# 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:** 46
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/901 "2009-04-28T13:17:45Z")
> [@ManiacMan](#): > > I don’t get it… **Mmph**. . . must . . . resist . . . not . . . Pit . . . must . . . resist . . . ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/902 "2009-04-28T13:21:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If you have some evidence that the canvasing board counted any “fishy” ballots, let’s see it. This is technically true, but not the issue at hand. Coleman’s beef isn’t that the canvasing board and the election contest judges counted fishy ballots. Exactly the opposite actually. He’s claiming they maintained a much higher standard for counting the ballots presented to them. The problem is that they claim there are some fishy absentee ballots already included as part of the recount process. There is no ‘proof’ of this, only witnesses and anecdotes, because once a ballot is counted, it can’t be traced back to a particular envelope, on account of protecting anonymity. In the Election Contest, the judges acknowledged this, but ruled that this basically just a result of a deficiency of resources in some precincts. They simply didn’t have the manpower to maintain the higher standard. Where the Equal Protection claim comes in, is that a questionable ballot is more likely to counted in the dense, poor district. And if you believe the party stereo types (Sparse, rich districts vote for Republicans and Dense, poor districts vote for Democrats), then a questionable Democratic vote is more likely to be counted than a questionable Republican vote, even when the voters in question have everything else in common. I’m not sure I buy the claim, but it’s an interesting conundrum. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/903 "2009-04-28T15:18:54Z")
I think [Eric Black](http://www.minnpost.com/ericblack/2009/04/21/8214/colemanfranken_case_thinking_out_loud_about_equal_protection_part_one) summarizes the issue well in his MinnPost column: > [@](#): > > In deciding which absentee ballots to count, different Minnesota counties applied state standards with different levels of fussiness. As a result, a ballot with a particular shortcoming – for example, the person who witnessed the absentee voter’s signature was not himself a registered Minnesota voter – might have been rejected on that basis in the strictest counties, while a similar ballot might have been accepted in a less strict county where the election officials didn’t bother to check the registration status of the witnesses. There are similar issues involving the issue of signature mismatches, where some counties were apparently a lot more likely to reject a ballot if they thought the voter’s signature on the absentee ballot application looked different from the one on the absentee ballot envelope. > > This is certainly not ideal. It would be best if the standards for acceptance of absentee ballots were applied uniformly in all jurisdictions. For all the jabber about who is showing adequate respect for the hard-working, well-intentioned Minnesota election officials and who is dissing them, these variations occurred (although the magnitude of them has not really been quantified). > > The Coleman argument is that these deviations from uniformity constitute an equal protection violation of sufficient magnitude that one of three unprecedented and serious adjustment must be made – up to the possibility of throwing out the whole election. That’s a lot to ask. TheThreeJudges of the election contest panel didn’t buy the argument. (Their rejection of it bordered on mockery. They wrote that if Coleman’s argument was taken to its logical conclusion, it would require that if one county inadvertently allowed some felons to vote, all felons’ votes must be counted.) Most neutral experts predict that it will fail with other courts as well, although I have written that Coleman’s is not a terrible argument and that we have, thus far, no solid indication of how courts other than TheThreeJudges will feel about it. The 3 Judge Panel rejected Coleman’s complaint essentially on the grounds that all elections have these kinds of variations, and that the process cannot be perfected, that no intentional fraud or malice was shown, and that while ballots counted in error (which are mostly theoretical and can’t be quantified) cannot be uncounted, Coleman’s requested remedy (counting MORE illegitimate ballots) which not make the count more legitimate but LESS so (hence the comparison to counting all votes of felons if one gets counted accidentally). Coleman’s other requested remedy, a new election, has no basis in Minnesota law, and could not bring any more perfect results in uniform standards anyway (plus Coleman knows he would get his ass handed to him in a revote, so it’s not really an ingenuous request). In summary, no election can insure perfectly uniform standards. Coleman has not shown any fraud, and has not offered a remedy which would bring perfection to the results, he only wants to INCREASE the imperfection enough to benefit himself. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/904 "2009-04-28T15:54:01Z")
No uniform standard will ever apply unless you get one perfect, tireless person to count all the ballots personally. ---
**Author:** ![ManiacMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b782af/32.png) [@ManiacMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ManiacMan)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/905 "2009-04-28T16:00:39Z")
Well I don’t really have the time to go through all the ballots here but on this site here: > **[Challenged Ballots: You be the Judge - Round 1 | Campaign 2008 | Minnesota...](https://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2008/11/19_challenged_ballots/round1/)** > > Play election judge on challenged ballots in Minnesota's U.S. Senate race recount, including the Lizard People ballot Ballot#3 “The X-Factor” was challenged by Franken. I don’t see any reason for it to be challenged other than Franken’s campaign trying to get rid of a Coleman vote. Ballot #8 “The Dot” was challenged by the Coleman team. What a crock…I think Franken should get that vote. More ridiculos examples are available demonstrating both sides questionable morales. The whole process has been flawed. Both sides challenged ballots for good reasons, and also FISHY reasons. Both sides did their best to knock votes off of each others tallly due to technicalities. Both sides are…“cheating” I think, but in a sneaky kind of way. Like a crooked criminal lawyer “bending” the rules a bit to get a client off. I haven’t quite puzzled out who is slimier…only for certain is that one side will be most certainly luckier. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/906 "2009-04-28T16:20:53Z")
Yes, both sides made frivolous CHALLENGES, but your insinuation was that the canvassing board went along with any of them. They didn’t. Neither side is “cheating.” Coleman is doing his best to stall the process (the basketball timeout anaolgy was apt), but even he isn’t doing anything that could be called cheating. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/907 "2009-04-28T16:21:04Z")
Arlen Specter just announced he switching to the Democratic Party, meaning Franken will be the 60th Dem when he is seated. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/908 "2009-04-28T16:22:18Z")
> [@ManiacMan](#): > > Well I don’t really have the time to go through all the ballots here but on this site here: > > [Challenged Ballots: You be the Judge - Round 1 | Campaign 2008 | Minnesota Public Radio News](http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2008/11/19_challenged_ballots/round1/) > > Ballot#3 “The X-Factor” was challenged by Franken. I don’t see any reason for it to be challenged other than Franken’s campaign trying to get rid of a Coleman vote. > > Ballot #8 “The Dot” was challenged by the Coleman team. What a crock…I think Franken should get that vote. > > More ridiculos examples are available demonstrating both sides questionable morales. > > The whole process has been flawed. Both sides challenged ballots for good reasons, and also FISHY reasons. Both sides did their best to knock votes off of each others tallly due to technicalities. Both sides are…“cheating” I think, but in a sneaky kind of way. Like a crooked criminal lawyer “bending” the rules a bit to get a client off. > > I haven’t quite puzzled out who is slimier…only for certain is that one side will be most certainly luckier. But if the commission didn’t accept the challenge it was thrown out. Challenging wasn’t enough to get the ballot counted. And the commission was very fair in their review - as fair as people can be. There were a lot of ‘games’ played - by both sides. Neither one wanted the other to go in with an upper hand. And both sides had a number of advocates working for them in the recount process - which leads to a lot of inconsistancy - and I’m sure some of the advocates were more partisan or wanted to push harder than others. And it really isn’t a matter of luck. Because of the types of ballots that require hand counting are more likely to belong to disadvantaged voters or be absentee ballots, and those voters are more likely to vote Democratic - Coleman was lost the moment it went into recount. Had Franken been 100 votes ahead, his lead would have expanded in recount. Luck is what Minnesota has done with a tied election in the past - flip a coin. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/909 "2009-04-28T16:24:49Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > Arlen Specter just announced he switching to the Democratic Party, meaning Franken will be the 60th Dem when he is seated. Which means that much more Frankenstalling will follow in Minnesota. If it’s possible for that process to be dragged out any further, that is. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/910 "2009-04-28T17:02:29Z")
The pressure from the national party on Coleman and Pawlenty to drag this thing out past the SC should be hitting 100psi any minute now. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/911 "2009-04-28T17:03:40Z")
With the Specter defection? Oh, yeah. Coleman will take this to the United Nations… ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/912 "2009-04-28T17:16:10Z")
He’ll take it to the Federation of Planets if he has to. Of course, there might have to call for a temporary stay of cert until earth develops FTL technology. Should only take 400, maybe 500 years. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/913 "2009-04-28T18:01:55Z")
> [@ManiacMan](#): > > Well I don’t really have the time to go through all the ballots here but on this site here: > > [Challenged Ballots: You be the Judge - Round 1 | Campaign 2008 | Minnesota Public Radio News](http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2008/11/19_challenged_ballots/round1/) > > Ballot#3 “The X-Factor” was challenged by Franken. I don’t see any reason for it to be challenged other than Franken’s campaign trying to get rid of a Coleman vote. The reason that one was challenged is clear if you look at the picture closely (or even clearer if you looked at the whole ballot). That voter carefully filled in the ovals for all the other items on the ballot, only the vote for Coleman had that big X written over it. (In the portion of the ballot shown, you can see one other vote off in the left column.) So Franken can make an argument that this voter wanted to cross off their vote for Coleman. (The voter should have asked for a new ballot, to replace the spoiled one, but many people don’t do this.) I personally challenged some ballots like this, but did not challenge them where for every office the voter had filled in the ovals with a big X like that. (Probably, the voter had originally put an X in each one, then the machine rejected it, and a poll worker told them that they had to fill in the ovals completely. Fairly common among older voters, who remember when we voted with an X in a box.) * * * Also, these were the initial challenges, made by a whole bunch of semi-trained volunteers all across the state. The basic instruction to them was ‘if there is any question about the vote, challenge it – all challenges will be reviewed later by the campaign attorneys.’ Many of the challenges were actually withdrawn by the Franken campaign. And after the first day before the Canvassing Board, it was clear how they were going to rule on various types of markings, and the Franken campaign withdrew the challenges on about 4,000 ballots. Coleman’s campaign also withdrew a bunch of their challenges. So many of these “frivolous” challenges trumpeted by the news media did not actually get challenged before the Canvassing Board. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/914 "2009-04-28T20:33:28Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Which means that much more Frankenstalling will follow in Minnesota. If it’s possible for that process to be dragged out any further, that is. I suppose it’s possible that when this is all over and done, Franken will still wind up with seniority on the class of 2010. But I’m not betting on it. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/915 "2009-04-28T20:52:50Z")
Eh, Franken’s still got nothing on Reed Smoot…elected in 1902, wasn’t able to take his seat until 1907. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/916 "2009-04-28T21:15:21Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > I suppose it’s possible that when this is all over and done, Franken will still wind up with seniority on the class of 2010. But I’m not betting on it. So, when Franken does actually get seated, Arlen Spector will have been a Dem Senator longer. Makes perfect sense. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/917 "2009-04-28T21:27:40Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > He’ll take it to the Federation of Planets if he has to. Of course, there might have to call for a temporary stay of cert until earth develops FTL technology. Should only take 400, maybe 500 years. And at long last, the Coleman campaign goes from splitting hairs and examining pencil marks to splitting neutrinos and examining tachyons. Intriguing. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2009, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/918 "2009-04-28T21:33:27Z")
Coleman’s latest objection is that the court changed the outcome of the election by observing it. ---
**Author:** ![NurseCarmen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5daacb/32.png) [@NurseCarmen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NurseCarmen)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/919 "2009-04-28T21:43:14Z")
A Schroedinger’s election? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2009, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239/920 "2009-04-28T21:52:08Z")
> [@NurseCarmen](#): > > A Schroedinger’s election? Does that mean we can stick Norm in a box? And leave him there? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=45) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hows-al-frankens-senate-bid-going/437239.md?page=47)