+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31



  1. #21
    UHM Since 1999
    This user has no status.
     
    Elder's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    07-19-2012

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Member #
    14323
    Posts
    571
    Threads
    83
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    I'm not going to get involved in personal comments and disrespectful discussion. I am aware of instances of Franken engaging in such dishonest behavior as I have indicated above but since it is not critical to my main point, I am not going to take the time to post links and sources.

    If you'd like to discuss his qualifications or the concerns about the handling of the MN recount in a cordial manner then I'm all for it.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    FrighT MasteR:one of da best additions to da board, in my opinion, having a place like the oath/dark mind for more intellectual discussions and analysis, and sometimes offering a lil comedy relief with da FrighT interviews

  2. #22
    anti-social worker
    This user has no status.
     
    Grendel's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    02-18-2010

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Member #
    105
    Location
    Detroit
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,610
    Threads
    165
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elduardo View Post
    Bottom line for me is that Franken is not qualified for any public office and that there are some documented concerns about the way that the recount in MN is being handled and that should concern all of us.
    I'm not particularly well-versed in California politics, but Schwarzenegger was similarly not qualified for any public office and appears to have done at least a passable job. Clearly I would advise shooting for much higher than "passable," but I'd say nothing can be ruled out.

    As far as the recount is going, given the impending court challenges, as well as the threatened filibuster in the Senate, I think the amount of eyes on the process should allow any chicanery that may be present to come to light. If that turns out to be the case, then any individuals involved should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    Patriot, n. One to whom the interests of a part seem superior to the interests of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerers. ---Ambrose Bierce

  3. #23
    Zombiefied Member
    This user has no status.
     
    RIP's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Member #
    582
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    46
    Posts
    440
    Threads
    17
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    Franken's qualifications are certainly up for debate, but the bottom line is...the people vote.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    A relatively unseen classic!

  4. #24
    UHM Since 1999
    This user has no status.
     
    Elder's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    07-19-2012

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Member #
    14323
    Posts
    571
    Threads
    83
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by RIP View Post
    Franken's qualifications are certainly up for debate, but the bottom line is...the people vote.
    Understood but let's examine that. Coleman was up by 725 votes the day after the election. Since then, it seems like every decision has gone for Franken (as explained by the WSJ), and votes for Franken have been found at a rate that one economist has said is statistically impossible.

    So I think the question of whether the people's vote has been properly counted has yet to be answered.

    Having said that, even if Coleman somehow wins it makes me sad that Franken got anywhere enough votes to win.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    FrighT MasteR:one of da best additions to da board, in my opinion, having a place like the oath/dark mind for more intellectual discussions and analysis, and sometimes offering a lil comedy relief with da FrighT interviews

  5. #25
    UHM Since 1999
    This user has no status.
     
    Elder's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    07-19-2012

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Member #
    14323
    Posts
    571
    Threads
    83
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    25 precincts now have more ballots than people that singed up on election night to vote.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    FrighT MasteR:one of da best additions to da board, in my opinion, having a place like the oath/dark mind for more intellectual discussions and analysis, and sometimes offering a lil comedy relief with da FrighT interviews

  6. #26
    Zombiefied Member
    This user has no status.
     
    RIP's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Member #
    582
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    46
    Posts
    440
    Threads
    17
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    As I understand it, the recount has been conducted according to Minnesota state law. Coleman advised Franken to waive the legally madated recount and concede the day after the election. Coleman had a slight lead at that point. Franken declined.

    Coleman decided to go to court to keep rejected absentee ballots from being counted. He said he wanted a uniform standard for counting ballots. The Supreme Court ruled that the valid absentee ballots had to be counted. Coleman and Franken both agreed to standards for accepting a ballot. Coleman then claims that there was no uniform standard.

    Now that the ballots have been counted in accordance with state law, Franken has the lead. Is Coleman going to concede as he suggested Franken do? No. He's going to sue. This thing will drag on for months most likely.

    Having said all of that, I haven't seen anything about precincts having more ballots than people.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    A relatively unseen classic!

  7. #27
    UHM Since 1999
    This user has no status.
     
    Elder's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    07-19-2012

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Member #
    14323
    Posts
    571
    Threads
    83
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    I've been following this closely and I've never seen a recount swing from one candidate being 725 votes up to 225 votes down. It's just highly unlikely to me that all of these Franken votes are coming out of the woodwork at such a disproportinate rate.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    FrighT MasteR:one of da best additions to da board, in my opinion, having a place like the oath/dark mind for more intellectual discussions and analysis, and sometimes offering a lil comedy relief with da FrighT interviews

  8. #28
    Zombiefied Member
    This user has no status.
     
    RIP's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Member #
    582
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    46
    Posts
    440
    Threads
    17
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    Perhaps. But Coleman's about face from election day to now is a tad suspect too no? To be fair, when the roles were reversed he was happy to be advising Franken to bow out.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    A relatively unseen classic!

  9. #29
    UHM Since 1999
    This user has no status.
     
    Elder's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    07-19-2012

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Member #
    14323
    Posts
    571
    Threads
    83
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    I'm not sure how Coleman's behavior is suspect, he's probably pretty stunned that he's now losing and that virtually every decision has gone Franken's way. I think Coleman should have been fighting hard the whole way.

    Did you read this part from the WSJ article:
    In other cases, the board has been flagrantly inconsistent. Last month, Mr. Franken's campaign charged that one Hennepin County (Minneapolis) precinct had "lost" 133 votes, since the hand recount showed fewer ballots than machine votes recorded on Election Night. Though there is no proof to this missing vote charge -- officials may have accidentally run the ballots through the machine twice on Election Night -- the Canvassing Board chose to go with the Election Night total, rather than the actual number of ballots in the recount. That decision gave Mr. Franken a gain of 46 votes.

    Meanwhile, a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he's benefited both ways from the board's inconsistency.


    Pretty clear-cut shenanigans.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    FrighT MasteR:one of da best additions to da board, in my opinion, having a place like the oath/dark mind for more intellectual discussions and analysis, and sometimes offering a lil comedy relief with da FrighT interviews

  10. #30
    anti-social worker
    This user has no status.
     
    Grendel's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    02-18-2010

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Member #
    105
    Location
    Detroit
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,610
    Threads
    165
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elduardo View Post
    Pretty clear-cut shenanigans.
    Perhaps, perhaps not. This was a WSJ editorial, not an investigative piece and there appear to be more than a few holes:

    Did the Wall Street Journal Fire their Fact-Checkers?

    The Wall Street Journal is bar none one of the best newspapers in the country -- except when its Editorial Board is having a bad day. And today the Board is having a very bad day, having published an editorial that declares Al Franken's provisional win in Minnesota, which the state just certified moments ago, to be illegitimate, while accusing Minnesota's Canvassing Board of being inconsistent and biased in favor of Franken.

    There is nothing intrinsically wrong with taking such a position. The Journal's editorial, however, has several basic facts wrong, makes several other assertions based on flimsy or nonexistent evidence, and generally has little understanding of the process that has taken place to date.

    Let's go through the editorial paragraph by paragraph.

    *****Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victory

    "Machinations": there's a ten-dollar word. Ritchie may be a Democrat, but he was also democratically elected -- lower case 'D' -- by the people of Minnesota. And as for the Canvassing Board, it arguably leans to the right, consisting of two members appointed by Tim Pawlenty, one appointed by Jesse Ventura, one elected member, and Ritchie.

    *****Mr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on "counting every vote" wants to shut the process down. He's getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies.

    Actually, Coleman is having far more trouble with the Minnesota Supreme Court, which generally has a conservative reputation, than he is with the Canvassing Board. They're the ones who rejected his petition on duplicate ballots, and they're the ones who rejected his notion of wanting to tack on additional ballots to the absentee ballot counting.

    *****Under Minnesota law, election officials are required to make a duplicate ballot if the original is damaged during Election Night counting. Officials are supposed to mark these as "duplicate" and segregate the original ballots. But it appears some officials may have failed to mark ballots as duplicates, which are now being counted in addition to the originals. This helps explain why more than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote. By some estimates this double counting has yielded Mr. Franken an additional 80 to 100 votes.

    There are 25 precincts with more ballots than voters? I'm not sure this is actually true. There were certain precincts with more votes counted during the recount than there were on Election Night -- which is not surprising, considering that the whole purpose of a hand recount is to find votes that the machine scanners missed the first time around. I have not seen any evidence, on the other hand, that there are precincts with more votes than voters as recorded on sign-in sheets. And the Coleman campaign evidently hasn't either, or it presumably would have presented it to the Court, which rejected its petition for lack of evidence.

    Also, note the weasel-wordy phrase "by some estimates", which translates as "by the Coleman campaign's estimate". There is no intrinsic reason why Franken ballots are more likely to be duplicated than Coleman ballots, especially when one significant source of duplicate ballots is military absentees, a group that presumably favors the Republicans. Coleman, indeed, only became interested in the issue of duplicates once he fell behind in the recount and needed some way to extend his clock. Before then, his lead attorney had sent an e-mail to Franken which said that challenges on the issue of duplicate ballots were "groundless and frivolous".

    *****This disenfranchises Minnesotans whose vote counted only once. And one Canvassing Board member, State Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson, has acknowledged that "very likely there was a double counting." Yet the board insists that it lacks the authority to question local officials and it is merely adding the inflated numbers to the totals.

    The Canvassing Board indeed determined that it lacked the jurisidiction to handle duplicate ballots, telling Coleman that he had to go to court. Which he did. And the court threw the case out because Coleman didn't have any evidence.

    *****In other cases, the board has been flagrantly inconsistent. Last month, Mr. Franken's campaign charged that one Hennepin County (Minneapolis) precinct had "lost" 133 votes, since the hand recount showed fewer ballots than machine votes recorded on Election Night. Though there is no proof to this missing vote charge -- officials may have accidentally run the ballots through the machine twice on Election Night -- the Canvassing Board chose to go with the Election Night total, rather than the actual number of ballots in the recount. That decision gave Mr. Franken a gain of 46 votes.

    Actually, there is some proof: the number of votes identified during the recount fell 134 short of the number of voters who signed in on Election Night in this precinct.

    *****Meanwhile, a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he's benefited both ways from the board's inconsistency.

    The decisions are not inconsistent if the Canvassing Board's objective is wanting to count every vote.

    And here again the Journal is going on about the county "showing more ballots than voters in the precinct". If there is evidence of this, it would be news not just to me but also to the Coleman campaign.

    *****And then there are the absentee ballots. The Franken campaign initially howled that some absentee votes had been erroneously rejected by local officials. Counties were supposed to review their absentees and create a list of those they believed were mistakenly rejected. Many Franken-leaning counties did so, submitting 1,350 ballots to include in the results. But many Coleman-leaning counties have yet to complete a re-examination. Despite this lack of uniformity, and though the state Supreme Court has yet to rule on a Coleman request to standardize this absentee review, Mr. Ritchie's office nonetheless plowed through the incomplete pile of 1,350 absentees this weekend, padding Mr. Franken's edge by a further 176 votes.

    This is just blatantly false. All counties, red and blue alike, were instructed by the Supreme Court to identify any wrongly-rejected absentee ballots, and all of them did. In certain counties, Coleman claims to have identified additional wrongly-rejected absentee ballots above and beyond the ones that county officials identified -- but these were counties that nevertheless complied with the court's order and turned in their lists of ballots to the state.

    *****Both campaigns have also suggested that Mr. Ritchie's office made mistakes in tabulating votes that had been challenged by either of the campaigns. And the Canvassing Board appears to have applied inconsistent standards in how it decided some of these challenged votes -- in ways that, again on net, have favored Mr. Franken.

    I watched the video feed of the challenge adjudication process and did think there were some number of inconsistencies, particularly in the ways that ballots with 'X's on them were handled. But, I was looking at .pdfs of the ballots, whereas the Canvassing Board got to look at full-color, three-dimensional copies, which may make some difference in borderline cases. More to the point, however: (1) both candidates had their lawyers in the room when this adjudication was taking place, and had every right to press the Board on perceived inconsistencies, and (2) there is no evidence whatsoever that these inconsistencies hurt any one candidate particularly more than the other.

    *****The question is how the board can certify a fair and accurate election result given these multiple recount problems. Yet that is precisely what the five members seem prepared to do when they meet today. Some members seem to have concluded that because one of the candidates will challenge the result in any event, why not get on with it and leave it to the courts? Mr. Coleman will certainly have grounds to contest the result in court, but he'll be at a disadvantage given that courts are understandably reluctant to overrule a certified outcome.

    He'll be at a disadvantage because fewer people voted for him.

    *****Meanwhile, Minnesota's other Senator, Amy Klobuchar, is already saying her fellow Democrats should seat Mr. Franken when the 111th Congress begins this week if the Canvassing Board certifies him as the winner. This contradicts Minnesota law, which says the state cannot award a certificate of election if one party contests the results. Ms. Klobuchar is trying to create the public perception of a fait accompli, all the better to make Mr. Coleman look like a sore loser and build pressure on him to drop his legal challenge despite the funny recount business.

    But it doesn't contradict Congressional precedent, as the Congress generally has seated provisional winners while challenges were taking place, including Republican Representative Vern Buchanan in 2007 and Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu in 1997.

    *****Minnesotans like to think that their state isn't like New Jersey or Louisiana, and typically it isn't. But we can't recall a similar recount involving optical scanning machines that has changed so many votes, and in which nearly every crucial decision worked to the advantage of the same candidate. The Coleman campaign clearly misjudged the politics here, and the apparent willingness of a partisan like Mr. Ritchie to help his preferred candidate, Mr. Franken. If the Canvassing Board certifies Mr. Franken as the winner based on the current count, it will be anointing a tainted and undeserving Senator.

    New Jerseyites! Louisianans! Cancel your subscriptions! And the rest of you might as well too.
    While I don't contend this rebuttal is, by any means, the final word, it raises some serious questions about the account in the Journal's editorial piece (esp. concerning the multiple references to precincts with more votes than voters)

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by Grendel; 01-07-2009 at 10:18 PM.


    Patriot, n. One to whom the interests of a part seem superior to the interests of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerers. ---Ambrose Bierce

  11. #31
    UHM's Reverend
    I take what I don't need... I
    crush... You BLEED...
     
    WarBeast's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Last Online
    11-03-2017

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Member #
    98
    Location
    Smithville Mo
    Age
    44
    Posts
    3,147
    Threads
    105
    My Mood
    Cool
    Follow WarBeast On Twitter Add WarBeast on Facebook
    Visit WarBeast's Youtube Channel
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 41
    Given: 2
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag Nope. PSN ID Dada Steam ID Don't want to share it. Wii Code Zilch
    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    Perhaps, perhaps not. This was a WSJ editorial, not an investigative piece and there appear to be more than a few holes:



    While I don't contend this rebuttal is, by any means, the final word, it raises some serious questions about the account in the Journal's editorial piece (esp. concerning the multiple references to precincts with more votes than voters)
    Isn't the WSJ owned by Murdoch?

    If so, that in itself makes any editorial piece coming out if it a bit more than dubious, if you ask me...

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!


    Plucking Eyes, Sockets Red, Swarming Flies, EAT THE DEAD!!!!!! - Me

    "The blackest night falls from the skies,
    The darkness grows, as all light dies,
    We crave your hearts and your demise,
    By my black hand— the dead shall rise!"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •