[jdonn]

Things are tightening
So at that rate, Franken would gain 278 votes to win by 63, or 0.002% of the vote. This could get ugly.

Edit: This is roughly equivalent to saying that if the vote was among 45,001 people, Franken would win 22501 to 22500, as opposed to pre recount which would favor Coleman 22503 to 22498. No wonder things are contentious and only going to get worse.

[PassedOut]

It seems that Franken would make a good senator. He's not only a comedian - he's the author of insightful, best-selling books about political topics. He makes his points in an understandable, entertaining manner.

[PassedOut]

Minnesota Public Radio has an interesting article with images of some of the disputed ballots: Challenged ballots: You be the judge

Quote

It's your turn to play election judge. Tell us how you would rule in the case of these challenged ballots. Use this Minnesota state statute as your guide.

Pretty interesting, and a good argument for having optical scan ballots for review.

[jdonn]

PassedOut, on Nov 20 2008, 06:00 PM, said:

Minnesota Public Radio has an interesting article with images of some of the disputed ballots: Challenged ballots: You be the judge

Quote

It's your turn to play election judge. Tell us how you would rule in the case of these challenged ballots. Use this Minnesota state statute as your guide.

Pretty interesting, and a good argument for having optical scan ballots for review.

Interesting. Here are my opinions.

Day 2:
1. Coleman
2. Franken
(in both cases perhaps the vote should technically not count based on rules, but I would always count a ballot where the intent is clear. I am much more in favor of the spirit than the letter of the law in these cases.)
3. Reject the ballot
4. Reject the ballot

Day 1:
1. Franken
2. Accept the ballot
3. Reject the ballot
4. Franken
5. Franken (this one was funny hehe)
6. Franken
7. Coleman
8. Franken
(I think it's really petty that Coleman's camp challeneged both 7 and 8, which are similar cases in opposite directions where the ballot that would go against him is far more obvious than the ballot that would go for him)
9. Reject the ballot
(Wow I'm in a HUGE minority on that one! But how does anyone know that the voter didn't vote in pencil, and an official erased it and changed the vote? If there is a solid chain of custody on the ballot and the other votes are marked in pen, give it to Barkley.)
10. Barkley
11. Reject the ballot
(Did they vote Coleman, realize they meant Franken, and underline Franken? Or did they vote Franken, realize they meant Coleman, and cross out Franken? Impossible to tell.)

[awm]

I'd ask a different question. Who are these people who can't do something as simple as filling out a ballot? And should we be letting them vote?

Okay, a few of these are obvious minor mistakes (tiny dot in a circle, thumbprint on ballot, etc). But aside from those, shouldn't the vast majority of these be thrown out? Who writes "lizard people" as a write-in for every race? Who fills in a bubble and then writes "No" next to it? Who circles the freaking optical scan markers? Can't we disenfranchise these idiots?

[TimG]

jdonn, on Nov 20 2008, 06:27 PM, said:

Day 1:
7. Coleman
8. Franken

My first reaction to #7 was that this was a double vote (and should be rejected).

Then, I saw #8 which looks like an obvious vote for Franken despite the dot in the Barklay oval.

So, now it seems that if two ovals are filled in, I have to determine which one is more filled in. So, I kind of lean towards require a candidate's name to be crossed out if there could be a question regarding a double vote. Which really isn't a good solution.

Anyway, these two ballots cause me to think this isn't as easy I would have thought.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Nov 20 2008, 09:05 PM, said:

jdonn, on Nov 20 2008, 06:27 PM, said:

Day 1:
7. Coleman
8. Franken

My first reaction to #7 was that this was a double vote (and should be rejected).

Then, I saw #8 which looks like an obvious vote for Franken despite the dot in the Barklay oval.

So, now it seems that if two ovals are filled in, I have to determine which one is more filled in. So, I kind of lean towards require a candidates name to be crossed out if there could be a question regarding a double vote. Which really isn't a good solution.

Anyway, these two ballots cause me to think this isn't as easy I would have thought.

Look at 8, then look at 10. I realize the challenges are made by volunteers who aren't in communication with each other and probably aren't even in the same place. But can Coleman's campaign seriously, with a straight face, say that 8 should go for Barkley but 10 should go for their guy??? Likewise for 7 and 8 in conjunction. It's sickening.

It reminds me of why for most of my life I was completely disinterested in either politics or voting. I am quite sure I will be that way again either after Obama's presidency, or during it if he turns out to be a disappointment.

[cherdano]

TimG, on Nov 20 2008, 08:05 PM, said:

So, now it seems that if two ovals are filled in, I have to determine which one is more filled in. So, I kind of lean towards require a candidate's name to be crossed out if there could be a question regarding a double vote. Which really isn't a good solution.

Anyway, these two ballots cause me to think this isn't as easy I would have thought.

The standard is whether the intent of the voter can be determined.
My guess is this is as good a standard as you can get.

[shintaro]

Reading this and not being over the pond;

It begs the question could these who cannot vote correctely be Bridge Players??

[pigpenz]

I was watching Hardball last night and they showed some of the ballots that were being questioned. It was very interesting!

One of the problems though was that the ballots that were being recounted first were from heavily democratic counties so at first it seems that Franken was gaining but when they get to the republican countes then he will fall behind again, doesnt sound good for him, but you never know this state did elect Jesse Ventura governor.

[jdonn]

Update. With 42.33% of the vote recounted, Franken has caught up by 86. At that rate, the recount would end with Coleman winning by 12 votes, or out of every 200,001 voters Coleman would win 100,001 to 100,000. This is amazingly close.