31 Mar
17

Special Election for NY Congressional Seat Gives 65 Vote Edge to Democrat!

By:

[DELETED BY AUTHOR]

FacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Tuesday, March 31st, 2009 at 8:27 pm
| 3 views

17 Responses to Special Election for NY Congressional Seat Gives 65 Vote Edge to Democrat!

  1. Wisdom says: 1

    recount, recount, recount, recount……

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    March 31, 2009 at 9:35 pm
  2. AF Sarge (Ret) says: 2

    If this is one of Soros’ Sec. of State, and goes to a recount/handcount, I think everyone knows how this will turn out……

    Sarge

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    March 31, 2009 at 9:50 pm
  3. Alex says: 3

    Each recount will see the vote increase for the democrat. ACORN will have plenty of time between now and April 13 to “find lost ballots.”

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 7:05 am
  4. Mike's America says: 4

    Maybe it’s about time we hired some of these ACORN folks to cheat on our behalf. Seems to me those whores will do anything for a dollar.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 8:10 am
  5. Real American Patriot says: 5

    Mike,

    “Maybe the GOP can hire the same folks who have been helping Al Franken manufacture votes in Minnesota to help with the recount!”

    I would really enjoy seeing your prove that non sense!

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 8:21 am
  6. Mike's America says: 6

    @Real American Patriot: Pretty easy to prove CRAP: More “ballots” counted than voters who signed in at the precinct.

    And guess who benefited? Franken!

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 8:36 am
  7. Real American Patriot says: 7

    Pretty easy to prove CRAP: More “ballots” counted than voters who signed in at the precinct.
    And guess who benefited? Franken!

    Now prove that NON sense… it’s right wing BS

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 8:44 am
  9. Danno says: 9

    There were 10,000 absentee ballots sent out; about 7,500 are back. None have been counted. In fact, a judge (by virtue of a motion made by Tidesco’s people) is holding them to assure a fair recount. The rest have a couple more weeks to be delivered and still be counted. This should go strong for Tidesco. It is not over by a longshot.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 11:04 am
  10. Mike's America says: 10

    I’m still waiting for CRAP’s apology. Accusing us of making stuff up when it is he who is ignoring THE FACTS.

    @Danno: No way to know for sure how well Tedisco will do with the absentees. ACORN has developed quite a specialty in phony absentee ballots. No doubt they were very active in this race.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 2:01 pm
  11. Mike's America says: 11

    Crickets are chirping as we continue to await the apology for the “right wing BS” SMEAR from CRAP!

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 6:06 pm
  12. Real American Patriot says: 12

    you will get no such apology from me…
    the link you posted states nothing about more ballots than those signed in at a precinct.

    I stand by my statement… right wing BS

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 1, 2009 at 11:13 pm
  13. Missy says: 13

    @Real American Patriot:

    Votes in Dem counties were double counted, one example were the votes the machine rejected, during the recount, both the original rejected ballot and the duplicate ballot were included in the count.

    The Minnesota attorneys that run Power Line have done 351 posts regarding this election:

    http://www.google.com/search?q=coleman+franken&btnG=Search&domains=powerlineblog.com&sitesearch=powerlineblog.com&sa=Search

    But, this one, tells us basically how Franken took the lead, nothing to be proud of. John Hinderaker recaps the sorry, sordid situation and recommends a re-vote:

    I spent some time today with Norm Coleman and one of his lawyers, talking about the election contest that is going on currently in St. Paul. In person, Norm makes his case effectively. The dilemma that he faces stems from the fact that Minnesota’s counties are not equally scrupulous in applying our election laws, as they apply to absentee ballots.

    Take, for example, the requirement that the signature on an absentee ballot must be witnessed by a registered voter. In some counties, registration lists are carefully scrutinized and if the witness’s name does not appear, the absentee ballot is not counted. Other counties make no effort to check this requirement and count hundreds or thousands of technically illegal ballots. Another example is the voter’s signature: some counties check carefully to make sure that the signature on the absentee ballot looks like the one on file, while others will accept virtually anything as a signature.

    It turns out, not surprisingly, that the counties that are careful about applying election laws are Republican-leading counties, while the lax ones–Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis–are heavily Democratic. What this means, in practice, is that thousands of votes are counted in Democratic counties that would not be counted if the same voter lived in a Republican county. Coleman observed that we hadn’t realized it until now, but every Republican who runs in a state-wide race starts with a deficit of several thousand votes for this reason.

    Coleman has asked the judges to open and count ballots that are in substantial compliance with Minnesota’s statute and have exactly the same status as many votes that have already been counted. The court, however, has shown an inclination to apply the election law rigorously and exclude all ballots that are not in full technical compliance with the statute. Thus a deep irony arises: if a uniform standard of strict compliance with the absentee ballot statute is applied, Coleman wins. If a looser standard of substantial compliance with the statute is uniformly applied, Coleman also wins. The only way Coleman loses is if a strict standard is applied in Republican counties and a lax standard is applied in Democratic counties. Unfortunately, that is exactly what has happened so far.

    The trial court has established standards for counting ballots under which thousands of ballots now ruled improper were counted on election day. There is no way to identify them and un-count them. (An absentee ballot has two envelopes; the outer envelope has the voter’s name on it, the inner one doesn’t. If the ballot is approved, it is opened and the inner, secret ballot is fed through a machine with the other ballots.) The logical implication is that we can never determine who actually received more properly-cast votes for Minnesota’s Senate seat, the task with which the trial court is charged.

    I was skeptical when the idea of a second election was first raised, but the more I learn about the facts, the more reasonable that alternative sounds. If it really is impossible to determine which candidate received more properly-cast votes, a new election would seem to be the fairest alternative. It may, however, take Senate action to bring about that result. (Coleman’s supporters are concerned that if Franken comes out ahead in the current process, Harry Reid will seat him, while if Coleman comes out ahead, Reid will order a new election.)

    An important policy consideration supports this result: as the system currently operates, a county’s failure to follow the law is rewarded, not punished. A Democratic-leaning county like Hennepin has every incentive to loosen the rules, not check on witnesses’ registrations, etc., so as to count the maximum number of Democratic votes. If the court ratifies such lax conduct in the current proceeding, any county that scrupulously applies state law will perceive that it is merely selling its own citizens short. This is hardly to be encouraged.

    All things considered, a runoff election looks like the best choice. Given the disparate standards applied by Minnesota’s counties and the extreme closeness of the race, it is too late to have a reliable tabulation of the votes.

    One more thing: Coleman didn’t make this point, but Franken’s lead is but a fraction of the number of votes that were illegally cast by illegal aliens, students from Wisconsin, and so on. If only qualified voters had been allowed to cast ballots, Coleman would have won by a margin far greater than Franken’s razor-thin 225-vote lead. If Franken ultimately becomes a United States Senator, he will owe his seat to the Democratic Party’s deliberate strategy, here in Minnesota as around the country, of facilitating voter fraud by frustrating all efforts to require voter identification.

    UPDATE: Michael Barone finds the argument for a re-vote persuasive and notes the precedent of the 1975 New Hampshire Senate race.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/03/023022.php

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 2, 2009 at 4:47 am
  14. Dave Noble says: 14

    Real American Patriot,

    Congrats on your nickname. Mike demanded an apology, too.
    And you told him to cram it in his ear.

    If you ever had any doubts, you are now a fixture at FA.

    When I saw CRAP in the Recent Comments section, I thought it was an acronym for a government program.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 2, 2009 at 5:02 am
  15. Real American Patriot says: 15

    Missy,

    John Hinderaker can recommend a re-vote all he wants.
    Minnesota law would not allow it. Simple as that.
    The righties can complain about the election laws not being handled fairly. However, the panel that judged this before the trial was weighted to the republicans side not the democratic side.
    So right off the bat I am very skeptical of republicans crying foul.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 2, 2009 at 6:09 am
  16. Missy says: 16

    @Real American Patriot:

    And the Republican county election judges played by the rules, not so in dem counties. You, are content to win with a flawed candidate and the cheaters that helped him.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 2, 2009 at 7:38 am
  17. Mike's America says: 17

    @Real American Patriot:

    I see FACTS don’t mean a thing to you.

    Missy gave them to you and you ignored them all.

    My bad in linking to the wrong story above. The problem is that there is such a mountain of evidence of voting funny business in Minnesota it’s hard to keep it all sorted.

    Here’s another link that may help reality dawn on you:

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

    a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he’s benefited both ways from the board’s inconsistency…

    …It appears some officials may have failed to mark ballots as duplicates, which are now being counted in addition to the originals. This helps explain why more than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote…

    It seems the only “BS” here is your willful ignorance and stubborn denial of facts.

    At least you found a friend in Dave Noble though that won’t help your case.

    ReplyReply
    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
    April 2, 2009 at 7:53 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>