Comments on: TEAM FRANKEN CHALLENGING VOTES FOR THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES

By: Sonnyboy

Sonnyboy — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:21:10 +0000

I mean the Franken team instead of contesting only Coleman votes may want to seem less biased by challanging other races as well.

By: Sonnyboy

Sonnyboy — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:18:57 +0000

I think the Franken team wants to disenfranchise as many voters as possible other then themselves. Maybe also they don’t want to look biased by contesting other races other than their own.

By: Maxus

Maxus — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:58:10 +0000

challenged ballots are rarely if ever overturned

By: Joel Rosenberg

Joel Rosenberg — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:56:15 +0000

Depends entirely on relative bogusness of challenges. There’s no doubt that some challenges on both sides are. If — and I do say and mean if — there’s more bogus ones from Franken side, Coleman’s likely to win.

Normally, of course, bogosity isn’t relevant; normally, elections aren’t this close.

By: Maxus

Maxus — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:49:20 +0000

Colemans camp has challenged 150 more ballots than Frankens camp…so Colemans lead is actually 50 votes…with 2/3 of Minneapolis to go yet…not looking good

By: Joel Rosenberg

Joel Rosenberg — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:42:57 +0000

MoN: the Franken campaign doesn’t control what ballots the Coleman campaign challenges, and vice versa. Neither side would be wise to let illegit ballots for the other side slide by, as close as it is.

So: Franken worker sees Coleman ballot; why wouldn’t they want to look at the flip side?

By: Master of None

Master of None — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:42:58 +0000

Is there any reason to believe that more Coleman votes will get thrown out than Franken’s by looking at the back of the ballot?

If not, then this tactic makes no sense for Franken to pursue.

It just adds to the number of contested ballots.

By: Joel Rosenberg

Joel Rosenberg — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:14:29 +0000

MoN: Of course Franken’s looking to invalidate ballots; they’re looking to invalidate the ones in the Coleman column. And vice versa.

All signed ballots are, by law, invalid; it’s legit to challenge them.

By: Master of None

Master of None — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:57:01 +0000

So Franken’s looking to invalidate ballots?

Do more Coleman voters tend to sign their ballots than Franken’s?

This makes no sense.

By: Joel Rosenberg

Joel Rosenberg — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:50:44 +0000

Mon: easy — a signature, which would render it invalid, for example.

By: Master of None

Master of None — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:35:18 +0000

Michael,

What do you know about the canvassers in Stearns county looking at the back of the ballots?

What could possibly be on the back of the ballot that would need to be checked?

By: Joel Rosenberg

Joel Rosenberg — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:09:13 +0000

Favorable explanation: “Your job is to challenge any ballots that look invalid; we don’t care who they’re for.”

Unfavorable explanation : “We need to get enough challenges in advance of the lawsuits to cloud the waters.”

Most likely explanation: some tired person/people did some stuff.

By: bernie

bernie — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:06:43 +0000

Calm down people. I don’t know about this particular challenge; it makes no sense to me on the face of it but there may be something else funny about the ballot; we just don’t know.

But remember, many of the Coleman challenges are equally puzzling! I have seen several of them myself last week. Both camps have identical orders from their campaigns – if in doubt, challenge!

This particular challenge could be a silly or frivolous one or it could be a well meaning but overly zealous observer. Or, there could be a legitimate issue with ballot. But “questionable” challenges are not exclusive to either Franken or Coleman.

By: Mustang09

Mustang09 — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:56:41 +0000

Team Franken is going to challenge enough ballots to come out on top prior to the challenges going to the canvassing board, so as to claim some sort of spurious moral high ground. The talking points will then start screaming that “Franken won the recount” so that after the challenges show Coleman the winner, Franken can claim the election was stolen. Expect the challenges to go through the roof in the last days of the recount, as team Franken scrambles to come out ahead. Pathetic.

By: Leroy Jenkins

Leroy Jenkins — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:30:20 +0000

And this is coming from people who wail and moan about how the election judges were going to steal the election by saying that a vote for Obama and a blank Senate vote should be counted for Franken.

And then they come back and challange any ballot that has votes for McCain and Franken, as if to imply that voter intent was clearly mistaken, and Coleman deserves these entirely filled in votes for Franken.

By: Skipper

Skipper — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:24:34 +0000

This is the kick the elephant strategy. For a while, the elephant ignores the irritation, but sooner or later it will react negatively and the kicker can accuse it of bad behavior. Here, Franken just keeps raising new “issues” hoping that one or more will eventually stick.

By: Swiftee

Swiftee — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:24:26 +0000

That all depends on the meaning of “is” in “is clearly marked”.

It’s called the Clinton election method…all the rage within the party of Scrubs these days.

By: JoeyDiAngelo

JoeyDiAngelo — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:13:36 +0000

Team Franken has been desperate from start to finish and their volunteers have been just as bad.

My question- how do you challenge a ballot when the vote is clearly marked?!