(Minnesota) Recount trial: Judges rule thousands of ballots can be considered

[sabra]

Source: Star Tribune

The court order indicates that all absentee ballots that complied with state law should be counted, along with those where errors occurred through no fault of the voter.

Nearly 4,800 rejected absentee ballots may be considered in the Senate recount trial, according to a ruling from the three-judge panel hearing the dispute between Republican Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken.

The court order indicates that all absentee ballots that complied with state law should be counted, along with those where errors occurred through no fault of the voter.

But the order limits Coleman to presenting evidence on those ballots specifically disclosed to the Franken legal team by January 22.

Coleman lawyer Fritz Knaak said he believes that the Coleman camp disclosed some 4,800 such ballots by the deadline, and Franken spokeswoman Jess McIntosh said that was also her understanding.

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/38890229.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUac8HEaDiaMDCinchO7DU

[EFerrari]

1. Is Coleman hoping Al will run out of money? What's the deal here?

[MineralMan]

2. This will probably benefit Franken, overall.

We shall see.

[Mz Pip]

3. Where id these ballots come from?

Why were they rejected in the first place?

I vote absentee all the time and don't like to think that my vote would not be counted.

[happygoluckytoyou]

6. in a related story...medical miracle...man pulls 50000 ballots out of his own ass!!!

hope the son of a bitch got a papercut

[GoesTo11]

11. From TPM

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/court-rules-on-franken-effort-to-limit-colemans-evidence-yes-and-no.php

And it turns out they've split the difference. Coleman's lawyers have alternately been talking about looking at all 11,000 remaining absentee ballots that have been rejected, or just looking at 4,797 of them, while Franken wants to limit Coleman to a prior list of 654.

The court is allowing Coleman to continue presenting evidence on the 4,797, which had been disclosed to the Franken camp in the summary judgment filings before the trial began. But that's it.

It's hard to tell what impact this might have. These ballots are obviously cherry-picked for votes that Coleman's people believe would break heavily his way, but it seems very unlikely that they would actually be able to get a great deal of them admitted. They've been bringing some of those same aggrieved voters to the witness stand, to plead for their ballots -- and in quite a few cases they've been total duds.

[peacetalksforall]

4. What is the Jan 22? about?

[acmavm]

5. This drek has officially become a soap opera. Enough heartbreak, hysterics,

unethical behavior, and just plain bad drama to last a lifetime.

[roguevalley]

14. it is painful isn't it. sigh.

[Ian David]

7. When ALL the votes are counted in a tight race, Democrats win. And by the Repukes' own admission...

... Democrats tend to be more "free-spirited" and "creative" in filling-out ballots. Which is why when "defective" ballots are counted according to the voter's intention, most of them will turn out to be for Democrats.

Including the ones that say "Lizard People" and "Obama!" in the margins.

[Still Sensible]

8. I believe it would be a statistical surprise

for absentee ballots to produce a Coleman win. It would seem much more likely that voters wanting to replace Coleman with either challenger would vote absentee over those that wanted to maintain the status quo. Of course, that is based on their not being a vigorous absentee voter campaign by Coleman or the GOP.

[Dinger]

10. Who Was That Guy? I THink His Name Was Nate Silver, Or Something Like That

?

[Suich]

19. Nate Silver

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

:)

[Dinger]

9. Is It Me, Or Is This Senate Race A Taboo Topic?

Seems like I hear little about it on t.v., even DU. What's up?

[struggle4progress]

12. Coleman Team Drops One Complaint: Okay, We Approved Those Votes For Franken

By Eric Kleefeld - February 3, 2009, 11:58AM
Some news out of the Minnesota trial: The Coleman legal team has now dropped another complaint from their lawsuit against the election results.

The Coleman campaign has let go of a complaint alleging that some of the 933 previously-rejected absentee ballots that were opened up on January 3 -- after both campaigns sorted through the envelopes and agreed that they were legally cast, and had been improperly tossed because of clerical errors -- were not in fact legally cast, and shouldn't have been counted.

To be blunt, this was perhaps the single worst gambit that Coleman was trying to make. Remember that all of these envelopes were declared by his own campaign to have been legally cast -- but once they were opened and revealed to have gone for Al Franken by a 176-vote margin, they suddenly became illegal and had to be picked through for potential rejection ...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/coleman-team-drops-one-complaint-okay-we-approved-those-votes-for-franken.php

[struggle4progress]

13. Coleman Lawyer Gets Called Out On Evidence -- By Judge

By Eric Kleefeld - February 3, 2009, 4:41PM

A very awkward moment just happened in the Minnesota Senate trial. Judge Kurt Marben, as opposed to a Franken lawyer, actively asked about a problem with the photocopy of an absentee ballot that Coleman lawyer Joe Friedberg was presenting, which was missing the section where a voter would list proof of residence.

Friedberg said that this was how they received the document itself from the county. This led to a very uncomfortable exchange between the lawyers, the judges and even the witness Kevin Corbid, the head elections official in Washington County, lasting for several minutes.

Judge Denise Reilly chimed in: "The issue is it was rejected for proof of residence, and the part of the ballot showing proof of residence is the part that's been cut off." Corbid added that it was possible that the proof of residence was removed when a separate flap was torn off of the envelope, accidentally taking that section with it ...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/coleman-lawyer-gets-called-out-on-evidence----by-judge.php

[creeksneakers2]

15. This doesn't look good to me at all

Out of the 11,000 rejected absentee ballots, Coleman got to pick his favorite 4,800 for the review. No ballots chosen by Franken will be reviewed.

Wrongfully rejected ballots will be counted. There's no way to know right now how many reviewed ballots will turn out to be wrongfully rejected. But there could easily be enough to change the outcome of the election, especially since Coleman got away with cherry picking which votes to recount.

Just about everybody thought the election was in the bag for Franken but its up in the air now. Franken needs to get all rejected absentee ballots reviewed, not just the ones for Coleman.

[marshall]

16. Franken didn't pick any to leave in, he picked ones to leave out

And a lot of them got thrown out.

[creeksneakers2]

18. Franken picked 771 to be reviewed

Coleman picked almost 4,800. There is no way that anybody could have chosen ballots to leave out, because if either candidate wanted the vote reviewed and notice was filed by January 22, the vote goes to review.

[McCamy Taylor]

17. This does sound fishy. No news coverage and now a judge declares Coleman can pick.

To me it sounds like a Republican set up. They will declare a court ruling that says "Coleman won" at the same time that the news media is portraying Congressional Dems as "drunk with power" so that there is now a "compelling need" for 42 Senate Republicans to check them. The SCOTUS will decline to hear the case (basically absolving themselves of their guilt over Bush v. Gore where they stepped in, though in fact they will not be absolving themselves). And that will be that.

The only problem is that a federal judge might step in to say all the ballots must be counted if they count some of them. Who is the federal circuit judge? A Republican appointee? Someone whom the Republicans can blackmail? Is he in the bag or not?

Did Obama leave the New Hampshire seat alone, because he intends to have the DOJ step in to enforce the Voting Rights Act in Minn. if they are not counting all the votes? And he does not want to be accused of going after the 60th Democratic vote?

[kikiek]

20. It would appear the court did not agree with Coleman on much. The campaigns ID the votes they

think were improperly rejected. As usual Franken is honest and including only those that they believe were. Coleman is shooting in the dark again including as many as possible to make it appear he is being screwed. The counties said they went over them 3 times. I doubt many will be counted. One county that leans Coleman may have not included some improperly because they didn't interpret the laws right, but it won't be enough to overcome Franken's lead. All smoke and mirrors again in my opinion. I believe Coleman wants to bankrupt Franken. Coleman is very bitter over his loss, and this has become malicious in my opinion. He will continue the fight as long as his money holds out and the courts agree to hear it. The Republicans have no shame they are encouraging it.

[Doctor_J]

23. Eventually some of *'s corrupt judges will give the seat to Coleman

You can kiss this one good-bye

[Deja Q]

40. Agreed. ALL the ballots. And make the candidate who said it's a waste of money pay for it.

[Bluebear]

21. Norm, the votes have been counted & recounted. Don't be a Sore Loserman.

[Doctor_J]

22. Obama should have demanded Coleman's concession as part of the NH travesty

Dems have battered spouse syndrome.

[w4rma]

24. I just want to know if these were cherry picked districts or if these were from all districts. (nt)

[bluesmail]

25. Coleman wants to put Al Franken into huge debt and is doing so

by using stall tactics. I donated to Al Frankens election fight. I don't live in Minnesota. I really want to see a 60 seat filibuster proof senate.

[Mister Ed]

32. Bless you for donating to Al. Folks, here's the link:

https://secure.alfranken.com/page/contribute

[Lint Head]

26. When you count 'all' of the votes the Democrat always wins.

:dem:

[josh paleo]

27. Don't know how many of the 4800

will be counted.

[josh paleo]

28. I'm surprised Obama hasn't asked Franken to concede

For the sake of bipartisanship.

[Mr. Sparkle]

29. Unbelievable, so the court over turns its earlier decision on how the recount should proceed.

nothing like moving the goal posts in extra time. spineless #@*&%$'s

[kikiek]

30. No...It is all fluff. Here is fivethirtyeight.com's update. Been waiting for it and it's as expected

UPDATE: The Court has also ruled, apparently, that the 4,800 absentee ballots Coleman wants to have counted will be held to a much higher burden of proof. Essentially, those ballots will be presumed to be guilty until proven innocent, and will have to be advocated for one at a time by the Coleman campaign, rather than being opened summarily and counted in bulk. This will make Coleman's rate of success very, very, very low, as opposed to merely very, very low. As Talking Points Memo notes, however, this process could take a very long time to complete and could continue to the delay the seating of a Senator Franken -- which may be Coleman's principal objective in the first place.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/02/absentee-ballots-unlikely-to-save.html

[Mr. Sparkle]

33. but doesn't Coleman need to advocate 300 of these to gain victory.Thats hardly an insurmountable tas...

..k. The recount procedure was agreed by all parties just after the election and now the rules have been changed at the last minute because the professional election stealer's don't like the outcome.

I am really disappointed by the courts decision. The Franken campaign should appeal.

[kikiek]

35. You aren't paying attention then. It isn't looking good for Coleman.

[kikiek]

31. Good news and clarificaiton on this.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/minnesota-election-court-denies-coleman-motion-to-count-4500-ballots.php
Minnesota Election Court Nixes Coleman's Bush v. Gore Gambit, Denies Motion To Count 4,500 Ballots
By Eric Kleefeld - February 3, 2009, 9:03PM

The Minnesota election court has just handed down a major ruling, completely denying Norm Coleman's motion for summary judgment that would have opened up and counted a set of roughly 4,500 rejected absentee ballots that his campaign insists were wrongly rejected and ought to be counted.

Earlier today, the court similarly rejected Franken's attempt to have the ballots set aside entirely and to limit Coleman to a pool of 654 ballots, which at the time the Coleman camp was hailing as a major victory that will ensure votes are counted. But it turns out it's not that easy.

[Mister Ed]

34. Dupe - please delete: Recount trial: Judges rule thousands of ballots can be considered

Source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune


The court order applies to about 4,800 rejected absentee ballots and indicates that any that complied with state law should be counted.

Nearly 4,800 rejected absentee ballots may be reconsidered in the U.S. Senate recount trial, after the presiding three-judge panel issued a ruling today defining boundaries for the proceeding.

The court granted Democrat Al Franken’s request to limit the universe of ballots that Republican Norm Coleman can seek to have counted, rejecting Coleman’s attempt to have about 11,000 rejected absentee ballots reconsidered. But Franken had asked the judges to limit the review to only the 650 ballots cited by Coleman when he filed his lawsuit last month challenging the recount.

With Franken holding a 225-vote lead after the recount results were certified, the 4,800 ballots that may be reconsidered would appear to be enough to put the ultimate outcome in doubt.

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/38890229.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUX

[sinkingfeeling]

36. 5000 rejected Minn. ballots get another look

Source: MSNBC.com

ST. PAUL, Minn. - The judges in Minnesota's Senate election trial threw Republican Norm Coleman a lifeline on Tuesday, opening the door to adding nearly 5,000 rejected absentee ballots to a race that Democrat Al Franken leads by just 225 votes.

It wasn't a total victory for Coleman, who had wanted the judges to look at about 11,000 such ballots. He also has to prove the absentees were unfairly rejected, and it's likely that Franken would gain votes from the pile too.


The judges said they would look at two categories of rejected absentees: those where it appeared the voter had met the legal requirements, and those where voters might have run afoul of the law through no fault of their own.


Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29012799/

---

Looks like this will take months, since each ballot must be 'defended' as being valid by Coleman.

[ogneopasno]

37. At this point, he's doing this to keep Franken from being seated. He doesn't think he's going to be

declared the winner by the court. Coleman just wants to hamstring the Senate while Obama is trying to get all this work done. Coleman is a craven asshole.

[aquart]

38. Yeah, but I'm still in favor of counting votes.

And if too many are getting rejected, someone needs to find a way to prevent that from happening again.

When people vote, we should be able to have confidence that our vote counts.

[Deja Q]

39. Didn't he try to do an end run around a little thing called STATE LAW? He needs to drop out. Now.

And as it was Norm who said it was a waste of taxpayer money to begin with, why is he farting about with things *now*?

Norm lost.

And, quite frankly, he is a real hypocrite -- worse than Wellstone's "I will only run two terms" and then opt to run for a third anyway.

If Norm represents the better party, let him show it in action rather than using empty words. He needs to bow out.

Let's reform. And move on.

Lord knows Norm wouldn't do a damn thing if he had won. That was his mindset from the start; and it was a mandated law requiring recounts in the first place - Norm wanted to do an end run around state law. Trying to obstruct or run around the law? Isn't that, well, not legal? (Correct me if I'm wrong...)