Franken Camp Sounds Alarm: Votes Missing In Minneapolis!
Just when you thought you might know what's going on in Minnesota...
The Franken campaign, which has been voicing concern all through this recount about missing ballots, just put out a very urgent press release alleging that 133 ballots are missing from a single precinct -- which just so happens to be a solidly-Dem precinct right in Minneapolis -- and calling upon the city's elections director to keep the recount officially open until this matter is resolved.
The county's initial election returns showed that Franken had a lead of 495 votes over Coleman, a nearly two-to-one-lead in this single precinct (Ward 3, Precinct 1). If these missing ballots are not recovered, it is quite possible that Franken could sustain a net loss in the vote count that would be enough to undo the campaign's claim of a 22-vote lead from this morning.
Late Update: The Star Tribune has some more info on this -- including the key number that Franken stands to lose a net 46 votes if these apparently misplaced ballots are not recovered. Ouch. The city is looking into the situation. An initial hypothesis was that some votes may have been double-counted the first time, but that no longer appears to be the case.
So the precinct is claiming that 129 votes were double counted (accounting for most if not all of the discrepancy). If this is true, then those 129 ballots are subtracted from the total and it is very likely that the ballots went more than two to one for Franken, meaning he would lose a number of votes. (One site is claiming this is resulting in a loss of 36 votes for Franken but it is unclear whether they have gone through the 129 ballots to determine the Franken-Coleman split). So we know even less about the final outcome of the race than yesterday
December 3, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
They will not be able to determine which particular ballots were overcounted (assuming that was the case). All they can do is count all the ballots they have and report the votes they find. The Star Tribune highlights the most interesting question:
"But Franken campaign officials said Reichert's explanation can't account for the discrepancy, given that 2,029 people voted on Election Day and the recount recorded only 1,896 votes." It sounds like ballots were lost in a precinct that went strongly for Franken.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35492669.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUX
December 3, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
What does the voter roll say? The number of people who signed in to vote on it should correspond to the number of ballots cast.
December 3, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
From what I read, the voter roll first reflected 131 less than the number of ballots counted and now reflects 4 more people than the number of ballots found.
December 3, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not what the Franken camp is saying. They say that the voter rolls show more than 120 more voters than ballots. That does sound like missing ballots.
December 3, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a question. It now appears from the Star Tribune site that counting has been finished in all counties except two which only started their recount today and in Hennepin which, despite starting their recount a week ago, are still at 92% completed. Is there any reason why they are unable to finish their count and is this related to the 131 overcount problem?
December 3, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Answering my own question, it now appears that almost all ballots have been counted. Everything from Hennepin has no been counted and more than half of the two remaining counties, 98% total.
December 3, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone know about this?
"Luckily, Minnesota’s electoral law has a provision for ties. After all the counting and recounting, if the vote is statistically tied, the state should invoke the section of the law that requires the victor to be chosen by lot. It’s hard to swallow, but the right way to end the senatorial race between Mr. Coleman and Mr. Franken will be to flip a coin. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/opinion/04seife.html?th&emc=th
December 4, 2008 4:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
In '04, two candidates in New Mexico had to flip a coin. That's the provision for breaking ties that they use.
Minnesota isn't the only state that uses a coin flip to break a tie.
December 4, 2008 8:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
The article said "statistically tied".
1) Does MN have a coin flip for exact ties? (probably)
2) Does MN have a coin flip for vote counts which are corrupted by errors which are clearly on the order of or larger than the difference between the two candidates' votes?
3) Which way would the Senate go, if MN appears significantly tainted, and why?
December 4, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Greg - someone might one to tell Josh that unless he was being sarcastic with his title on the front page, he misspelled "nonsense."
If he's being sarcastic, it doesn't quite work. It still looks like he just misspelled it: "nonesense."
December 4, 2008 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
ugh. Pass me the Prilosec. This election is killing me.
Probably neither here nor there but precinct 3-1 is nesteled into the University of Minensota. Lots of student housing and University staff so a 2/1 Franken ratio isn't at all surprising.
So far I've been impressed by the way MN Law articulats how the recount should be handeled and even how voter intent is to be determined on each challanged ballot.
But one thing I don't think these statutes has forseen is this approaching possibility: If, at the end of the recount, 122 more voters signed in than there are ballots - and if the difference between Franken and Coleman is LESS then the demonstrably missing 122 ballots - well, I think we'd be in new territory where the margin of error could be proven to be greater than the difference between the two candidates.
December 4, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really should use the edit feature. oops.
December 4, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder what the election result would have been had Franken been a candidate experienced in the skill of campaigning? Having a glib tongue from years on the comedy circuit and the talk show venue, only goes so far. The beginning of the campaign was shaky for Franken while he developed his campaigning chops. In an election turning out so close, that experience gap is turning out to be the difference. Coleman should have been easily defeated otherwise.
December 4, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would it not make sense to declare that if a precinct cannot produce all the ballots it originally counted, then any 'recount' would then be in error. On this basis, the original count should stand in its stead?
December 4, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink