WAIT! ... HOLD ON! ... I see 10,000 votes for Kopperberg being delivered right NOW!
Posted on 05/20/2011 4:14:32 PM PDT by Jean S
With the weeks-long recount complete, unofficial numbers confirm that state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser narrowly defeated Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election, but the fight may now turn to court.
Final recount numbers expected to filed later Friday showed Prosser with a 7,006-vote advantage over Kloppenburg.
Kloppenburg will spend the coming days reviewing the findings of the recount to determine whether to sue over the results, said Kloppenburg campaign manager Melissa Mulliken.
"I'm not going to speculate" on the likelihood of a lawsuit, Mulliken said. "We have to look at the record and analyze the evidence and the law and make our decision from there."
Kloppenburg asked for the recount after losing by 7,316 votes.
Unofficial numbers show her gaining 310 votes in the recount, but still losing to Prosser by more than 7,000 votes.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
After all it's just too close to call for a die hard socialist dimocrat.
If she asks for a recount, walker should do something else To kill the unions in the state.
Good. She’ll look like a fool and piss away a lot of RAT/union thug dollars.
They will recount and recount until they can “find” enough votes to win. Then they stop.
Especially one who insisted Prosser concede when initial tallies showed Kloppenburg had a 300 vote plurality.
She can’t ask for a recount of a recount. That part is over.
Make that a Communist.
Here’s one. Set up an “independent verification authority” to check IDs at Union elections. They’d simply check IDs and match them against membership rosters before annual votes for officers.
Yup. The same kind of BS that that they tried in Florida.
Count and recount until you get the desired outcome.
“unofficial numbers confirm that state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser narrowly defeated Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election”
A 7000+ vote margin is a “narrow” defeat? LOL
They will that, but they've got a lot of 'em. What galls me is that those public employee unions are extorting dues from their members that in fact come from taxpayer dollars (who pay the salaries of the public employees from which the dues are extorted). In essence, the taxpayers are funding the 'Rat lawsuits. That seems wrong to me. If they fund 'Rat lawsuits, they should fund 'Pub lawsuits as well, whenever there is a stolen election that the 'Pubs want to contest in court (Coleman in MN, Rossi in SayWA).
In case someone missed it here’s Kloppenburg’s “victory” speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPOOPVKe0u0
Modern day it's synonymous.
When Gore beat Bush by just over 6000 votes in WI the Journal-Sentinel didn’t call it “narrow”.
You forgot the word "solid" in front of that 10,000! ~snort!
When votes from all precincts were finally counted, she had lost by more than 7000 votes. She then demanded a re-count, making all kinds of self-righteous pronouncements about "the sanctity of the electoral process" and how "the people have to be sure their votes count." This, after having demanded a concession from her opponent when her apparant margin of victory was only one thirty-fifth of what his turned out to be.
And don't kid yourself. Every bit of this foolishness makes perfect sense to liberals. And at the same time, Republicans who, say, object to the way Al Franken was sent to the Senate, are called "sore losers" and are accused of "trying to win in a courtroom what they couldn't win fair and square at the ballot box."
Ping!
How much do you want to bet she files the fifth day in the afternoon?
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.