For some reason all I can think is, December in Minnesota... is "Let's go to Florida!" really such a menacing statement?

My prediction: Franken wins this whole thing.

It's really difficult to figure out exactly where Coleman is going with this. Is there any doubt that eventually these ballots are going to get counted? What, exactly, is the point of arguing that counting those ballots has to wait for a later (and certain to come) court ruling? The only logical outcome of the Equal Protection argument is that the court will eventually rule that either NONE or ALL of the improperly rejected ballots be counted, and the latter is all but assured. Counting all these absentee ballots just works in Franken's favor.

Am I missing something here? Does he have something up his sleeve that I'm not seeing?

If we're going entirely by which campaign had a harder time with the judge's questions -- which can often be true,

It is equally true with equal frequency that the harder questions go to the one who is favored. I've seen it go both ways.

That said - I'm no fan of Coleman's "argument," so maybe this court is one of those that you can tell which way they are leaning by the questions.

That is really risky, though, frankly.

Ok, off topic, but truly an outrage!!!!! Bush says that "There can be no debate" he kept the US safe????????? WTF, 9/11 happened on his gd freaking watch? He ignored the terror threat until we were attacked and did nothing to prevent the attacks. The terror threat is greater today than it ever was before 9/11. Thousands of US soldiers have been killed and tens of thousand wounded in Iraq (also, hundreds of thousands of women and children and men have been killed by him in Iraq). Bin Laden is still free and plotting. WTF. The guy is delusional.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

I'm watching the Canvassing Board go through each ballot thanks to the livefeed on startribune.com.

1. The proceedings are pretty professional. Everything was well organized beforehand and each question is answered with little to no doubt.
2. Because the proceedings are professional, the idea of Team Coleman using Bush v. Gore as precedent (and the partisan hackery of that charade) is hilarious.
3.The accents are magnificent, especially the clerk reading out the name of the ballot.

Yesterday, for some reason. Coleman's lead increased. Go figure.

Maybe rock-paper-scissors should decide the outcome?

Is Alan Page still on the Minnesota Supreme Court? Couldn't he just swoop down and whip Coleman's ass?

Had to laugh when I read the line "the only one who was openly hostile to Franken's lawyer was Justice Lorrie Skjerven Gildea." Lorrie's husband Andy Gildea used to work for the RNC; now I believe he works for the state house republican staff.

Some legal clarifications might be helpful:
1) SCOTUS, when deciding Bush v. Gore specifically limited their decision. In essence, they said the case will not apply to anyone, ever again, and has no authoritative value, beyond George Bush and the specific issue of the Florida vote.
2) A good summary of Bush v Gore can be found at:
http://home.pacbell.net/jmax7/BushvGore2000.htm
3) Florida required the vote to be certified by December 12, 2000. This was a drop-dead date, without recourse. Gore sued for a re-count of uncounted votes. the Florida S. Ct. agreed on December 8th. The U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay, on the 9th, which halted the recount (rather than let the recount proceed, and then decide what to do with the recount numbers.)SCOTUS then dithered until Dec. 12th to issue its opinion, making it impossible to complete the recount in the time left.
4) Skipping over the fact that for a variety of legal reasons, Bush v. Gore was a truly terrible decision, it doesn't help Coleman.
5) The MN senatorial election, unlike the Florida presidential vote, has no deadline to certify votes. Coleman has no clock to run out. Consequently, only three decisions can be made by the MN: Order all votes counted, Order no votes counted, even though it is undisputed that the "fifth pile votes" should have been counted, or leave it up to different counties to decide whether or not to count the fifth pile votes. Frankly (Franken?) since there is no deadline, I cannot see a logical reason to choose anything but the first choice.
6) Once the MN Court rules, Review by SCOTUS is by certiori which means it is voluntary. SCOTUS can either take the case, or not. If it doesn't take the case, then the MN S.Ct decision is final. I do not see any upside to SCOTUS taking the case. SCOTUS took a lot of heat on Bush v. Gore. It was worth it to them to get their man in office. This go-around, they have nothing to gain. The Senate will be controlled by the Ds and the Pres. is a D. If they go out of their way to take the case, and somehow annoint Coleman, all they gain is a doofus who is under indictment and may not survive long even if elected. Coleman is no Stevens. And in the process they build a huge fire under the Ds to substantially change the makeup of SCOTUS and the lower federal courts, and to start overruling SCOTUS decisions. A hostile, active Senate can make SCOTUS largely irrelevant, and that's the last thing the Five Controlling Egos of SCOTUS want to happen.
7) So, the likeliest outcome is that the MN S. Ct. says to count all votes, the US S.Ct. chooses not to weigh in, and Franken wins the election.
8) There is one other option, I think. I believe the MN rules say that if the final vote is a "statistical tie" the matter is chosen by lot. Yup, that means a flip of the coin. Statistical tie doesn't mean exact tie. There were 2.9 million votes cast. A difference of a few votes, seems to be a statistical tie. Even 1000 votes difference out of 3,000,000 is only 3/100th of a per cent or .0003. Don't rule out the possibility if Franken wins, Coleman will sue for the coin flip. I want to believe that Franken is not that desperate, and will accept the final numbers.
9) The clock Coleman may be focusing on is the start of the next Senate. Coleman's plan may be to stall things beyond that date. If no Senator is certified by then, the governor can appoint someone.
10) The Governor of MN is Tim Pawlenty, an R. He'll have some tough choices. If he appoints Coleman, he's a hero to the Rs nationally, and may be in serious trouble in blue Minnesota. If he appoints, or Coleman wins outright, and then Coleman is forced to resign due to corruption issues, then what does Pawlenty do? He should appoint Franken to follow the voters' will, but if he's looking to 2012, he may be more interested in throwing red meat to his base, than salve to his own state.
11) Nate at 538.com and a few Dartmouth professors say Franken is favored. My vote's with them. One way or another Franken wins, either now or after Coleman resigns.

I think Mr. E has it right. The US SC probably won't step in to give the Repubs another meaningless senator especially when that senator is Norm Coleman and very well may be going to jail.

If Coleman loses by 5 votes it's going to remind me of the $150,000 the RNC wasted on Sarah Palin's wardrobe. They should've sprung for the matching handbag.