|
Posted on 11/25/2008 8:57:11 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
If the absentee names are made public, a mad scramble will ensue to contact those voters and get them to demand their ballots be counted. That's just what happened in the 2004 governor's race in Washington State after King County Judge Dean Lum allowed local Democrats access to the list of provisional voters that hadn't been counted because either there was no signature or no match between the signature and the voter registration on file with officials.
Judge Lum's ruling was criticized by many election lawyers because, in the 2002 Help America Vote Act, Congress stipulated that provisional ballot votes remain private....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
As the Dems did in Washington state, Franken wants to call absentee voters (if the say they tried to vote for Franken) to talk them into demanding that their votes be counted.
Doesn’t calling voters violate the concept of the secret ballot? Franken wants people to publicly declare that they voted for him? And that they marked their absentee ballot incorrectly by not voting for him?
Am I understanding this correctly? If so I can’t believe that this is legal.
The law is what rogue judges say it is, unless they get overruled by a higher court.
It’s the Democrats so anything and I mean ANYTHING goes. They write the rules as they go and invent ones that aren’t there.
There should be, but apparently aren’t, strict standards of procedures for re-counts. They should do the re-count exactly the same way as votes are counted on election night. If they have scanners or punch cards or whatever type of ballot, they should be counted the same way again to double check the totals. If there are any hand counts, they should be used as a check against the machine totals, not examined to look for people who didn’t cast a vote in the Senate race. They should not be able to examine ballots without a vote for Senate, and then claim that voters wanted Al Franken because an Obama vote was on the ballot. They shouldn’t be able to call voters and ask them to publicly state that they wanted Franken, even though they didn’t mark their ballot properly.
This recount does not pass the smell test.
|
Hello? Yes, I meant to vote for Al Franken because I am that stupid.
And that they marked their absentee ballot incorrectly by not voting for him?
See above answer.
Coleman should just surrender now.
Republicans must win by a margin larger than fraud and litigation. He managed to defeat the fraud, but not the margin of litigation. The democrat machinery will see to it that Franken comes out on top.
If you didn’t vote for Senator you didn’t vote for a Senator and that is that. This reminds me of the nonsense that went on in Florida. You can’t run a fair election on intentions. If you intended to vote for someone, don’t forget next time and when you do make sure you vote properly so it will count.
A law suit could be filed seeking declaratory relief and, if it is refused, injunctive relief can be sought in federal court on an emergency basis under the Ku Klux Klan Act 1996 amendments. How appropriate that would be. Freepers need to besiege a conservative legal foundation to get behind this effort.
Isn’t it nice how much the Dems “care” about close elections?
In my opinion, Franken isn’t even counting on the courts to rule for him.
He wanted the names of the absentees who were rejected, so he could contact them all, and ask who they tried to vote for.
After all the recounts and court challenges are done, look for Franken to publish a list of 3000+ names of absentee voters who were rejected who have sworn they voted for him. My guess is the list will be more than half the total rejects, but it wouldn’t have to be — they won’t collect any signatures from Coleman folks.
That list will come out just before the Senate accepts the new members. The list will be used by the Senate Democrats to call for a hearing about Minnesota. They will then note the 3000+ names is more than enough to make Franken the winner, and they will use their power as the Senate to declare Franken the winner.
The list is so they can justify stealing the election. And the media will go along with it. You can hear the argument “The law didn’t allow Minnesota to count those ballots, but now we know for certain what those voters intended, and it is only FAIR that those voters get to have their votes counted.”
Coleman’s people should demand that every ballot cast by someone with a Somali-like name be examined to see if that person is her legally or committed fraud by violating the P-3 immigration code (getting US citizenship by a false marriage and lying to an immigration official).
Coleman needs to challenge voters in precincts where there are known concentrations of Somalis. This is true now that a Somali living in the US has blown himself up in Somalia while trying to be a human bomb.
Nobody knows how many illegals in Minnesota voted nor how many are illegal under the P-3 code.
This would give Franken and company nightmares of the best type. Defeated because they couldn’t get Democrat voters votes because they were here illegally. Nothing like a little fraud to do you in, eh Al?
Isn’t there a firm deadline? I was in Florida in 2000, and Katherine Harris had a date certain to certify the results.
In Minnesota, as with the HAVA legislation, the actual ballot is secret. What is public information is the name and address of the person on the rejected ballot. In what I believe is a loophole in Minnesota law, absentee/mail-in voter information is public data after an election, meaning members of the public have access to voter information. That is how Franken is able to obtian the info.
Not being familiar with Washington state law, I can tell you that Minnesota statutory and case law history is very firm that if an absentee/mail-in ballot is not properly filled out, it don't get counted. Period. So unless we see a rogue court completely reverse precedent, which I don't see happening, they won't be counted.
That is a great description of how the recount SHOULD go. I wish those dimwits in Minnesota thought that way.
For a party named “Democratic” they seem to find plenty of tricks (rogue judges and officials) to nullify popular votes.
(I intensely dislike this oafish fool.)
Damnit! It's the DemocRAT Party. Nothing democratic about it at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
We know who you are, and how you voted. And since you didn't vote for us, we'll look into whether you really have a plumber's license, and whether you owe child support, and what your FICO score is.