With Key Phase In Recount Now Over, Franken Looks On Track To Win
The Minnesota state canvassing board has finished its review of challenged ballots today, and we can now say this: When all the dust settles, comedian and progressive activist Al Franken is very likely to become a United States Senator from Minnesota, unless it is somehow reversed in court.
Franken went in this week officially down by 188 votes, but with thousands of ballots being kept out of the count by challenges from both campaigns. With over a thousand of those disputed ballots now counted, we have a much clearer picture: Franken is almost certainly ahead right now, by roughly 75 votes -- and barring any court reversals, he will be the next senator from Minnesota.
With such a slim margin separating Franken from GOP Sen. Norm Coleman, it's not completely impossible that the outcome could be reversed. But the two campaigns have been battling vote by vote for more than a month, and the remaining window of opportunity to pick up additional votes has narrowed considerably.
Franken has a nominal lead right now of 251 votes, according to the Star Tribune's tally. But that number is inflated because more officially-withdrawn Franken challenges of Coleman votes are still uncounted, versus the smaller number of withdrawn Coleman challenges. This is basically a mirror image of where things were during the hand count, when a surplus of Coleman challenges made it seem like he was ahead or that his "lead" was growing.
The Star Tribune's analysis predicts that those remaining votes will break to Coleman, but not by enough for him: Franken ahead by 78 votes. We might be able to know for sure as soon as Monday, as the numbers get processed by the state.
Next up are the legal disputes, where each side has its own pet issue. Coleman alleges, with some decent evidence, that a small number of absentee ballots were counted twice during the recount, giving an illegitimate leg up to Franken. But Franken has basically proven on far stronger evidence that even more absentee ballots weren't counted at all, depriving him of an edge. The state Supreme Court has put out a muddled opinion on Franken's issue, making it unclear how this will play out.
Should this race go to the courts, both issues will be explored, and would likely cancel each other out or even play slightly to Al's benefit -- though there's always the chance it could be done in a way that truly does favor Coleman, and prevents Franken from getting anything. Then the only remaining question is whether the Senate GOP decides to dispute the seating of Franken at the Senate, or whether the Dems hold up a seating of Coleman in case his own legal maneuvers somehow work and deprive Franken of a win.
But at this point, it looks like it's all over except for the shouting. Of course, there is going to be a lot of shouting.
I still think the best thing would have been to have a re-vote between the two. Of course there would be a $30M+ price tag on such an endeavor...
December 19, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since demographics heavily favor Republicans in special elections, can we infer from your statement that you favor Coleman? The rules are the rules. They were voted on, adopted and enshrined into law and to the best of my knowledge, in Minnesota, those rules don't include a re-vote. But that is perfectly consistent with today's Republicans: Just unilaterally re-write laws when they get in the way of the GOP agenda. This is not only dangerous but it is fundamentally against everything the United States of America was created for. Our founders were tired of England unilaterally imposing laws specifically tailored to advance it's agenda upon them without any input from thos governed. What the Republicans have been doing for the last few decades and what you are advocating is no different from that in my opinion.
December 19, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dumb idea. The election was held and the people's will - even if it is an extraordinarily close election - should be respected.
Absent proof that the election was held in such a shoddy manner that its results are unreliable - and there is no proof of anything remotely close to that - there should be no do-over.
In fact it seems Minnesota's handling of this has been far, far better than what Florida did in 2000. Maybe that has something to do with the fact that Coleman's brother is not the governor and elected official in charge of the elections is not also the co-chair of Coleman's campaign.
Oh, and it's not fucking Florida.
December 19, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
What the F for? Just because it's close? That makes no sense.
The vote was the vote, even if it is won by only 1. There is no reason for do-overs just because it's close. As long as the elcection itself was done properly and the results can be considered legitimate, then let the process play itself out.
December 19, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the result could most fairly be described as a statistical dead heat since the result (whoever wins) will be well within the margin of error, given that the process of counting and then recounting nearly three million votes is never going to get it perfectly right. If they did it all over again, the result could easily be different by a couple of hundred votes either way.
So there is a valid argument for a run-off, given that we'll probably never know who actually won (i.e. what the result would be if you could have read all the minds of all the voters at the moment they voted).
But it's not going to happen. There is no provision for a run-off in MN law, so the final tallies as it stands once all the votes are counted (and the law suits decided), will determine who gets to be senator, even if there is just one vote.
Oh, and by the way, go Franken!
December 19, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
this is not s survey, so there are no statistics in play. It is the actual count of the votes cast -- so a win by 70 votes is a win. Period -- no margin of error to worry about.
December 19, 2008 10:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because 2,885,555 votes were cast and the spread is going to be >75 votes. I don't have enough faith in the election system to believe that small a percentage should be acceptable in declaring a victor.
Sure it only takes a one vote edge to win, even if one billion million people voted, and I'd agree if there was absolute certainty that the count was correct and the election was ran perfectly.
I also understand that Minnesota doesn't have a run-off or re-vote option. It is what it is, and I assume you would all have the same opinions if Coleman was leading by such a margin and be ready to congratulate him on his win at the end of the process without any hard feelings and with the belief that the people's will had been done.
December 19, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will hold the same opinion no matter who wins this.
Obviously, as you and tacitust both mentioned, the vote margin is really close - within what could be considered a "margin of error". But I think we get into some pretty murky waters when we try to overturn the results of an election, which in this case, by all reasonable measures, has been conducted quite well.
A vote 2 or three months later will not have the same result, but is it a BETTER result? If voter turnout is 20% lower in the runoff, and a new candidate wins, is that better - a more accurate reflection f the will of the voters on Nov. 4? And what is the cutoff point? Do we have a 'do-over' whenever the margin is .1%, .5%, 1%? How do we know for sure what the margin of error is? All this does is open up a whole other area of questioning the validity of the results. If Minnesota had such a law, it wouldn't surprise me if the two of you wanted to find some other flaw with the revote margin ("Eh, .1% is too low, the margin should be .273, except during full moons, when statistics indicate the margin of error goes up to .3392%!!!)
The point of the election is to determine the will of the voters at a given moment in time. Unless an election was conducted in such a way that the will of the voters was obscured by poor administration or malfeasance, the results should stand. At some point, you just have to admit that the system will never be perfect, and that at the end of the day we accept the results we get if everything was done correctly and a good-faith effort was made to determine the will of the voters.
Michael Phelps won gold in one of his competitions by the thinnest of margins, beating competator Cavic by only .01 of a second. A statistical tie. I suppose you've been calling for a do-over of that amazing race as well:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0808/oly.phelps.sequence/content.1.html
December 19, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
i really don't understand why you are questioning the vote count.
each ballot has been hand counted with maximum transparency and oportunity for both sides to challenge how every single ballot was counted.
if you have a revote and the result is just as close, do you just keep going through the process until you get a large enough margin to satisfy some other arbitrary margin of victory other than one more vote than the next closest vote-getter?? where is that arbitrary line drawn?? when does it get drawn??
elections ought to be decided under the rules that are in place when the process begins. there is nothing fair and democratic about changing the rules after the fact. (nor is it fair and democratic to change the rules during the course of the election as my own state of michigan did for the primary.)
December 20, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
"and I assume you would all have the same opinions if Coleman was leading by such a margin and be ready to congratulate him on his win at the end of the process without any hard feelings and with the belief that the people's will had been done."
Just curious: Were you advocating for a revote immediately after the election, or only after Senator Franken had taken the lead?
December 20, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jonze, WTF?
Do over? For what purpose? Close elections are just that close, but there is a winner who gained a vote majority and all that has to be done is to go through the arduous process.
It appears from the process that the most contested challenges are done and that once the pool of reversed challenges are included a reversal by hand recount changed the votes by 266, which by my experience all who call for do overs just don't like the outcome.
Now the fighting goes to determining two other human errors in the process, possible double counting and probable disenfranchisement due to clerical errors in processing absentee ballots.
So work through and account for it...If Coleman gains a handful of double counting mistakes subtract...if there are 1600 uncounted lawfully submitted ballots---count them.
When it is done....if Coleman or Franken has a one vote victory, seat them.
Watching the process I think it has been handled pretty fairly and I even applaud the Supreme Court of MN to force the two parties plus the Canvass Board to work it out regarding the absentee ballots. These lawyers are bound to be officers of the court and it will be plain to see if they go too partisan and thereby sanctioned accordingly.
December 20, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Say good night, Norm.
December 19, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the best thing is to count all the absentee ballots that were wrongfully excluded, eliminate any double counted ballots, andthen seat Al Franken when he wins by about 300 or 400 votes.
My sixth sense tells me that the GOP apparatus in MN cheated Franken out of a lot more votes than the numbers reflect. In particular, I am thinking of the absentee ballots which all sides did NOT agree were purely clerical error, but which should still be counted because America is a free society, and in a free society, minor, inconsequential errors in filling out ballots (which do involve the imprimatur of probable fraud) should not stand in the way of the exercise of the most fundamental right that exists in democracy -- the right to vote.
I think yet another positive aspect of Obama's election is that the federal government can finally pass some voting legislation that, in addition to having a title or name that implies real reform in making sure that voters are not deprived of their right to vote -- but actually does exactly the opposite (like the GOP sponsored voting legislation 5 years ago) -- actually does involve protecting voters, and especially minority voters, first time voters, and others (who tend to vote for Democrats, oddly enough) who are espcially vulnerable to GOP vote suppression shenanigans. Amen to that.
December 19, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
That parenthetical in the second paragraph should have read "(which do NOT involve the imprimatur of probable fraud)".
December 19, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eh, let's not go down the same route as the loons on the right when they say the election is being stolen from them. Both sides are working hard to get the most favorable outcome for them, but it's all been within the bounds of legality from what I've seen so far. I don't think there's been any systematic fraud in this election, just good old fashioned hardball politics.
And Franken is winning, thank goodness.
December 19, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may all be legal, but only one side proposed that the other concede without the legally mandated recount, and only one side has been trying to prevent the counting of absentee ballots that were incorrectly rejected. Franken is definitely holding the moral high ground here.
December 19, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Star Tribune reports that Sen Frankenstein is up by TWO HUNDRED FIFTY VOTES at the close of business today
So much for Eric's Timely Election returns ;p
December 19, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I think they should just settle it with a good bout of mud wrestling. I'm a big supporter of Al Franken's and he would whip Coleman's butt hands down!!!
December 19, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's Andy Kaufman when you need him. The election could have been settled if Andy called out Norm's wife to a wrestling match and she accepted. Well, he's dead and she'd probably kick his ass anyway.
December 20, 2008 1:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
This was an election about which I felt really disappointed on election nt. I was very excited about having Al in the senate, a very funny but articulate true progressive. And when have we ever had one of those. I've been so heartened by the discussion and projections of the recount (thanks Nate), but again the actual process at first seemed to be going in the wrong direction. Finally Al is ahead and apparently is going to win.
Now it seems even more important to have Al in the senate, what with all the MSM, blue dogs, Bayh and his idiot followers and their "center right nation" bull crap. Also given the rather less than progressive cabinet and things like the Warren fiasco, it should be fabulous fun having Al speaking out on the tube if the MSM actually puts him on. (Not that I'm that upset by Obama's picks for his cabinet in general) I do believe Al will be invited on the squawk shows as a DEM spokesman even if he does upset the "Village" because he's just too damned entertaining to keep him off.
"Because he's good enough, he's smart enough, and doggone it people like him!"
December 19, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we there yet ?
December 20, 2008 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
As someone who cast my one ballot for Al Franken on Election Day, in a precinct where the on-site scanner results on Election Night were the same as the results of the recount, and where no ballots were challenged, (home to the above average Minnesotans) I really wonder about the conclusions of those who keep advocating we change our state laws, and have Re-do elections.
Look -- an Election system that uses paper ballots scanned in the precinct will always have a very small error rate. Scanners won't count a few votes -- not enough ink applied to the oval for instance, they won't disqualify ballots where some types of identifying marks are on the ballot, and they might not catch all overvotes, or odd-ball commentary such as Lizard People write in's that cancel out intended votes. But we know, having used this system state-wide since our reforms in the late 1980's, that it accurately counts all but about one in a thousand votes. When the margin of difference is less than that, we apply a much more thorough and accurate counting method to those same ballots, it is called a hand recount -- and the outcome is a much closer count in the end. In a hand recount we apply State Statute Law -- we disqualify ballots with identifying marks, we count most of the ink challenged marks inside the oval, and yes we find some system errors that we would not have discovered otherwise. Hopefully this leads the legislature to do what it has done in the past -- look for the causes of problems in the system, and write clear statutes to fix them.
This time around I believe we have identified one major matter that needs change -- and my guess is that it would apply to other states as well. Over the past few cycles we have gradually introduced "early voting" simply by eliminating some of the rules we had for "absentee voting" without considering that they are different things. Our old absentee rules required pre-application, required one affirm one would be out of the county on election day, or, that you were sufficently disabled you could not come to the polls, or would be so on election day (surgery scheduled that day, for instance.) This kept the universe of absentee voters quite small, and the process of applying for an absentee ballot sufficently complex that relatively few used the system.
But in recent years we have modified these rules and allowed early voting at the Board of Elections, with none of the qualifications in place. However we have kept the rules regarding the acceptance of an absentee ballot in place for this "new Class" of voters, "Early Voters". We see the result of this in those piles of disqualified ballots. Not just those in the 5th pile which are now ordered to be counted (about 1600 state wide) but probabaly thousands of others in the other four piles which were disqualified under Statute Law. Ironically -- or perhaps not so ironically, the campaign's efforts to get people to "early vote" may have had the effect of disqualifying thousands of voters and their votes.
What we now need to do -- assuming we want to retain early voting -- is to write statute law that has the effect of equalizing the probability that an early voter will have the same success having their ballot accepted as a voter who stands in line at the polls on election day. This is one big insight to come to light as a result of the "Great Minnesota Recount" -- and it probably applies to about 25 other states in the country that allow early voting.
December 20, 2008 7:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sara:
Living WI which was refreshing in that it had day of the election registration and now CO which still has 30-day out registration but heavy emphasis on early voting---either poll place (one week out) or Mail In Ballot (permanent or election cycle) where over 50% of the vote was cast before election day it was refreshing and inclusive.
For progressives it really up'ed the voter participation, but there were identified voter suppression efforts especially by GOP Clerks who found ways to clerically make mistakes or not send out ballots.
My opinion is that America should look at best practices across the States: Paper ballot like MN is the best for recount and holding down systematic fraud at electronic counting. Day of election registration option where disenfranchising citizens because of arbitrary residence dating is ridiculous and those who desire to vote could go to polling places. But in the whole Oregon's all MIB for previously registered voters also is quite inclusive. My only improvement is to have more hand receipts where voters can personally drop off ballots up to election day. If a citizen does not receive their ballot by a week before the election day they must go to a polling place and get a replacement but by design all are paper ballots.
The object should be non partisan and hold that we want to have the most people voting to determine the public's will. That counting should be done with independent forms of validation to certify the results and when there is a 5% or closer election a full hand recount conducted.
Furthermore audits should be done at local levels and if too many instances of questionable processes discovered an investigation conducted.
December 20, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
As someone who cast my one ballot for Al Franken on Election Day, in a precinct where the on-site scanner results on Election Night were the same as the results of the recount, and where no ballots were challenged, (home to the above average Minnesotans) I really wonder about the conclusions of those who keep advocating we change our state laws, and have Re-do elections.
Look -- an Election system that uses paper ballots scanned in the precinct will always have a very small error rate. Scanners won't count a few votes -- not enough ink applied to the oval for instance, they won't disqualify ballots where some types of identifying marks are on the ballot, and they might not catch all overvotes, or odd-ball commentary such as Lizard People write in's that cancel out intended votes. But we know, having used this system state-wide since our reforms in the late 1980's, that it accurately counts all but about one in a thousand votes. When the margin of difference is less than that, we apply a much more thorough and accurate counting method to those same ballots, it is called a hand recount -- and the outcome is a much closer count in the end. In a hand recount we apply State Statute Law -- we disqualify ballots with identifying marks, we count most of the ink challenged marks inside the oval, and yes we find some system errors that we would not have discovered otherwise. Hopefully this leads the legislature to do what it has done in the past -- look for the causes of problems in the system, and write clear statutes to fix them.
This time around I believe we have identified one major matter that needs change -- and my guess is that it would apply to other states as well. Over the past few cycles we have gradually introduced "early voting" simply by eliminating some of the rules we had for "absentee voting" without considering that they are different things. Our old absentee rules required pre-application, required one affirm one would be out of the county on election day, or, that you were sufficently disabled you could not come to the polls, or would be so on election day (surgery scheduled that day, for instance.) This kept the universe of absentee voters quite small, and the process of applying for an absentee ballot sufficently complex that relatively few used the system.
But in recent years we have modified these rules and allowed early voting at the Board of Elections, with none of the qualifications in place. However we have kept the rules regarding the acceptance of an absentee ballot in place for this "new Class" of voters, "Early Voters". We see the result of this in those piles of disqualified ballots. Not just those in the 5th pile which are now ordered to be counted (about 1600 state wide) but probabaly thousands of others in the other four piles which were disqualified under Statute Law. Ironically -- or perhaps not so ironically, the campaign's efforts to get people to "early vote" may have had the effect of disqualifying thousands of voters and their votes.
What we now need to do -- assuming we want to retain early voting -- is to write statute law that has the effect of equalizing the probability that an early voter will have the same success having their ballot accepted as a voter who stands in line at the polls on election day. This is one big insight to come to light as a result of the "Great Minnesota Recount" -- and it probably applies to about 25 other states in the country that allow early voting.
December 20, 2008 7:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Get back to me when the election is over and someone officially won.
December 20, 2008 8:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please, please, please let this thing be over! By the way, when WILL it end? When will it become official? Nobody seems to know. I realize that both sides will go to court, but WHEN will a winner be declared? (Meanwhile, isn't it nice to watch Coleman's apparent victory slip away!)
December 20, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I am game for a time-line estimate.
Monday the 21st is devoted to adding back in the challenged ballots that were withdrawn from the Canvass Board. These revert to decisions called at the County level. There are nearly 5000 of them. The Spread Sheet must also reflect all decisions called by the Canvass Board. If they missed anything that needs review, it can be done.
Tuesday they will hear Coleman's duplicate ballot appeal and Franken's answer. I suspect they have already decided this one, they will keep the count as it stands from the County Canvass. If someone wants to further discuss the issue, it would require evidence, and the Canvass Board is not a court. It would have to come up after the vote is certified in an Election Challenge Contest. (more on this later)
They will consider how to count the wrongly excluded absentee ballots, meeting the Supreme Court ordered deadline of December 31, at 4:00PM for both final sorting and counting. The Court ordered a process acceptable to both candidates, the SOS, the Canvass Board, and County Election Administrators. I don't know, but I assume that both candidates have been asked for process outlines, I assume the Attorney General will be asked to consider the State Law -- and the practical matters such as when, where and how to will be offered by the County Administrators -- and they will have to decide and agree on process in this meeting on Tuesday.
Wed. Christmas Holidays --
December 31, 4:00 PM -- results from Court ordered counting of absentee ballots due in SOS office. January 1 is a Holiday, so results could be held till January second before they are posted officially -- I assume the Canvass Board will meet on Jan 2. They will then add in the Absentee Ballots to the existing overall total.
They are under Supreme Court orders not to certify before December 31 at 4:00 -- but they could do this on the 2nd.
If one candidate wants to contest the election process State Law provides for a seven day period following certification for a three judge panel in Ramsey County to take up the Contest. After that it is too late.
The new Senate is sworn in January 6th -- so it is quite possible we might make the swearing in by four days. If there is a contest, it will take till the end of the week for papers to be filed -- and then a judicial process that could take weeks.
I will be more certain after we see the final recount numbers this Monday, once they add back in all the withdrawn challenges and revert to County calls on them. Who is ahead and by how much?
Then once we get the Absentee counts on the 31st, and those get added in -- we will know who is ahead and by how much. Coleman has two issues to raise in a contest post certification -- the lost ballots from 3/1 (I don't think he'll get anywhere with this) and his duplicate argument. He has to estimate whether he could make up the margin with these arguments -- and how much he wants to spend on Lawyers on this thing if he is behind.
My own sense is that Franken will get between 100 and 200 extra votes in the 5th pile of absentees, so he could have 250-400 more votes as of Jan 2 than Coleman -- and that might be a very nice time for Normie to call it a good fight, and retire his side.
Hopefully this answers your question. Old saying, "Haste makes Waste" -- and it applies to elections. When they are close you do the count according to all the rules and laws, and you take all the time you need to do the process right.
We don't cut corners in Minnesota. And after all it is Howling Blizzard Weather and Iced in Winter, what better to do except driveway shoveling, than recount an election!!! The Seed Catalogues should show up in the mail about the time Fran and Al go down to Washington.
Well, I suppose we could all go ice fishing.
December 20, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
A bit off-topic, but did anyone see that Michael
Connell, who may have had a hand in stealing the Ohio election for the GOP in 2004, died in a plane crash yesterday? It seems that at one point he had asked for protection after receiving threats.
December 20, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because of a couple of hundred votes in Florida in 2000, the country has endured eight years of purgatory. I think we can live with Franken taking Coleman's seat because of a couple of hundred votes in Minnesota, or even a few dozen, if it comes to that.
December 20, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The TV news pundits are all saying that Al Franken won't have won a "mandate".
Up to their usual cheesy cheapness, but of course I fail to see how that cheap word matters at all, see as how and when Al Franken’s caucuses with Dems, those cheesy words will not make his vote any less influential or irrelevant. Another example of how corporate owned media has gone utterly to the dogs.
December 20, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stupid them, me again. It is Obama who won something of a Mandate, being that he got 53% of the Presidential Popular Vote, and is way way over 270 in the Electorial count.
All Al Franken is about is the Minnesota Senate Seat, (sometimes called the Wellstone Seat, sometimes the Gene McCarthy Seat) and if he only gets it by a few dozen votes, so be it. Six years from now he will be defending a record, and that should be a much easier race.
December 21, 2008 8:13 AM | Reply | Permalink