfully rejected ballots.” and as that Coleman request stands it seems fair. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/297 "2008-12-12T21:31:33Z")
So are they using the election day count for just those 133 ballots or are they using the election day count for all the ballots from that precinct ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/298 "2008-12-12T21:57:56Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > That seems a little iffy. What’s the purpose of the recount, if when it doesn’t match up, you just use the original? Doesn’t that same logic invalid _any_ recount difference? They weren’t ABLE to recount the ballots in the 1st precinct because some of them were lost in between the 1st count and the 2nd count Since they COULDN’T recount those ballots, they had to accept the 1st certified result for that precinct. It’s not a question of the results not matching. Some of the ballots were physically lost. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/299 "2008-12-12T21:59:00Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > So are they using the election day count for just those 133 ballots or are they using the election day count for all the ballots from that precinct For the precinct. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/47e85d/32.png) [@Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Lance_Murdoch)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2008, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/300 "2008-12-12T22:02:25Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > So are they using the election day count for just those 133 ballots or are they using the election day count for all the ballots from that precinct All the ballots from that precinct. I think it is almost certain the Coleman campaign will go to court to prevent the original count from being used. * * * By the way, it now looks like there are well over 1,000 wrongly rejected absentee ballots. We have no way of knowing who these ballots were cast for. It is becoming increasingly likely these ballots will be counted as the state AG has weighed in in favor of counting them and the canvassing board is asking counties to sort them out. The Coleman campaign has been fighting to prevent these ballots from being counted, but in the end they may well find themselves behind without them and that might cause them to get religion on the subject. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=16)