Ah yes,good old Stalin to the rescue of Al Franken and the Democrats in Minnesota. If you do not get the votes, recount until you get the desired result. This whole recount is an embarrassment to the entire US voting population. When you have 25 precincts with more votes the n voted on election day, you know there is problems with the recount.
Funny Business in Minnesota
In which every dubious ruling seems to help Al Franken.
JANUARY 5, 2009
Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victor.
Mr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on “counting every vote” wants to shut the process down. He’s getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies.
Under Minnesota law, election officials are required to make a duplicate ballot if the original is damaged during Election Night counting. Officials are supposed to mark these as “duplicate” and segregate the original ballots. But it appears some officials may have failed to mark ballots as duplicates, which are now being counted in addition to the originals. This helps explain why more than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote. By some estimates this double counting has yielded Mr. Franken an additional 80 to 100 votes.—WSJ
Loading ...
With the likelihood of Al Franken being named winner of the election in Minnesota, I wonder if Obama has plans for Franken to be the new head of the FCC or chairman of the committee to implement the UN”Fairness Doctrine”?
Carl, I agree that the results of the recount indicate a problem with the voting system mechanisms, but is it a problem with the recount, or a problem with manipulation during the original count? It seems to me that the vast majority of problems we have seen with election tally results this year (and in fact with tallies for the last several years) can be laid at the doorstep of overzealous republican officials.
One glaring example of this is the suddenly existing discrepancies between exit polls and election results. Exit polls are DIFFERENT from opinion polls in that A) they are not about opinions/inclinations/etc but about a fact: who did you just vote for? and B) Historically they have a record of being accurate and correct OVER 99% of the time.
And YET, during the 2004 and 2008 elections, the election results in several states differed VASTLY from the exit poll results. A strange coincidence? I don’t think so. Consider:
1) Bush used exactly this discrepancy between exit poll results and official election results IN THE 2004 Ukraine election to “election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency”. But somehow the same discrepancies here in the United States don’t prove the same thing? Give me a break.
2) ALL of the weird discrepancies between exit poll results and official election results in the U.S.A. happened in hotly contested states, i.e. states where Bush might have a chance.
3) ALL of the weird discrepancies between exit poll results and official election results favored Bush in the official results.
Weird coincidences? No.
Open your eyes, Carl. Your democratic republic has been hijacked. And you have been successfully sold a bill of goods.
Steve, it is interesting to me that you ignore those 25
precincts which had more votes than voters. Is there a
reason you chose to ignore that fact in this situation?
I may be uninformed on this issue, but it is my understanding
that “one vote per voter” is the law of the land. If this
is the case, more votes than voters constitutes irregularity
and is grounds for investigation, possibly criminal in nature.
It is very obvious to me that this particular election is
wholly corrupted. I have to wonder how much work ACORN did
on this particular election, since ACORN has, in other places,
registered more voters than total voting-age population.