Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate trial focuses on absentee processing (Franken-Coleman recount)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-30-09 07:47 PM
Original message
Senate trial focuses on absentee processing (Franken-Coleman recount)
Source: Star Tribune

A Ramsey County elections official said he believes numerous ballots that were mistakenly rejected remain uncounted.
By PAT DOYLE, pdoyle@startribune.com
Last update: January 30, 2009 - 1:41 PM

Confusion over election rules and the crush of Election Day business caused local officials to mistakenly disqualify numerous ballots that remain uncounted to this day, an elections expert testified Friday in the courtroom contest over Minnesota's U.S. Senate recount ...

... some new voters put their registration form inside the secrecy envelope containing their absentee ballot, where elections officials overlooked the card and then rejected the ballot as coming from an unregistered voter, he said.

In Ramsey County, Mansky said he believes 62 rejected absentee ballots that were not tallied by the Canvassing Board should have been counted ...

But some of the remaining rejected ballots were vetoed by the Coleman and Franken campaigns. The Minnesota Supreme Court, in ordering a review of rejected absentee ballot envelopes, required agreement by county elections officials and the two campaigns for any of them to be opened and counted. While the counties identified 1,346 mistaken rejects, they and the two campaigns agreed on only 933.



Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/38701592.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-30-09 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. So what? Coleman's already cheated. He should be disqualified for entering evidence that was
tainted. They should have thrown the book at him the moment the case started. He's totally jerking the judges' collective chains.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-30-09 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Coleman's election trial fizzling
By Emily Kaiser in Franken vs. Coleman
Friday, Jan. 30 2009 @ 8:33AM

... Thursday had some great highlights not to be missed. Coleman has been calling witnesses to discuss ballots that were improperly rejected. Unfortunately Coleman's campaign didn't really do their research. These witnesses were supposed to be the main focal point of his trial: proving how many sad voters had their ballots tossed for no good reason.

Talk about a flop. Ramsey County elections director Joe Mansky testified Thursday and said outside of the court room that three of the voters Coleman brought to testify didn't even cast valid ballots ...

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2009/01/colemans_electi_2.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. These judges should have thrown his backside out of court. They've been way too good to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC