# 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:** 30
**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:** [January 8, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/581 "2009-01-08T18:14:14Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Unfair as in different rules were applied to challenged regular votes as opposed to challenged absentee ballots. > > Fair would be the same rules applied to all challenged votes. Ah, I see. I thought you meant that the process was unfair to one of the candidates. ---
**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:** [January 8, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/582 "2009-01-08T19:35:34Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > While I assume that (3) and (4) apply to people who vote in person as well, (1) and (2) clearly don’t. Yes, they (or the equivalent) do apply to in-person voting. When you go to vote, they find your name in the list of registered voters, read the address off, and ask if you still live there. So that’s #1. (Though they don’t ask for any proof that you live there.) Then they ask you to sign the registered voter book, so that’s #2. (Again, though, I’ve never noticed them taking the time to actually check your signature – they always seem pretty busy at my polling place.) ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/583 "2009-01-08T19:36:13Z")
It was obviously unfair to the Republican, because the Republican lost. If it had been fair, the Republican would have won. Try to keep up. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/584 "2009-01-08T19:41:02Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > He’s Coleman’s campaign manager. The next idiotic question is, why wasn’t Franken’s campaign manager named? Robin ---
**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:** [January 8, 2009, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/585 "2009-01-08T19:59:38Z")
> [@Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](#): > > The MN Republicans are talking about election reforms this contest has shown need to be made. High on the list of changes they say need to be made is… > > (wait for it) > > Voters should be forced to show ID before they can vote! There was a bill that passed through both houses of the Legislature last year, that had several electoral reforms. Things like making absentee voting easier (so presumably less rejected absentee ballots), allowing registration via a simple check-off box on Drivers License renewal forms, etc. It was vetoed by Republican Governor Pawlenty. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/586 "2009-01-08T20:16:59Z")
> [@MsRobyn](#): > > The next idiotic question is, why wasn’t Franken’s campaign manager named? > > Robin Al ain’t suing, as he is pretty much OK with the result. ---
**Author:** ![sweepkick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@sweepkick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweepkick)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/587 "2009-01-08T22:29:12Z")
> [@MsRobyn](#): > > Who the hell is Cullen Sheehan, and why is he named as a contestant? > > Robin [Cullen Sheehan](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VySnpLoaUrI&feature=related), Norm’s Campaign Manager. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/588 "2009-01-08T22:29:27Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Why? There are obviously risks involved in accepting ballots by mail that aren’t present with in-person voting. > > Here are [the four rules](https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=203B.12) for rejecting absentee ballots: > While I assume that (3) and (4) apply to people who vote in person as well, (1) and (2) clearly don’t. > > I guess you _could_ toss out (1) and (2), but it would make absentee voting on behalf of persons other than oneself a lot easier. Read what I wrote again. I wasn’t talking about the criteria for rejecting the ballots. I was talking about the criteria for challenging the rejection of those ballots. Do you understand the distinction? Again, for the regular ballots, if a campaign challenged it, the challenge was reviewed by the Canvasing Board, who determined if it was valid or not. For reviewed absentee ballots, if a campaign challenged it, it was rejected. End of story. Surely you can see how the second process could favor one candidate or the other. If the second process had been used for regular ballots, Coleman would be ahead by a significant margin right now. (He challenged more of the regular ballots than Franken did.) ---
**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:** [January 8, 2009, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/589 "2009-01-08T22:42:02Z")
If they’d used the same process for the normal ballots, Franken would have amped up the challenges too. The fact is that the counting process was always the same for both candidates, regardless of whether it changed for different kinds of ballots. No candidate was ever given an advantage over another, and both candidates agreed to every process. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/590 "2009-01-08T22:56:28Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > both candidates agreed to every process. Yup. And part of the process that they both agreed to was that the validity of any challenged absentee ballots would be decided by an election contest in court. So why is Franken complaining about it? ---
**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:** [January 8, 2009, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/591 "2009-01-08T23:07:03Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Yup. And part of the process that they both agreed to was that the validity of any challenged absentee ballots would be decided by an election contest in court. So why is Franken complaining about it? He’s not. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/592 "2009-01-09T03:47:48Z")
Jesus, that Sheehan is a slimy little prick. I can’t decide if I should emulate him or want to flatten his face with a heavy book. Robin ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/593 "2009-01-09T13:52:20Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Read what I wrote again. I wasn’t talking about the criteria for rejecting the ballots. I was talking about the criteria for challenging the rejection of those ballots. Do you understand the distinction? > > Again, for the regular ballots, if a campaign challenged it, the challenge was reviewed by the Canvasing Board, who determined if it was valid or not. > > For reviewed absentee ballots, if a campaign challenged it, it was rejected. End of story. OK, where were these ballots in the process? For ballots in the regular recount, the question of whether they belonged in Pile 5 - i.e. had no reason to not be counted - _had already been settled_. The only question was _voter intent_. For the absentee ballots that had apparently been rejected for reasons other than the four legitimate reasons, the question was _should they be counted_. For reasons unbeknownst to me, the campaigns each agreed to allow the other a certain number of no-take-back vetoes in this process. Sure, it’s a distinction. But it’s one _that the two campaigns agreed to_. And undoubtedly it was more Coleman’s idea than Franken’s; the Franken team has always wanted to see every legitimate ballot counted. > [@](#): > > If the second process had been used for regular ballots, Coleman would be ahead by a significant margin right now. (He challenged more of the regular ballots than Franken did.) There’s no reason on earth that it would have, or should have, been. Hell, it shouldn’t have been an option for the absentee ballots either. But the MN Supreme Court gave the campaigns some wiggle room, and your guy took advantage of it. Now you’re complaining about what your guy did. Tough. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/594 "2009-01-09T15:55:06Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > For reasons unbeknownst to me, the campaigns each agreed to allow the other a certain number of no-take-back vetoes in this process. The reason was the Supreme Court ruling that **all** parties had to agree, and if they didn’t, then it would be settled by an election contest, which is currently in progress. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/595 "2009-01-09T16:04:06Z")
> [@MsRobyn](#): > > Jesus, that Sheehan is a slimy little prick. I can’t decide if I should emulate him or want to flatten his face with a heavy book. > > Robin Who says you need to choose? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![UTejas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UTejas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UTejas)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/596 "2009-01-09T17:39:07Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > OK, where were these ballots in the process? > > \ > For the absentee ballots that had apparently been rejected for reasons other than the four legitimate reasons, the question was _should they be counted_. For reasons unbeknownst to me, the campaigns each agreed to allow the other a certain number of no-take-back vetoes in this process. > > \ Well the important distinction here is on the absentee ballots that were erroneously tossed out. The important thing to remember is that _the ballots were not opened_. The absolute veto applied to sealed ballots that had been rejected improperly for things like “weren’t dated next to signature” despite that not being a requirement. The campaigns had to both agree that the ballot was improperly rejected _without knowing who it was a vote for_. Once the ballots were opened, they would be subject to the standard rules for challenges on voter intent. There is no double standard between absentee and regular ballots–the difference is the absentee ballots have an extra layer of problems they can be rejected for and it was this level that both campaigns had veto power over **without knowing whether or not they were rejecting a vote for himself or his opponent**. ---
**Author:** ![tds1273](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df705f/32.png) [@tds1273](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tds1273)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/597 "2009-01-09T17:40:37Z")
> [@Peanut\_Gallery](#): > > Nailin’ Palin II: The Bachmann Buzz is Building :eek: I laughed. I cried. I put my put my head in a bucket of bleach. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/598 "2009-01-09T17:44:03Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > The reason was the Supreme Court ruling that **all** parties had to agree Specifically to _that_? I don’t think so. > [@](#): > > and if they didn’t, then it would be settled by an election contest, which is currently in progress. That was in the MN SC’s decision? Link and quote, please. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/599 "2009-01-09T18:15:33Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Specifically to _that_? I don’t think so. > > That was in the MN SC’s decision? Link and quote, please. I’ve already provided them in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/600 "2009-01-09T20:00:14Z")
BrainGlutton’s earlier post brings to mind this old “Weekend Update” bit of Franken’s from his SNL days: [Link](http://snltranscripts.jt.org/79/79fupdate.phtml) > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Whereas with Al Franken, it’s about what is good for . . . “… me, Al Franken.” [QUOTE=Al Franken] Thank you, Jane. Well, the “me” decade is almost over, and good riddance, and far as I’m concerned. The 70’s were simply 10 years of people thinking of nothing but themselves. No wonder we were unable to get together and solve any of the many serious problems facing our nation. Oh sure, some people did do some positive things in the 70’s - like jogging - but always for the wrong reasons, for their own selfish, personal benefit. Well, I believe the 80’s are gonna have to be different. I think that people are going to stop thinking about themselves, and start thinking about me, Al Franken. That’s right. I believe we’re entering what I like to call the Al Franken Decade. Oh, for me, Al Franken, the 80’s will be pretty much the same as the 70’s. I’ll still be thinking of me, Al Franken. But for you, you’ll be thinking more about how things affect me, Al Franken. When you see a news report, you’ll be thinking, “I wonder what Al Franken thinks about this thing?”, “I wonder how this inflation thing is hurting Al Franken?” And you women will be thinking, “What can I wear that will please Al Franken?”, or “What can I not wear?” You know, I know a lot of you out there are thinking, “Why Al Franken?” Well, because I thought of it, and I’m on TV, so I’ve already gotten the jump on you. So, I say let’s leave behind the fragmented, selfish 70’s, and go into the 80’s with a unity and purpose. That’s what I think. I’m Al Franken. Jane? [/QUOTE] (With apologies if this has already been referred to as I just surfed into this thread and haven’t read every post.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=31)