Minnesota Senate Vote Count Keeps Getting Tighter
Another bright morning, and Sen. Norm Coleman's (R-MN) lead over Al Franken just keeps shrinking as the vote totals are re-canvassed in this contested election result.
As of right now, Coleman leads by only 204 votes, compared to a 211-vote lead at the close of business Friday. In the immediate totals after Election Night, Coleman led by about 800 votes.
This race is guaranteed to go to a full statewide manual recount, with both sides fully lawyered up and ready to go. We probably won't have a resolution for several weeks -- and even then, the result could possibly be disputed at the Senate this January.
Late Update: Coleman is now up by 206 votes - 1:45 p.m. ET.
Late Update: Coleman is now up by 205 votes - 2:50 p.m. ET.
Late Update: Coleman is now ahead by 207 votes - 3:02 p.m. ET.
*raises glass* Here's to Coleman being roundly booted out of office after recount!
O/T: So is Missouri ever planning on declaring a winner of their electoral votes? Or are they delaying because they don't want to give up their "bellwether" status?
November 10, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
It seems like McCain should be given the state so I am not too sure what they are waiting for.
November 10, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
538 has it red.
November 10, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Missouri isn't alone -- most states haven't officially declared the winner of their electoral votes.
We sometimes forget that AP or the networks have no legal standing when they "declare" a winner -- what they do as news organizations is very different from certificates of election issues by Secretaries of State or state election administrators. The returns we see on election night (and now) are unofficial results, nothing more.
Until the official canvass is complete, all the results we see are unofficial and uncertified.
Here in Vermont, where Obama won 2-1, the results won't be official until the Secretary of State releases her official canvass.
In many states, there are different rules and timetables for counting absentee ballots, determining provisional ballots, reviewing reported returns for clerical errors, etc. It is usually a couple of weeks to allow this to happen.
If we didn't learn anything else from Florida in 2000, part of respecting the sanctity of the vote is making sure every vote is counted accurately - and we should be patient enough to wait a couple weeks to allow a fair and accurate count in close races like these.
I suspect that MO will ultimately award their votes to McCain, but I'm glad they are following procedures and waiting to declare anything. (And wouldn't it be sweet if it turns out that there are enough uncounted Obama votes out there to add another state to the total?)
November 10, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can the Senate dispute the election?
November 10, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't get that either. I really like Franken, hope Norm gets his ass kicked.
And counter, WTF is up with Missouri???
November 10, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Constitution gives Congress that authority:
Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.
If one side or the other is still dissatisfied after the recounting and lawyering, then they can try and get the Senate to support them.
I am not sure how often, through our history, this has occurred or been successful
November 10, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I kind of doubt it's going to make it to the Senate like that, but who knows?
I can't recall that ever happening but that doesn't mean it hasn't -
November 10, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
November 10, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
What would we do without wikipedia? Thanks for that. I had no idea.
November 10, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting tidbit:
So, presumably, it's not the only time the results have been overturned, but the only time after a Senator has been seated.
November 10, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Point noted. :)
November 10, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Senate must decide who to seat (or is it whom?). I remember years ago a Senate election in New Hampshire between Durkin and Wyman that was decided by 10 votes in favor of Democrat Durkin.
Then, in a recount, the state's Republican ballot commissioner called it for Republican Wyman by 2 votes. The Senate rules committee was hopelessly deadlocked, the Republicans filibustered Democrat attempts to seat Durkin. Both men had offices in the Senate, as did the outgoing Senator, Norris Cotton, who agreed to stay on. Finally, when it became apparent there would be no resolution, both men agreed to a revote. The seat was declared vacant.
In September of 1975, buoyed by anti-Watergate sentiment, the ombiblious Mr Durkin won by 27,000 votes, and spent much of the next six years toasting to his good fortune in the Monocle. But his Senate career was ended in 1980 by Warren Rudman, in the Reagan landslide.
November 10, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's whom.
November 10, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
*clink*
I'll join that toast.
IT looks good -
November 10, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
The MN election system is about as solid as can be (optical scan ballots that are easy to fill out) so 200 votes still a pretty big margin.
But there are always people who don't fill in the circle completely.
Let us win this seat for Franken on the backs of those who can't follow directions and screw you Norm Coleman!!
November 10, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
As I understand, there are a significant number (perhaps as much as 27,000) votes that were not counted because the scanner could not pick up intent. Those votes will be examined by hand, and if intent can be determined, will be counted in a recount.
Those votes, historically, have come from first-time, elderly, and other voters who demographically may favor Franken.
All of which is to say, that margin may go away in recount. Silver calls it a toss-up...
November 10, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nate Silver, as usual, has excellent analysis of Franken's odds of winning the recount (though it's based on the previous total for Franken)at 538:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/frankens-odds-of-winning-recount-may-be.html
November 10, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nate's analysis is terrific, and a key take home point from reading it is that vote the Al gets closer increases his odds.
We're still talking about a large gap between votes in the Presidential race and the Senatorial race:
2,910,324 President
2,885,494 Senate
24,830 Gap
That's 0.9% of the Presidential votes.
It's not terribly unusual to have people *not* casting votes for certain things. But with sem-viable three options for Senate, it's hard to imagine 25K voters not marking something on their ballot.
John
November 10, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It probably won't happen, but it'd be fun to see the pre-recount totals switch to favoring Mr. Franken, who could promptly ask Hon. Sen. Coleman to step aside for the... whatever lame reasons he was using on when he stood to gain.
November 10, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
For anyone interested in Norm's chameleon background, here's a great article by Garrison Keillor.
November 10, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Go Al, Go~!
John
November 10, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is the link for only the Senate race (so you don't have to scroll down past the presidential race):
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20081104/ElecRslts.asp?M=S&R=S
And here is a handy scoreboard style thingie that automatically refreshes:
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20081104/MyRacesRslts.asp?Races=0103&M=CUSTOM&mRefreshInterval=180
November 10, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
cool.
November 10, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone posted an interesting article on OpEdNews where they found vote subtractions in the Al Franken and Norm Coleman race. I don't know if this is just an artifact of the reporting system used for vote tallying? Anyone know if this is normally seen in an election?
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Evidence-of-Republican-Fra-by-E-Nelson-081110-788.html
November 10, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Back down to 205 at 11/10/2008 2:26:17 PM
John
November 10, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crap... 11/10/2008 2:31:18 PM has Norm back up to 206. :)
John
November 10, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know how I know that Franken is going to come out on top? Fox News is already trying to drum up "election fraud" allegations in Minnesota.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,449334,00.html
November 10, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good article my Makos:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/10/15497/678/320/658690
"... it's the little spec of blue about five counties up from the bottom, third from the state's eastern border, and houses about 23 percent of the state's voters."
Al took Hennepin County 50%-36%-13%. 657,346 votes so far. There's 6,438 fewer voters for Senate than for President.
If there's movement like we've seen elsewhere since election day, there's a decent chance Franken may take the lead.
John
November 10, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink