:snerk:
Since apparently many of you are not following links, let me reiterate.
Ann Coulter Under Investigation For Voter Fraud
Yes, the “Hot Republican Chick,” who has argued that she should not have the vote because she has ovaries, may have voted in Connecticut while being registered in NY. Now, this could be a false alarm, since she was cleared of doing this in Florida two years ago.
But I hope it turns out to be true. Just because.
Repeating an accusation doesn’t establish it as true.
There was no such plan in 2004, there was no such plan in 2008. The Dems lost in 2004 (fair and square), and won in 2008 (fair and square). aldiboronti is, of course, entirely correct.
Regards,
Shodan
Wait, I thought voter fraud was what happened when Democrats won, and voting fraud (via rigged machines) was what happened when Republicans won.
Castellano’s piece is entirely based on the WSJ editorial - that’s his cite for the claim.
And the WSJ editorial was pretty fact-challenged, including the claim that some precincts had more votes than voters. Norm Coleman hasn’t mentioned it, either - you’d think he would.
He has. It’s part of his lawsuit. That’s what he is talking about when they talk of ‘duplicate’ votes. They think there are votes counted more than once because there were more total votes than the voters recorded on election day.
In MN, you sign in when you get your ballot. If you haven’t registered, you can do it on the spot. In those 22 precincts, the number of signed in registers + the number of newly registered voters was less than the number of votes counted in the recount.
I was serious, curious and lazy. I have not been keeping up with the news lately due to work schedules and was too lazy to do some Google searches. Thanks for the links (you too Sinaijon)!
Thanks again for the links, I scanned them with interest. Sounds like the recount is totally fubar, maybe we should have the US Supreme Court step in and straighten it out… :dubious:
Do you happen to know what any of those precincts are? I’m really trying to research this, and every source I can find just has the reference to 22 or 25 precincts, but nobody has a reference to any primary source, nor does anybody even name the precincts.
The Minnesota Secretary of State has results at the precinct level, but the number of registered voters is the number at the beginning of election day (even the November 4 vote totals are higher than the number of registered voters for some precincts).
What I’m saying is, I think the WSJ got sloppy, and the fact that a recount has a higher vote total than the original vote evolved into ‘more votes than voters,’ and the meme has taken hold. I can’t find a first-generation source.
Did you actually understand this is a new one. Can you follow that. Perhaps if you read the article first it would help. Check the date and the location of charges . Now can you get it? This is where I call you a name. What would be appropriate?
Wow. Let’s try again.
On November 15, elucidator made a post. That was the last one until this morning, when foolsguinea posted this link:
[noparse]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/ann-coulter-under-investi_n_165007.html[/noparse]
That link was the entire point of the bump.
Three hours later, you posted this link:
[noparse]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/ann-coulter-under-investi_n_165007.html[/noparse].
Notice any similarities? More to the point, notice any difference?
Try this: click on the link in post 56. No click on yours. How about now?
There isn’t any evidence of duplicate votes. Coleman made that up. The hell of it is, even if all those imaginary duplicate votes were thrown out, it still wouldn’t be enough to erase Franken’s lead, so the whole phony allegation is a waste of everyone’s time.
In related news, Coleman says “God wants me to serve.”
It was a joke. A not very funny joke. When I saw the date on the post I thought it would be funny to add a random generic Luci insult to the random bump. But whatever.
Well, I did find this pdf of the precinct-by-precinct breakdown (warning: PDF) of Minnesota’s voting and the recount and the gains.
If there were duplicates benefiting Franken, it would have to be seen in gains for Franken, right? Not just net gains (like, Coleman losing votes), but actually more votes for Franken, if we want to find a place with more votes than voters.
Right?
I looked for precincts that had a more than 10-vote gain for Franken in the recount. In 94 pages of pdf, I found 9:
Hennepin County:
Golden Valley 06 - 13 new votes for Franken (p. 30)
Minneapolis W07 Pr 06 - 10 new votes for Franken (p. 32)
Minneapolis W08 Pr 07 - 12 new votes for Franken (p. 32)
Minneapolis W11 Pr 07 - 13 new votes for Franken (p. 33)
Minneapolis W11 Pr 08 - 13 new votes for Franken (p. 33)
Ramsey County:
Maplewood Pr 06 - 91 new votes for Franken (p. 66)
St. Paul W03 Pr 09 - 16 new votes for Franken (p. 68)
Shoreview Pr 06 - 12 new votes for Franken (p. 69)
St Louis County:
Gnesen 565 - 19 new votes for Franken (p. 76)
I looked up these precincts in the individual precinct pages (like this one) where it says the number of registered voters for that precinct the morning of the election.
Guess how many of these nine precincts had more votes in the recount than voters in the precinct?
ZERO.
If there are other precincts that had more votes than voters, of course I’m interested, but if they didn’t benefit Franken, what sense is there in arguing fraud?
And I would still like to hear which precincts did have more votes than voters.
But both sides cheat, right? I mean(after they had to give up saying that there was absolutely no evidence of Republican subterfuge because they couldn’t be heard over all the laughing) , that’s been the excuse every damn time the righties have been caught-“Even if our guys did something bad, so did your guys!”. That is the argument here, that there must be widespread cheating on behalf of the Democrats, because that would somehow justify, in some insane way, what has happened before?
I’m mimpressed. That’s a far higher level of honest self-assessment than I generally tend to associate with professional motorized trike salesmen.
No offense intended to any other motorized trike salesmen, of course.
Ah. That’s more like it.
Huh.
Did he say how many months he figures God has in mind, and whether they should be consecutive or concurrent?
I can’t stand Coulter. But I don’t care what precinct she voted in. I don’t care which one she was registered in. As long as she voted just once, I can’t get behind attacking her on this.
-FrL-
Not sure what you’re talking about here. You did indeed post the very same link that foolsguinea did. But you seem to be sure that yours is a different one. Did you perhaps post the wrong link? Maybe you are talking about the link you meant to post?
-FrL-
You sure about that?
I just took a look at your first example: Hennepin County, Golden Valley 06. The final recount numbers were 699 Coleman, 920 Franken, 285 Other, which is 1904 votes total. The original unofficial results list 1889 total voters in the precinct (actual total votes, not “registered voters”).