Al Franken Wins!
- Thread starter smurphy
- Start date
Here's a response to the article on the WSJ forums. I suggest anyone who cares about this in reality to look at the thread in those forums. A few thoughtful responses that deal with the issue, and a couple of responses that just bash liberals and Minnesota, without basis.
Again, the Wall Street Journal is now another media outlet for the political views of Rupert Murdoch. From the forum thread:
This is the worst article I have ever read in my life. I doubt that the writer has ever watched a minute of the absentee recount, never examined 6000 plus ballots on line as many did, or researched anything about this, yet he is willing to spill to the world his opinion like religion that the election is being rigged.
In reading the story I love the points he missed. Franken asked to count all the absentee ballots that the different counties said they had mistakenly said were invalid. Coleman said no to this and wanted them to add instead some 650 ballots that only Coleman thought should be added (they were judged not valid because on Minnesota law.) Franken had a lead of 49, after examining every ballot cast on election day and the votes challenged by the two parties. If the writer of the article examined the 6000+ questioned ballots he would have seen that the majority of them were in fact for Franken. Next the board looked at all the rejected absentee ballots that the boards, Coleman, and Franken would agree on. Franken picked up another 176 votes for a total of 225. The board deciding this was primarily Republican, with the only Democrat Ritchie voting only if there was a tie on the decision of the other Republicans and Independents. I do not know how many tie votes Ritchie was the deciding vote on but I believe it was less than 25.
So with all this going by the book, Coleman is behind by 225 votes. Franken would still be ahead if you gave Coleman the benefit of the doubt and awarded him those 133 votes he said were doubles. He still would be behind. That is why he is now asking the State Sepreme court to add some 650 reject ballots that were rejected 3 times by the individual county election boards. Big suprise that he only found these ballots in Republican Districs which had rejected them 3 times as being invalid.
I should have an editorial in the Wall Street Journal that is not based on any fact..... I'm almost 60, but I was taught that this would be called fiction. Please take the pen or keyboard away from this guy before he hurts himself.
Again, the Wall Street Journal is now another media outlet for the political views of Rupert Murdoch. From the forum thread:
This is the worst article I have ever read in my life. I doubt that the writer has ever watched a minute of the absentee recount, never examined 6000 plus ballots on line as many did, or researched anything about this, yet he is willing to spill to the world his opinion like religion that the election is being rigged.
In reading the story I love the points he missed. Franken asked to count all the absentee ballots that the different counties said they had mistakenly said were invalid. Coleman said no to this and wanted them to add instead some 650 ballots that only Coleman thought should be added (they were judged not valid because on Minnesota law.) Franken had a lead of 49, after examining every ballot cast on election day and the votes challenged by the two parties. If the writer of the article examined the 6000+ questioned ballots he would have seen that the majority of them were in fact for Franken. Next the board looked at all the rejected absentee ballots that the boards, Coleman, and Franken would agree on. Franken picked up another 176 votes for a total of 225. The board deciding this was primarily Republican, with the only Democrat Ritchie voting only if there was a tie on the decision of the other Republicans and Independents. I do not know how many tie votes Ritchie was the deciding vote on but I believe it was less than 25.
So with all this going by the book, Coleman is behind by 225 votes. Franken would still be ahead if you gave Coleman the benefit of the doubt and awarded him those 133 votes he said were doubles. He still would be behind. That is why he is now asking the State Sepreme court to add some 650 reject ballots that were rejected 3 times by the individual county election boards. Big suprise that he only found these ballots in Republican Districs which had rejected them 3 times as being invalid.
I should have an editorial in the Wall Street Journal that is not based on any fact..... I'm almost 60, but I was taught that this would be called fiction. Please take the pen or keyboard away from this guy before he hurts himself.
