Even More Ballots In Minnesota?
There's been a new twist in the Minnesota recount that means Al Franken could potentially pick up some more votes -- but it all depends on a key decision this Friday by the state canvassing board this Friday on rejected absentee ballots.
Minneapolis officials have finished sorting through rejected absentees -- and it turns out that 171 ballots appear to have not been rejected for any legal cause at all, but were instead thrown out because of administrative errors. If these votes were put back in, they would probably break heavily to Al.
Two caveats are worth noting here. First, this all depends on what the canvassing board does on Friday, when they meet to decide the fate of the rejected absentees. But because the Secretary of State sent out a letter to counties asking them to sort the ballots -- essentially a review process by itself -- the Franken camp has publicly expressed optimism.
Second, an order to count these ballots would also mean that all the other similar ballots would be counted statewide, and we don't know what those numbers look like. It would seem to more likely be good news for Franken, as pre-election polling from Minnesota showed Dems winning the absentee ballots overall.















O for god's sake - what a mess! Makes me want to know just how bad it really is in all the states.
We have got to do something about our election process.
December 10, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
You'll be glad to know that a solution was offered for these problems years ago: Electronic voting machines.
December 10, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like a great id--
December 10, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's probably no worse in Minnesota than in other places. It only becomes an issue when the election is really close and a few votes one way or the other really count.
December 10, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. Even in horse races you sometimes get the very rare dead heat. It's not that it's actually a tie; the margin of victory is too small to measure.
It seems like MN has been doing pretty well so far, considering the circumstances. But it has lost some of its entertainment value for the impatient among us.
December 10, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's going largely fine. Most challengers on both sides were frivolous, the main issue is the 300 mission ballots I believe.
Look we have 77% turnout along with same-day registration so really the lack of other problems is probably a good thing.
December 10, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
It only becomes an issue when the election is really close and a few votes one way or the other really count.
Make that it only comes to most people's attention when it looks like an election is really close and a few votes one way or the other really count.
Counting our votes on these junk machines with junk software is no way to run an election. In most races there is no recount because the racess don't appear close. It's a much simpler task to rig an election in most jurisdictions in this country since HAVA was passed in 2002. And all you have to do is push the margin of victory up past the recount threshold. Even in a US senate race that wouldn't take more than following any one of a few documented procedures while setting up the scanners or in tabulating the votes afterward in relatively few polling places.
And that's if you're deliberately trying to fix an election. Unintended screw ups are even more likely because of the faulty nature of these machines and the secretive CYA mentality of the manufacturers/vendors. Many of these "glitches" never get corrected unless election integrity watchdogs expose them because election officials don't want to lose their jobs and the vendors
don't want to lose the business.
December 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, here's a startling thought: ever wonder how many actual officeholders in this country only are there, because election authorities just didn't feel like doing whatever it took to count the actual votes?
And that somebody else legitimately should have occupied those offices?
And if those officeholders were re-elected at some point, it was with the power of incumbency, to which they were not even entitled in the first place?
And that what this makes us is a country, being run illegitimately, by the wrong people?
(Like you, I can think of one particular high officeholder, who fits that description..!)
December 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The link doesn't work as given. But if you go to
http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_11183835
instead (same link but without the click-counting field) it works fine.
-- MarkusQ
December 10, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks.
December 10, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
At this point I'm expecting we'll see security footage of Norm Coleman loading up his car with ballot boxes and fishtailing out of a driveway with poll workers in hot pursuit.
http://pufferfish.typepad.com/
December 10, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd rather see the pixel-mosaic masked footage of ER workers attesting to Laurie Coleman's unexplained facial bruises. Some time before the election would clearly have been far better, though.
December 10, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, I'm predicting a Dean Barkley upset.
December 10, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eric, I'm wondering if you're being ironic about electronic voting machines solving problems of our voting system. After the Bush-Gore disaster, many states rushed into use of electronic machines, and they seem to have at least as many pitfalls as traditional ballots — at least as they have currently been implemented. To name some of the problems, there are software malfunctions where machines drop votes, the fear machines could be hacked, and concerns about voting machine companies like Diebold that have records of supporting one party.
December 10, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well... yeah! http://blackboxvoting.org
December 10, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
I certainly read Eric's reply as a sarcastic but true comment on what the previous big "fix" to our voting system was.
December 10, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
even with electronic voting machines you still would have a recount of the absentee votes etc.
no matter what system is used you will always have an issue when the election is this close.
Bob Graham once said that to defend FL after 2000 and its true.
December 10, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, this is beyond absurd. They should just do a revote at this point. It's sooo screwed up that there is no way that whoever wins this clusterf*ck will have any legitimacy. They will always be questioning the election and the legitimacy, no matter who it is. Schedule a revote NOW for mid january and get it over with already.
December 10, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why would you assume a revote wouldn't come out similarly close? In this case it might not because of Barkley's presence on the ballot, but generally speaking there's no reason to expect a revote would solve the problem.
December 10, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually thought that barkley's presence impacted on the vote. Also, the problem is all the missing ballots and such. Do it again and get it right this time.
December 10, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure it did. The "Independence Party" (undoubtedly a sock-puppet of the MN Republicans) has been running "centrist" candidates here for years, muddying the waters, luring credulous DFL'ers who for one reason or another are not wild about the party's candidate away and delivering elections to the Republicans, who always vote in lockstep.
December 10, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Independence Party is NOT a "sock puppet" for the Republicans. It is a ballot-qualified major party in Minnesota, directly descended from Ross Perot's "Reform Party" presidential campaign in 1992 . . . the campaign which took so many votes AWAY from George Bush Sr., that Bill Clinton won the election.
In 1998, Norm Coleman looked like a sure winner for the Governor of Minnesota office, when he was upset by Jesse Ventura, the Reform Party candidate. This threw a BIG wrench into Norm's vaunted ambitions---everyone who's ever met Norm knew he was ALWAYS aiming for the Presidency, much more obviously than most politicians.
Those two examples show this party as a wild card, not a sock puppet. They changed their name to Independence Party but it is the same outfit.
Other than Ventura, they have not won elections. They did get a State Senator to quit the Republicans and join their party, but she was defeated later, or quit, I can't recall. Other than Ventura, their most prominent leaders are Tim Penny, once a "Blue-Dog" DFL (Democratic-Farmer Labor) congressman but always a Republican at heart, and Dean Barkley, a somewhat Quixotic figure whose big coup was to persuade Jesse to run in '98. Also John Wodele, the husband of a DFL county attorney who herself is running for Governor in 2010 as a DFL-er. Wodele managed the campaign for Elwyn Tinklenberg against Michele Bachmann. Tink incidentally was endorsed by the Independence Party along with the DFL, which would have helped a lot in Bachmann's district--except Minnesota law doesn't allow candidates on more than one ballot line (unlike say, New York state.) So an unknown named Bob Anderson paid the fee and got listed on the ballot for the IP. ANY Bob Anderson in Minnesota is an electoral threat, and Bob's 10% of the vote probably did throw that race to Bachmann---but don't blame the IP, which endorsed Tinklenberg. So---maybe an unwitting accomplice in some races, like when Pawlenty was re-elected in 2006, but not a sock puppet.
Minnesota has a tradition of third parties. They serve a purpose . . . although admittedly, the IP's purpose is more murky than most. I would analyze it as mostly an ego-outlet for its hard-core members (there are few) and a catch-all protest party for those who choose to vote for its candidates.
The outcome of this election is, so far, disappointing. If Coleman squeaks back in, the nation is wounded. But Minnesota's elections are as clean as any and better than many! I love Al Franken, but his candidacy was always problematic. I estimated that he would have needed an 80% turnout to win . . . and we only reached 77%. Actually less than four years ago. EVERY VOTE MATTERS!
December 10, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This threw a BIG wrench into Norm's vaunted ambitions---everyone who's ever met Norm knew he was ALWAYS aiming for the Presidency, much more obviously than most politicians."
Can you explain to me exactly who Norm Coleman's constituency is in MN?
I mean a sleazy, carpetbagging New Yorker wouldn't seem to have a lot of appeal in a land full of traditionally liberal, stoic and decidedly unflashy Minnesotans.
December 10, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re-vote? Not an option: Minnesota law provides for a canvass if the election is close, decision by lot if there is an actual tie, and a possible state court contest of the result.
And, having lived through this campaign, a re-vote, with even a short re-campaign, is the last thing any Minnesotan might wish for.
'Virtual tie' is a meaningless concept in this context.
December 10, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
So, bottom line, whoever gets the nod will have no legitimacy from the voters. That doesn't seem right.
December 10, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
So what exactly is "legimate"? Are you suggesting that 1) people vote, 2) every election have a hand recount, and 3) if the numbers don't match (they won't, not exactly)GOTO 1. We'd still be trying to decide this contest as Obama finishes his second term.
Face it, the Repubs are going to question the legitimacy of anything less than a Coleman win. And do so loudly, trying to create doubt in the minds of the public.
I'd say Shrub was never legitimate, even if he (for sake of argument) won either the requisite number of electoral or popular votes.
We're doing the best we can in MN. No election this size, with this many workers and machines and pieces of paper, is going to be 100.000000%. And if it's almost that close, we can live with it, so long as no intentional tampering is involved.
December 10, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually don't dispute your points. Maybe they throw it to the legislature to decide. It all seems so screwed up at this point and this is not meant to be a dig at minnesota by any means.
Also, the king was never legitimate in my book either. But for 9/11, that he rode all the way to the bank, he would have been gone in 06, big time.
December 10, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Duh, 04, I meant 04.
December 10, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The legislature can play no role in the decision. But the U. S. Senate could, because it is up to the Senate to decide for itself whether to accept or reject a certified winner. Historically, some Senators have been held up while their elections were investigated; a few have even been rejected--mostly for blatantly corrupt election tactics; a handful for apparently political reasons though not much in relatively recent times. The Senate even swallowed LBJ's stolen election in 1948---read about it in Robert Caro's "Means of Ascent."
December 10, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This election will be decided one way or another by less than a couple hundred votes when each candidate has about 1.2 million votes.
That is a 0.0083% difference. Virtual tie. I'm no statistician, but it seems bizarre to me we keep having "ties" when so many votes are cast.
December 10, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just goes to show that every vote counts and reason to push those who complain their vote really doesn't make a difference.
December 10, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Looking forward to hearing Coleman's argument as to why they should not count valid absentee ballots that were rejected for no legal reason but only by administrative error.
December 10, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, from as long as I can remember, until 2000, we never, ever had these types of voting issues. Now from 2000 until the present, every single election, there have been voting issues, disenfranchisement, recounting, screwed up ballots, 8 hour waits in lines, etc., etc. Anybody have any theories on what is up? I really don't get it.
December 10, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's to do with HAVA. Repug scheme to fix elections. http://blackboxvoting.org http://bradblog.com
December 10, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is nothing new. Back in 1931, during the recount in the Alabama US Senate race, two county sheriffs literally burned the ballots for their counties. You just need to enhance your memory.
It is quite true that in recent years, far more mischief has been committed---the vast majority of it by Republicans, who ever since the 1968 election have pursued a strategy of making racial appeals to white voters at the expense of racial minorities.
Under Ronald Reagan's administration, the Republicans began using the power of government to start obstructing and subverting the Voting Rights Act---don't forget that until the late 1960's, many Southern states had mechanisms to deny the right to vote to black citizens (blatantly violating the Constitution, but that's just a piece of paper.)
Karl Rove, Junior Bush's political mastermind, pushed further, setting in operation a coordinated national strategy of disenfranchising targeted groups of people who tended to vote Democratic. There are literally dozens of ways that people were blocked from voting--voter purges, caging, lack of voting machines, police intimidation; etc. The privatization of elections and the use of electronic voting devices especially the touch-screens, made outright vote stealing a cinch for those who controlled them---namely, Republicans. The HAVA Act wrote disenfranchisement tactics into federal law!! And under Gonzales, the Justice Department was used to skew elections to the GOP. While all this was happening, the Democrats either played stupid or were stupid---passively playing along and caving in every inch of the way.
December 10, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
But when will Obama go on the record to say the sky is blue? What is he waiting for? What is he hiding?
December 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
He still doesn't have Sarah Palin's support. Why can't he close the deal?
December 10, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand the frustration expressed by many here, but apart from the issues of lost ballots from a precinct in Minneapolis and some hysteria from the repubs and Coleman the process is actually running smoothly. The process even allows for easy identification of how many ballots were lost and the alternative of counting the original machine tally from that precinct.
Minnesota uses an optical scan technology for ballots that provides a clear paper trail -- that allows an easy recount and identification of anomalies that touch screen voting and other electronic technologies lack.
A complication in this election was the Barkley candidacy that got a significant percentage of votes and probably effectively tightened the margin for the two major candidates. There has been a significant movement in Minnesota to adopt an instant runoff voting system -- Minneapolis has already passed an amendment to allow that. Instant runoff would allow voters to rank candidates by preference and provide a path to a clearer majority in complex elections like this one.
December 10, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
We don't have similar information about St. Paul, because Joe Mansky, the Elections Manager for Ramsey County, is refusing to sort the ballots.
Mansky said he doesn't want to come between the two parties, and so only a court should sort ballots.
(information from the radio show "The Mark Heaney Show" on Air America Minnesota on Monday night)
December 10, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink