(H/T – Lemur King)
I don’t know how everybody in my overstuffed feed reader missed this one when Politico’s The Scorecard reported this gem of a quote from Senate Majority Leader “Dingy” Harry Reid (D-NV) on Monday:
"Norm Coleman will never ever serve [again] in the Senate," Reid told Politico’s Manu Raju. "He lost the election. He can stall things, but he’ll never serve in the Senate."
News flash to Reid – your boy Stuart Small…er, Al Franken does not have his Certificate of Election yet, and it looks like nobody will get it until Franken’s carefully-engineered 1,000-vote gain from election night gets examined in the light of a courtroom. If the challenges are addressed in Coleman’s favor, Franken won’t even have a cancelled provisional certificate to wave in front of the Senate like John Durkin (D-NH) successfully did.
I wonder if the Dingy One really wants to go down that road, especially considering he’s up for re-election in 2010.
Loading ...
Dude, the recount happened exactly as it was supposed to happen according to the laws of Minnesota. The result of that process is that Franken won. Why can you not accept this?
That is rather open to interpretation:
- A significant number of ballots that had so much as a stray mark next to Franken’s name were counted for Franken regardless of the condition of the remainder of the ballot, while a significant number of ballots that had so much as a stray mark somewhere other than besides Coleman’s name in the Senate portion of the ballot were not counted for Coleman regardless of whether a clear mark was next to Coleman’s name.
- The court-ordered inclusion of the “improperly rejected” absentee ballots is incomplete, and most of those from heavy-Franken areas were included while most of those from heavy-Coleman areas were not.
- The treatment of differences between the number of ballots cast as of election night and the number of ballots that physically existed when the recount took place had only one constant – it favored Franken.
Now, would you have been one of the few Democratic Senators that refused to seat the unelected Durkin before the second election? Somehow I doubt it.
Dude,
If you think this recount was handled without prejudice, keep smoking what you got. There are numerous examples where similarly marked ballots were removed from votes for Coleman but included for votes for Franken. Not to mention the fact that if recount totals didn’t match vote night totals, the accepted count went to Franken’s advantage in every case.
Additionally, the suit that Coleman has filed is also provided for by Minnesota law, why can’t you accept that?
Oh I have no problem with him challenging it in court. I don’t go around calling him a jerk for doing it. It, too, is part of the process. What I’m talking about instead are the conservative bloggers who are all whining that there was foul play at every turn. There wasn’t.