Here’s a little test.
If the canvassing board declares this ballot to be in the Other/No one category,
Then, what category does this ballot belong in.
.png)
a) Other/No one
b) Al Franken
If you answered (a), you have sound logical capabilities. If you answered (b), you are either a complete moron, or you are part of the Canvassing Board deciding the outcome of the Minnesota Senate race. Or both.
So, it looks like Stuart Smalley will win the Minnesota Senate seat after all. The recount has him up at this point, with the canvassing board using the following criteria when deciding the outcome of the challenged ballots: if it benefits Franken, it’s in.
This is an outrageous failure of democracy. I don’t doubt that this kind of stuff goes on all of the time, but the fact that it is going on with the spotlight of the national media shining brightly upon it is cause for concern for what the next four years will hold. Apparently, the Democrats are feeling a little emboldened these days.
Hope and Change!
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Ahh! Don’t worry about some biased report on FOX. We don’t have all the facts. Let’s just let the people involved sort it all out. I’m sure the true winner will be chosen.
Go Senator-Elect Dr. Octopus!
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
December 24th, 2008 at 8:45 am
Showing just a little of the ballot is very misleading. The voter’s intent would be taken from how the rest of the ballot was marked among other things.
December 24th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Interestingly, both of the ballots voted for the Republican for US House.
I disagree, though. There should be uniform standards used and it is not a safe bet to use how the person voted in other races as a means of discerning voter intent. People split the ballot all of the time.
December 24th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
You misinterpreted what I was saying … the rest of the ballot helps illuminate what a given voter meant by any given mark … it has nothing to do with who they voted for.
Uniform standards are great when people make uniform marks, but people don’t .. I’ve counted ballots and seen it first hand.
There is nothing wrong with the “voter’s intent” standard, and there is nothing wrong with having people contest ballots so such ballots have to be looked at more closely.
To be a repeat parrot: Showing just a little of the ballot is very misleading. The voter’s intent would be taken from how the rest of the ballot was marked among other things.