Rusty silver linings

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Which is what the Supreme Court, in effect, suggested he do.

Yep. I suggest he save his money.

Perhaps you did, but you really ought to consider dialing down the jackass act.

Make you a deal. You make an effort to say something intelligent, and I won't mock it.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Yep. I suggest he save his money.

Make you a deal. You make an effort to say something intelligent, and I won't mock it.

Liar.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Liar.

Do I go with the rubber/glue defense on this one? I am not familiar with the playground rules of Tex School.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Do I go with the rubber/glue defense on this one? I am not familiar with the playground rules of Tex School.

We've really devolved from the topic here.

You've made it clear you prefer to be a jerk. Since you have a shiny new message board now, I'm asking you politely to do it there, and steer clear of my threads here. In case I'm not being clear enough for you: please don't reply to my posts any longer. I'm going to forbear replying to yours.

[Tex]

Here's a new column at the WSJ on the Minnesota situation and how it parallels the suspicious circumstances of the 2004 Washington governor's race.

The Dems are simply better at cheating in a close election than Republicans are. I'm not sure how to fix that, other than to beat them outside the margin of error.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123068520570944301.html

A snippet:

During the recount process [in Washington], five counties found new, uncounted, unsecured ballots and added them into their totals. King County officials admitted publicly that ballot reconciliation reports were falsified in an attempt to conceal variations between the number of votes counted and the number of voters who voted (two elections workers were disciplined as a result).

By the end, 3,539 votes more than the number of voters who voted were tabulated. Four other swing counties provided an additional 4,880 mystery ballots. Ms. Gregoire was the victor by a margin of 133 votes.

That margin -- 133 votes -- happens to be the same number of ballots that Minneapolis election officials are currently missing. The initial vote tally in one Democrat-leaning precinct counted 133 more ballots than officials have been able to find for the Senate recounts. The Minnesota canvassing board decided on Dec. 12 to allow Minneapolis simply to ignore the recount and go with the original number. This provided a 46-vote boost for Mr. Franken, about the same as his current projected lead. The board also "requested" that counties reconsider rejected absentee ballots, a new and novel part of the recount procedure that is also expected to favor Mr. Franken.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

We've really devolved from the topic here.

You've made it clear you prefer to be a jerk. Since you have a shiny new message board now, I'm asking you politely to do it there, and steer clear of my threads here. In case I'm not being clear enough for you: please don't reply to my posts any longer. I'm going to forbear replying to yours.

Alas, I haven't gone to the new message board and don't intend to. So, it's just you and me here! If you don't like it, hit ignore. Otherwise, happy reading.

As for the silly article you linked to above:

"That margin -- 133 votes -- happens to be the same number of ballots that Minneapolis election officials are currently missing. The initial vote tally in one Democrat-leaning precinct counted 133 more ballots than officials have been able to find for the Senate recounts. The Minnesota canvassing board decided on Dec. 12 to allow Minneapolis simply to ignore the recount and go with the original number. This provided a 46-vote boost for Mr. Franken, about the same as his current projected lead. The board also "requested" that counties reconsider rejected absentee ballots, a new and novel part of the recount procedure that is also expected to favor Mr. Franken."

That is about the dumbest conclusion the author had available. "Let's see- 133 vote difference in Washington, and that may have involved fraud. WAIT! There is also a 133 vote difference here! Because all elections with a 133 vote difference involve fraud, based on my sample size of 1, THIS election involves fraud too! Yipee! My editors will love this find."

[Tex]

Republicans may filibuster any attempt to seat Franken, absent a certificate of election.

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/cor...009-01-02.html

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Republicans may filibuster any attempt to seat Franken, absent a certificate of election.

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/cor...009-01-02.html

I sure hope they do. What a political disaster that would be.

[Tex]

Franken looks poised to be declared the victor under a cloud of questionable tactics. The WSJ catalogues the missteps and inconsistencies that Franken appears to have exploited.

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.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Franken looks poised to be declared the victor under a cloud of questionable tactics. The WSJ catalogues the missteps and inconsistencies that Franken appears to have exploited.



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html

Franken didn't want to "shut the process down." He wanted a statewide recount of all absentee ballots. Guess who said no? Coleman. Coleman then asked for a recount of only those ballots in counties which were heavily Republican. Talk about questionable tactics. He should have learned from Gore that those tactics are a bad idea.

Coleman's other arguments are also without merit. He gets hot under the collar about the 100+ votes that were counted on election day, and then lost, and then allowed to remain counted, arguing that those votes should be totally excluded. Why should they be excluded? In the entire state recount, the vote shift was approximately 400 votes. What are the odds that the 100+ votes that were originally counted on election day were grossly miscounted? Pretty slim. Even if you argue that 30 votes of those votes were miscounted (which would be almost incomprehensible), what are the odds that all 30 favored Franken? Furthermore, why should the voice of all of those people not be heard? Should all of their votes be excluded because of a clerical error? Of course not. Weighing a small chance that some votes will be miscounted against excluding perfectly legal votes, you must err on the side of including the perfectly legal votes. Would you not agree? Coleman would too, if he really believed in "counting every vote."

The "double counted vote" issue has also been thoroughly debunked by all but you and Coleman's attorneys. Congratulations, Senator Franken. You won fair and square and proved that Republicans can't steal them all.