November 26th, 2008 • 1:58 amBallots Will Determine This Election, Not Partisans

The Coleman campaign has decided it’s time for both sides to put their cards on the table. They’ve done this through this fax from Coleman for Senate Senior Counsel Fritz Knaak to the Franken campaign:

ST. PAUL - The following was faxed to the Franken Campaign by Coleman for Senate Senior Counsel Fritz Knaak this evening:

“It has become apparent that both campaigns are engaged in a mounting game of ballot challenging that serves no useful purpose. This is not the way the recount process was intended to work, and we are trying the patience and goodwill of election officials and volunteers throughout the state. While the Franken Campaign began this morning challenging 25 ballots in one Sherburne County precinct, the vast majority without merit, it’s obvious that our campaign volunteers felt the need to match these growing and unnecessary challenges throughout the day. This is an artificial game which has virtually no bearing on the outcome of this recount as we know that the vast majority of these challenges will be rejected before we even get to the Canvassing Board on December 16th. With that in mind, in the spirit of the Holidays, and to give respect to this process that it deserves, we ask you to join us tomorrow morning in standing down in the game of ballot challenge one upsmanship.”

I’ve posted about this here and here. Everyone who’s paid attention knew that this was a PR game initiated by Franken. The PR game started shifting away from Franken’s campaign when Stearns County Auditor Randy Schreifels felt compelled to issue this press release:

Date: November 24, 2008
Contact: Randy Schreifels, County Auditor-Treasurer, 320-656-3901

U.S. Senate Race Recount Facing More Challenges

The process is slowing down in Stearns County’s hand recount of the U.S. Senate race.

Stearns County election officials are getting many more frivolous challenges, mainly starting with one challenger from the Al Franken campaign. When this happens, the Norm Coleman campaign will counter with another frivolous challenge.

By 10:00 this morning, there have already been seven ballots challenged, where voter intent is very clear. On Friday, there were 15 challenges, and most of them were frivolous as well. Compare that to just 8 challenges the entire first day and only 3 challenges the second day.

This morning, for example, a ballot was challenged because the oval wasn’t completely blackened, although the majority of it was filled in. Another ballot was challenged because there was a mark, or a small line, somewhere else on the ballot, not even near the U.S. Senate race.

Stearns County officials were hoping to wrap up the recount today, but that goal might now be in jeopardy. At the end of the day on Friday, Stearns County had approximately just 16,000 ballots left to recount, out of 79,000 total ballots, and officials were hoping to finish those today. But with the extra challenges, the process could extend into Tuesday.

Legally, Stearns County has until December 5th to complete the recount.

For those who want to watch the recount, but can’t make it into the Administration Center, they can view it live on Stearns County’s website at www.co.stearns.mn.us from 8:00–4:00 each day.

Schreifels justified his ire in an interview with me, saying that Franken’s frivolous challenges were artificially extending the recount, which means that his personnel are allocated to the recount longer than if Team Franken had just played it straight.

Captain Ed posted this about the recount:

The canvassing board will provide the real focus for this recount. We’re fortunate to have four widely-respected jurists on this panel who will not countenance any shenanigans, even with the strongly partisan Mark Ritchie as a statutory member as Secretary of State.

Barring the Minnesota Supreme Court ruling that clearly stated election law be ignored, Team Franken must notice that their chances of winning are shrinking daily.

One thing that should be pointed out about this that hasn’t received enough coverage is that Minnesota’s election laws are exceptionally clear and Minnesota’s ballots are the best in the nation. Even the recount procedures are well-designed.

TRANSLATION: The ballots will determine the outcome, not the partisans.

That’s something Team Franken has been trying to change since the outset. Thsu far, they’ve failed miserably in effecting that change.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Post Comments RSS Feed Post Comments RSSTrackBack URI 4 Responses

  1. All right. I awaken to an update on the “Great Minnesota Attempted Ballot Robbery”.

    Thanks for keeping the updates coming. The family will be traveling for the holidays but I plan to be laptop equipped and will check in quite often.

    Happy Thanksgiving from our house to yours.

    Chuck
    Lookout Mountain

    Comment by Chuck • 26Nov2008 @ 7:18 am

  2. Thanks Chuck. I’m preparing another post right now. I’m also hoping that the Canvassing Board’s meeting will be streamed like last week’s was. If it’s videostreamed, I’ll liveblog it.

    Happy Thanksgiving to you, too.

    Comment by Gary Gross • 26Nov2008 @ 7:57 am

  3. I definitely got the sense when I recounted in Mpls on Thursday that the Franken people were told to challenge stuff that was just “odd” for some reason. The longhaired dude who I drew as an opposite challenged a “light” ballot and was actually a bit apologetic about it. He offered that the ballot would probably be sent back. And it was. As was the sloppily filled out ballot that I challenged for voter intent because the mark was out of the circle.

    At least in Mpls we’ve had a two tiered system of challenges. Once challenges are made at the tables and after all the ballots for the precinct have been counted, the challenges go to a big table with the captains for each side and the elections director. They make the final determination on what official challenges are.

    From what I’ve seen, this extra step eliminates a lot of the marginal challenges. I won’t say “frivolous” because I think that except in the case of some overly agressive people, it depends on what standards you are using and that often depends on how strict the standards your opposite is using. It’s definitely a case of “tit for tat” and the equivalent numbers of challenges that are resulting is proof of that.

    Comment by Margaret • 26Nov2008 @ 8:42 am

  4. Thanks for the insight Margaret.

    Comment by Chuck • 26Nov2008 @ 9:07 am





Categories