Coleman vs. Franken recount

[Harlowe]

Well this one is neck in neck the whole way. I keep hearing one pulling ahead of the other. This race is the least interesting to me because I can't stand either candidate.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/featur ... d_ballots/

HOWEVER .....I do feel some love for this ballot.

[Partha]

It's only interesting because it's part of the triple bank shot Democrats need for a coalition of 60. Much love for that ballot, tho.

[Klast Brell]

Ive been following some of that here in Minnesota. Lawyers from both teams will be looking at every single ballot. They are permitted to challenge any ballot for any reason. Minnesota law says that intent of the voter needs to be determined to be determined. But I have a feeling we are going to have echoes of hanging chads. But now its going to be partially filled in bubbles. If some voter put an x through a bubble next to candidate A's name, lawyers for candidate B will claim the voter did not intend to vote for that race at all. Or that the voter was crossing out the bubble for the candidate they did not like.

I could be tinfoil hatting it here, but It strikes me that lawyers have a professional responsibility to fight for their client. It would not surprise me if they challenged any ballot they can on the flimsiest of excuses.

[Harlowe]

Seems like Coleman's lawyers are challenging 50% more than Franken's. Just an observation so far from what I've read.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I could be tinfoil hatting it here, but It strikes me that lawyers have a professional responsibility to fight for their client. It would not surprise me if they challenged any ballot they can on the flimsiest of excuses.

You are correct on the assumption (it ain't tinfoil). Lawyers are required to pursue the interests of their clients, regardless of the larger picture.

[Alluveal]

Oh c'mon. Who doesn't want Stuart Smalley in office?

[Klast Brell]

After day 2 of the recount
The Franken Camp has challenged 374 ballots.
The Coleman camp has challenged 360 ballots.
The number of challenged ballots now greatly exceeds the number of accepted votes that separate the 2 candidates.
Here is an example of a challenged ballot

[Ddrak]

That's a reasonable one to contest imo. Person should have asked for another ballot.

Dd

[Mukik]

Is minnesota filled with retards? I filled in a ballot vote after putting in a 13 hour shift @ work. The guy clearly told me to make sure I only marked the one I wanted to vote for , cause if I made any mistakes, its thrown out. If someone wants to vote for lizard people, let them vote for them. Write in whomever they want, and as long as that bubble isnt filled out, its not getting a vote. Fill in both ballots and that causes them to reject the ballot. This clearly shows they either had assholes running the polling places or voting. I find it truely appauling that people dont take voting that seriously when 300 years ago, it was left mostly for the elite to decide the fates of governments.

[Harlowe]

You'd find the same exact thing in any state that had a hand recount.

[Klast Brell]

That's a reasonable one to contest imo. Person should have asked for another ballot.

Dd

You would make an excellent lawyer Dd. Request that ballot thrown out because it was not filled in correctly.
Minnesota state law counts the intent of the voter, not the method of filling out the ballot. Circling a name, underlining it, marking one then crossing it out and marking the other. If the intent can be determined, the vote counts. Seems simple? There is plenty of room to argue what the intent of the voter might have been.

Here is the whole law: Pay special attention to Subdivision 13. Election laws prohibit voters from putting distinguishing marks on their ballots, and marked ballots are declared invalid, for good reason: uniquely marked ballots can be identified later, allowing a criminal to pay the voter for voting "correctly" or punish him for voting "incorrectly". Both campaigns are claiming stray marks on ballots are intentional identifying marks just like a marked deck of cards. But how do you know the intention of a stray mark? How can you tell the difference between an innocent mark and a nefarious one?

204C.22 DETERMINING VOTER'S INTENT.
Subdivision 1.Ballot valid if intent determinable.
A ballot shall not be rejected for a technical error that does not make it impossible to determine the voter's intent. In determining intent the principles contained in this section apply.

Subd. 2.From face of ballot only.
Intent shall be ascertained only from the face of the ballot.

Subd. 3.Votes for too many candidates.
If a voter places a mark (X) beside the names of more candidates for an office than are to be elected or nominated, the ballot is defective with respect only to that office. No vote shall be counted for any candidate for that office, but the rest of the ballot shall be counted if possible. At a primary, if a voter has not indicated a party preference and places a mark (X) beside the names of candidates of more than one party on the partisan ballot, the ballot is totally defective and no votes on it shall be counted. If a voter has indicated a party preference at a primary, only votes cast for candidates of that party shall be counted.

Subd. 3a.Votes yes and no.
If a voter votes both yes and no on a question, no vote may be counted for that question, but the rest of the ballot must be counted if possible.

Subd. 4.Name written in proper place.
If a voter has written the name of an individual in the proper place on a general or special election ballot a vote shall be counted for that individual whether or not the voter makes a mark (X) in the square opposite the blank.

Subd. 4a.Write-in vote for candidate team.
A write-in vote cast for a candidate for governor without a write-in vote for a candidate for lieutenant governor must be counted as a vote for the candidate team including the lieutenant governor candidate selected by that candidate for governor.

Subd. 5.Name written on primary ballot.
If a voter has written the name of an individual on a primary or special primary ballot, a vote shall not be counted for that office.

Subd. 6.Mark out of place.
If a mark (X) is made out of its proper place, but so near a name or space as to indicate clearly the voter's intent, the vote shall be counted.

Subd. 7.All written names or marks counted up to limit.
If a number of individuals are to be elected to the same office, the election judges shall count all names written in and all printed names with (X) marks in squares opposite them, not exceeding the whole number to be elected. When fewer names than the number to be elected are marked with an (X) or written in, only the marked or written in names shall be counted. When more names than the number to be elected are marked or written in, the ballot is defective with respect to that office and no vote shall be counted for that office.

Subd. 8.Misspelling; abbreviations.
Misspelling or abbreviations of the names of write-in candidates shall be disregarded if the individual for whom the vote was intended can be clearly ascertained from the ballot.

Subd. 9.Votes for only some offices or questions determined.
If the voter's choice for only some of the offices or questions can be determined from a ballot, the ballot shall be counted for those offices or questions only.

Subd. 10.Different marks.
If a voter uniformly uses a mark other than (X) which clearly indicates an intent to mark a name or to mark yes or no on a question, and the voter does not use (X) anywhere else on the ballot, a vote shall be counted for each candidate or response to a question marked. If a voter uses two or more distinct marks, such as (X) and some other mark, a vote shall be counted for each candidate or response to a question marked, unless the ballot is marked by distinguishing characteristics that make the entire ballot defective as provided in subdivision 13.

Subd. 11.Attempted erasures.
If the names of two candidates have been marked, and an attempt has been made to erase or obliterate one of the marks, a vote shall be counted for the remaining marked candidate. If an attempt has been made to obliterate a write-in name a vote shall be counted for the remaining write-in name or marked candidate.

Subd. 12.Soil; defacement.
A ballot shall not be rejected merely because it is slightly soiled or defaced.

Subd. 13.Identifying ballot.
If a ballot is marked by distinguishing characteristics in a manner making it evident that the voter intended to identify the ballot, the entire ballot is defective.

Subd. 14.No votes for certain offices.
If the number of candidates for an office is equal to the number of individuals to be elected to that office, and the voter has not marked any name, no vote shall be counted for any candidate for that office.

Subd. 15.Blank ballot for one or more offices valid.
If no name or response to a question is marked and no name is written in, the ballot is blank with respect to that office or question. A ballot that is blank with respect to one or more offices or questions is not defective.

[Klast Brell]

The recount is almost 80% done and the number of challenged ballots is over 3000. The unchallenged margin between the candidates is about 200. Both sides are still challenging about an equal amount of ballots. But as if that were not enough there are still legal battles over batches of ballots that have gone missing. Absentee ballots that were not submitted properly. and the ever popular accusations of partisanship on the part of the election officials.