Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Coleman Spokesman Declares Election 'Fatally-Flawed'

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 » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:33 AM
Original message
Coleman Spokesman Declares Election 'Fatally-Flawed'

Coleman Going For Do-Over? Spokesman Declares Election "Fatally-Flawed"
By Eric Kleefeld - February 17, 2009, 6:59PM


Today's developments in the Minnesota election trial make even clearer the extent to which the Coleman team are casting doubt on the whole election result -- indeed, they're using the sort of language that could lead one to believe they'll try for a do-over.

At Coleman lawyer/spokesman Ben Ginsberg's post-court press conference today (c/o The Uptake), unveiled this new line: "You saw today in the testimony of Scott and Carver counties, why Al Franken's current lead -- and I use that term euphemistically -- is based on illegal votes."

Ginsberg also said that the variation across the state in how absentee ballots were screened for acceptance or rejection made this "a fatally-flawed election."

The Coleman legal team used this afternoon's examination of two county election managers, Kendra Olson of Carver County and Mary Kay Kes of Scott County, to explore their this-whole-election-is-a-disaster gambit again. Olson testified that she tried to be forgiving with some of the rules for accepting or rejecting absentee ballots -- but not all.

more...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/coleman-going-for-do-over-spokesman-declares-election-fatally-flawed.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CanonRay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. A do-over? You've got to be kidding me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. I doubt that any law permits a 'do-over'. They will have to decide the election they have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hobbit709 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. Translation-He lost and I'm out of a job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal Minella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
21. Actually, according to Wiki, he's working with the "Republican-Jewish Coalition" so it seems clear
that his objective in dragging the Senatorial election results around through courtrooms is to keep Franken from being seated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. By that standard, there haven't been many fair elections ever.
Any system that leaves decisions as to whether votes count to the discretion of human beings will have "errors".

The "fatal flaw" Ginsberg rails about occurs in pretty much every election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elizfeelinggreat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
4. Fatally flawed ... for Coleman!
LMAO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Love Bug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
5. This just shows how desperate Coleman is getting
He's got nothing, so he has to attack the process. This is pure bullshit. I live and vote in Minnesota and this election and recount are about as clean and transparent as it gets. There will never be perfection in the process because too many human beings are involved, but we do get things as accurate as we can.

Time to suck it up, Coleman and be a man. You lost -- accept it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. I don't know if Coleman could walk away from it or not,
even if he wanted to. They just had a big fundraiser for Coleman's legal costs. They're throwing everything they can at keeping the Democrats from having 59.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
6. Ahh - thank god we've FINALLY gotten to his last gasp - "let's call the whole thing off".
Things should start moving faster now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
7. I don't think there's any provision in MN law that would
allow a "do-over." It's all pretty clear that if there's a dispute like this, it gets settled in the courts. No doubt, after this case is over, assuming that Franken comes out on top, Coleman will escalate to the MN Supreme Court.

It should end there. Elections are a state issue, not a federal one, even when a Senator is involved. I suppose the Coleman camp might try a SCOTUS appeal, but it's even odds whether the SCOTUS would agree to hear it. They're still feeling a bit sheepish about 2000, I do believe and, with a Democratic majority in both houses, I'm not sure they'd be willing to risk throwing an election to a Republican.

That's my take on it, anyhow. I suspect that this case will wind down in its current state in a couple more weeks, with the disputed absentee ballots being counted according to the court's ruling. I also expect Franken to gain votes in that process.

Then, it will get pushed to the MN Supreme court, which may well decide not to hear the appeal. Even if it does, that will get dealt with rather quickly. If that's the case, Franken will be certified and take his seat. A SCOTUS appeal would probably follow, but I don't believe the SCOTUS will hear it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. And SCOTUS will decline to hear it, and we're done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. Christ. I expect this shit from a sore loser candidate in some 3rd World country...
...not in the US, especially not in my state. This shit is the BS I see in elections in 3rd World countries where there is little tradition of a peaceful democratic transfer of power where the losing candidate always refuses to concede and accuses the winner of election-rigging.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. He thought the process was just fine on Nov. 5
When the early returns showed him with a slim lead, Coleman was A-OK with the election process. I wonder why he now thinks it's fatally flawed? Didn't he understand all the rules? Does he want to change things now that the process is done, and he's lost under the rules as written? My goodness! It would appear that the votes have been counted, re-counted, and re-counted again. What, is he some sort of sore loser? Where are the Brooks Brothers rioters? Stuck in Florida?

Gee Norm. Get over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
12. I did not realize UBER-TOOL Ben Ginsberg was his lawyer
Edited on Wed Feb-18-09 09:57 AM by emulatorloo
For example in 2004 he was legal adviser to Bush Campaign AND the Swifites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Ginsberg

He came to Patton Boggs in 1993 after serving for eight years as counsel to the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and the National Republican Congressional Committee.<3>

In the 2000 and 2004 election cycles, Ginsberg served as national counsel to the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign.<1> In 2000, he played a central role in the Florida recount.<1> He also represents the campaigns and leadership PACs of numerous members of the Senate and House, as well as the Republican National Committee, National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee.<1> He serves as counsel to the Republican Governors Association and has wide experience on the state legislative level from directing Republican redistricting efforts nationwide following the 1990 Census and being actively engaged in the 2001-2002 round of redistricting.<1>

In 2004, Ginsberg gave legal advice to the controversial 527 Group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Though his simultaneous activities with the "Swifties" and the 2004 Bush Campaign could be considered questionable, his activities were not illegal. Nonetheless, Ginsberg resigned as legal counsel from the Bush Campaign after his position was made public.

Ginsberg appears frequently on television commenting on law and politics.<3>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BonnieJW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
13. Coleman is the fatal flaw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
14. Ol' Norm comes off like a big crybaby with each passing hour.
There will come a day, I hope sooner rather than later, when he won't be throwing legal temper-tantrums and will just be Ex-Senator Norm Coleman.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
15. Sure, when Florida can have a 'do-over' of the 2000 Presidential vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
16. every election not fixed before hand is 'fatally flawed' to repugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
17. "Fatally flawed" - translated: benefits/done by a Dem;
"Not perfect" - translated: benefits/done by a ReRushican ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
18. It's almost March and this is still undecided. . . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
20. As an outsider looking it, it appeared to me that
this election was basically a referendum on the incumbent Coleman. Basically more than 57% voted against him. If they did a "do over" would the state's voters once again give Barkley more than 15% of the vote or would they realize that they need to back Franken in order to oust Coleman? It seems to me there would be enough sensible Minnesotans that would cross over and make sure of the outcome a second time. Or, were the majority of Barkley voters anti-Franken? Obviously, this is simply a rhetorical exercise since there is virtually no chance for a do over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
22. Taking odds here:
How much longer until Coleman just starts flopping on his belly, pounding his fists and feet against the floor?

When will he announce that he's going to hold his breath until he turns blue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-09 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
23. oh my hasn't Franken been declared the winner.
Edited on Wed Feb-18-09 11:44 AM by bdamomma
Coleman is making a true a$$ out of himself.
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 Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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