Coleman asks that thousands of rejected absentee ballots be reconsidered statewide, after many were reconsidered and added in democratic districts. Coleman is arguing that the reconsideration of absentee ballots in only select districts is a violation of the constitutional principle of equal protection. He is pushing for a common standard to be used statewide in the recount.
After a Coleman win by several hundred votes on election day, the vote totals have flip-flopped repeatedly in both directions during the recount. Currently, Franken has a lead of 225.
This is a class blog for the students of POLSCI 426: Congressional Politics at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(164)
-
▼
January
(23)
- Partisan Now, Bipartisan LaterThe logic behind Rep...
- Sensenbrenner snubbed by democrat officials' parti...
- Michael Steele is the new GOP Chairman
- Food Stamps Over Jobs??
- Ethics or Money?
- Where Did All the Republicans Go?
- 60?
- Bring on the windfarms
- Blagojevich is out.
- "The Grand White Party"
- Senate Likely to Pass Bill on Kids' Health Insurance
- Feingold: Give appointment powers to the people
- Impeach McCain
- House passes $819 billion stimulus bill
- House likely to pass $825 billion stimulus package...
- Just a CNN Politics article about Obama's talks wi...
- An Update on the Minnesota Recount
- Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) Calls on Government to st...
- An editorial about partisanship in Obama's America
- Wisconsin's Feingold Wants to Stop Governors From ...
- Senate Seat Is Latest Stop On Bennet's Unlikely Ride
- Don’t Name That Senator
- Welcome to Spring
-
▼
January
(23)
2 comments:
I have yet to find any political analyst who gives Coleman a chance, and I think I speak for many (of all party preferences) that I'm looking forward to this ordeal being finished.
Yeah. I'm not sure who your "analysts" are. The last thing I would ever say is that there is any sort of obvious outcome to this messy process...it's still very much ongoing. The Coleman campaign is willing to take it all the way to the supreme court.
Essentially:
Coleman already won by 215 votes on election day. The slim margin meant that a recount was automatically mandatory by state law.
The lack of uniform standards for the recount process has resulted in hundreds of new votes entered into consideration that were not originally. At this particular point in the recount, the new votes are mostly from democratic districts.
It is not that recounting the same ballots has produced different results. It is the case that entirely new ballots are being considered the second time around that were originally rejected for technical reasons. Which is fine - but so far the numbers only reflect these new ballots from liberal districts. If Republican districts added their rejected ballots, the lead would be quite different than the current margin of 225 that Franken has.
We'll have to wait and see if the equivalent rejected ballots from Republican strongholds will be admitted into the count.
If you are only counting half the rejected ballots, it is not an accurate count. Accept them all, or none at all. It is a sham to only accept these type of ballots from select districts that benefit Franken, as the Coleman campaign is currently arguing.
Post a Comment