Matt Lewis suggests that Norm Coleman is ruining his reputation and future political career by his court challenge to Al Franken’s “victory in Minnesota” which is the result of a meticulous recount using practices defined as magic. With a 225 vote margin for Franken, in 25 precincts, there were more votes counted than people who voted, multiple voting errors. Wrote the Journal of the recount process:
Minnesotans like to think that their state isn’t like New Jersey or Louisiana, and typically it isn’t. But we can’t recall a similar recount involving optical scanning machines that has changed so many votes, and in which nearly every crucial decision worked to the advantage of the same candidate. The Coleman campaign clearly misjudged the politics here, and the apparent willingness of a partisan like Mr. Ritchie to help his preferred candidate, Mr. Franken. If the Canvassing Board certifies Mr. Franken as the winner based on the current count, it will be anointing a tainted and undeserving Senator.
At this point, I don’t know who really won definitively. What I do know is that Democrats have played the same game in Minnesota that they played in Washington State back in 2004-keep counting votes until you win. And that there’s something awfully fishy about the degree to which this election has shifted. For too long, Republicans have let Senate Seats and Governor’s races go by the boards in places like Missouri in 2000, South Dakota in 2002 because there’s been a thinking in the GOP that the integrity of elections matters a whole lot less than people thinking we’re not poor sports. We should just smile and say, “Hey, you stole this election fair and sqaure. Good work.”
In Coleman’s case, he has no political future as a candidate for elected office if truly he has been bested by pornographer and tax cheat Al Franken. Not winning by a solid margin against this clown, says that Coleman doesn’t have a whole lot of image to save.
Coleman has no reason not to pursue this and challenge this sham of a counting process. Maybe through the challenge, an accurate count will help him bridge the 225-vote margin for Franken, or perhaps a court will result in a revote. Coleman ultimately has nothing to lose. To paraphrase the 109th rule of acquistion, for Coleman, “Image and an empty sack is worth the sack.”
I don't see the wisdom in surrender
mikefisk Wednesday, January 7th at 10:08AM EST (link)Considering the nature of Republican candidates in elections, giving up before all avenues have been exhausted would probably doom Coleman politically for good. Dino Rossi wasn’t able to come back four years later in WA, and I doubt Coleman would be able to return to high elected office with a stinging, albeit dubious, defeat hanging over him like that. He’s just not the transcendental political figure that it takes to recover from that sort of a setback.
While not pursuing a contentious legal fight might save his image, capitulation will destroy it. Heads you lose, tails… you lose as well.
“Once within the maw of Leviathan, degree of digestion is irrelevant.” - Michael Fisk
7.88, -1.97
Not Just His Image
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 10:26AM EST (link)I’ve followed the recount closely and have read his contest documents - unless he uncovers something new and overwhelming in discovery he really can’t win the contest with what he has now. He may have actually gotten more votes than Franken but at these margins unintentional error will overwhelm reality and the contest requires him to prove intentional error of large enough margin to chagne the certified result. A better ground game should have gottne him more than 42% of the vote against a mediocre comedian.
The image I worry about is not his, he is done in electoral politics on any big stage, but the party’s. Right now the public perception is he is trying to overturn the election as certified by a bipartisan canvansing board that included the republican supreme court judge - polls in Minnesota confirm that. Him pushing forward, I think, it is more likely to hurt the party in MN and elsewhere than get them an additional Senate seat. From a simple political calculation, I think he should drop it.
So?
IJB Wednesday, January 7th at 12:19PM EST (link)According to you, this makes Coleman and the GOP unpopular in MN - who cares?! (There is *no* chance it makes us unpopular anywhere else.)
We already can’t win in MN, so it makes all of about 0 difference there.
On the other hand, it probably helps the GOP everywhere else, keeps another example of Democrats stealing an election in the public eye, and my help us set up a narrative for 2010 and 2012.
Frankly, there’s almost no downside to this. I’d be more than willing to lose MN if it helps us win everywhere else.
Go Coleman!
I personally think Coleman has very little chance of prevailing (let’s face it - the courts are every bit as corrupt and ‘in the bag’ for the Dem as Washington, DC). But it’s worth it if it keep publicity on this issue. (And there is still a sliver of a chance he may prevail.)
Frankly, it’s attitudes like yours as to why the GOP is in the mess we’re in.
As a party, we need to focus on the people who are willing to fight, regardless of the odds (and, if necessary, fight dirty), and shed those who aren’t willing to fight.
That’s the real message here.
Why can't we win in MN
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 12:49PM EST (link)We have a virtual tie in the Senate and a republican in the governor’s house - why is it a sure thing that we can’t win in MN?
As for how it helps the GOP elsewhere, BS. What good did 2004 in Washington do for the GOP? Most people see it as inside baseball and whoever takes it to court automatically looks bad - I mean its not like all the ill will following Gore’s loss by Democrats did them any good in subsequent elections.
The whole meme of stolen elections doesn’t get much traction outside of diehards who are already bought in - especially when you end up losing in court (and why you think apriori that the courts are corrupt is beyond me but I assure you the people whose votes you need to win aren’t as convinced).
I think it is attitudes like yours that is why the GOP is in the mess it is in - we have to see the bigger political picture and not focus on the fights of those already committed (on either side).
Yawn (nt)
IJB Wednesday, January 7th at 5:55PM EST (link)What you're advocating is cowardice. Coleman should fight.
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 6:26PM EST (link)What will stop Democrats from doing this over and over again if every single time they do, people like you, supposed to be on our side, demand that we surrender?
Are you seriously thinking this sort of thing earns us any credit with voters? What planet have you been on for the past eight years?
No. Hell no.
We surrendered countless advantages, refused to fight on so many issues simply to avoid controversy over the past four years and what has it gained us?
And now, after all that, you’re saying we should try more of the same?
Cowardice?
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 6:47PM EST (link)Honestly, I doubt the American public broadly cares one way or the other what Coleman does - but Sore Loserman was a label that stuck for quite sometime as a punch line.
I don’t think it surrender to not file a court case that is unwinnable. If he had a legitimate shot at winning of course you fight to the end but he doesn’t - and when he gets hit with Frnakens costs for the case will the RNC be picking up the tab?
And why is it "unwinnable?" Because the media says so?
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 7:09PM EST (link)Mark Ritchie and the canvassing board performed made more than enough blatantly dishonest calls to call the entire enterprise into question for any person with a shred of decency.
And as for money, not only should Coleman take this to court, he, the entire MNGOP and Pawlenty should pool resources and launch a media blitz informing Minnesotans of what just happened and what a crook they have for a Secretary of State.
It’s high time the GOP learned that there is honor in going down fighting rather than surrendering outright for fear of losing.
Based on the case
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 9:38PM EST (link)Based on the case and the law - unless he uncovers some new fraud. He just doesn’t have enough votes on claims that he even has a chance of convincing the panel on to overturn the current gap. Had he and his legal team had a better strategy from the start they may be in a better position now but that hsip has sailed.
At most he can get the 30 some votes from Hennepin and 40 some from Ramsey, but even those will be tough. His other main claims aren’t winnable - the absentee ballot one wold require that the panel overturn the MN Supreme Court’s order and even if they did that they are unlikely to exclude the votes but include a greater amount of Franken votes as MN law errs towards inclusion and the absentee votes were so overwhelming for Franken. The duplicate votes point lacks evidence - unless he witheld it from his court filing and from the Supreme Court when they asked for it last week.
What makes you think it is winnable?
What makes you an expert on whether or not this case is winnable?
Vegas_Rick Wednesday, January 7th at 7:18PM EST (link)Should GWB have caved in 2000? Four years of Al Gore? Now the choice is fight or four years of Al Franken.
As an aside, I wonder how Minnesotans feel about themselves. Jesse the Body and now Al the Idiot.
“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan ‘press on’ has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.” Calvin Coolidge.
I don't agree
Doc Holliday Wednesday, January 7th at 6:31PM EST (link)I doubt most Americans want Franken. If the cheaters know we will always lay over, like Nixon did, then they will not respect us, they will do it even more. Now is the time to fight ’til the end, if nothing else it will show the Demonrat Machine. The Dems have had a bad month. I can’t believe you think the public is mad at Coleman.
Molon Labe!
Believe it. There are actually who call themselves "Republicans" who think Coleman should have conceded even when he was ahead.
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 6:43PM EST (link)I think it’s time to face reality. We need a purge. Some people are simply not worth having within the Big Tent because they amount to a Fifth Column. We’re weaker with them in the Party than with them out of it.
555
Doc Holliday Wednesday, January 7th at 6:46PM EST (link)one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Too many are getting used to losing, or they just don’t want to fight all we need to fight to win. yes, the deck is stacked against us, but this is the only game in town. It is time to lead, follow, or get out of the way!
Molon Labe!
5555555!!!!! -nt
E Pluribus Unum Wednesday, January 7th at 7:35PM EST (link)Carthago delenda est
Do your conservative t-shirt Christmas shopping at EPU Gear. Save the conservative muse, save the world.
Coleman should have conceded when he failed to reach 50%
JSobieski Wednesday, January 7th at 7:42PM EST (link)An incumbent who can’t reach 50% has no business staying in office.
/Sarcasm off
Minnesota Republicans
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 6:49PM EST (link)There are Minnesota Republicans and Minnesota public who are upset with Coleman - I doubt most Americans care who is senator from other states or care about the case at all.
even more reason why coleman should fight
Doc Holliday Wednesday, January 7th at 6:53PM EST (link)if he can’t beat Stuart Smalley, he has no political career. OK, Coleman is as boring as a pet rock, but Minnesotans need to look at themselves and see they are becoming a national joke, first Jesse the body, now this 3rd rate comic?
Molon Labe!
I agree with that
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 6:58PM EST (link)Coleman has little personal reason not to fight (other than the financial cost) - he has no political career left. Remember, he was also the one who lost to that same Jesse the Body Ventura.
Tha doesn’t mean the party and grassroots should stay along for the ride down and use scarce resoruces on a losing battle.
It's thinking like this that kept us in the minority for forty years.
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 7:27PM EST (link)You sound like a typical pedestrian pencil-pushing consultant.
Let me let you in on a little secret; resources would not be so scarce for Republicans if the GOP’s elected officials actually fought instead of listening to people like you.
It’s the constant ducking of fights and avoiding confrontation, the endless senseless compromising and capitulation that has killed off the base’s enthusiasm, and that’s why the money has dried up.
The GOP grassroots would not need to be dragged along, they’ll come by themselves, with their checkbooks and credit cards.
Upset with Coleman? For not standing by and letting the Democrats steal an election? Yep, that makes sense. [nt]
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 7:12PM EST (link)EVERYBODY freaking cares
E Pluribus Unum Wednesday, January 7th at 7:17PM EST (link)the difference between 58-42 and 59-41 is rather non-trivial, to use an IT term.
Carthago delenda est
Do your conservative t-shirt Christmas shopping at EPU Gear. Save the conservative muse, save the world.
Political junkies ren't everybody
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 9:46PM EST (link)Really, you think everybody cares about whether demcorats need 1 or 2 votes to break a filibuster? Everybody barely pays attention to this stuff outside of election season and it is mistake to assume that those of u who follow it closely reflect the iterest of most who vote.
Now, I would also aregue that even from a legislation standpoint it is prety trivial - do you really think it will be that much harder for the democrats o get collins and snow as opposed to just one on a filibuster? I’m not convinced of that.
We should adopt policies to give us better images in the MSM
JSobieski Wednesday, January 7th at 7:45PM EST (link)and permanent minority status in Congress.
Are you giving advice for victory, or advice for defeat?
Were you urging Franken to “drop it” a couple of weeks ago? I don’t seem to remember that post.
Dude, put the /snark/ tag on
E Pluribus Unum Wednesday, January 7th at 7:49PM EST (link)I was starting to wonder, who was that guy in the JSobieski outfit?
Carthago delenda est
Do your conservative t-shirt Christmas shopping at EPU Gear. Save the conservative muse, save the world.
Just getting back in the Redstate swing of things
JSobieski Wednesday, January 7th at 7:53PM EST (link)My oops!
LOL
Then maybe you don't know this:
E Pluribus Unum Wednesday, January 7th at 8:01PM EST (link)Read the small print on this one.
Carthago delenda est
Do your conservative t-shirt Christmas shopping at EPU Gear. Save the conservative muse, save the world.
No, I actually did read that---CONGRATULATIONS!
JSobieski Wednesday, January 7th at 8:09PM EST (link)I’ve been an infrequent reader, but just haven’t made any comments or written any posts.
Actually been doing some reading on . . . John Locke.
Victory carries some defeats
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 9:50PM EST (link)I’m advising for victory, Coleman’s defeat is already done. I’m not sure Franken could have dropped it weeks ago (I believe the recount was automatic under MN law) but even if he could he still had a shot at winning - Coleman right now doesn’t.
I don’t see what is gained by fighting the losing fight, but if you all think it serves a purpose that’s fine.
HELL NO!
tsquare Wednesday, January 7th at 10:47AM EST (link)(stronger words redacted)
Simply no…
One reason to fight
exitsfunnel Wednesday, January 7th at 10:52AM EST (link)The only argument I can think of for the challenge is that at the very least it will suppress a democratic vote as the congress takes up the Obama $800 billion train wreck. Of course this would only be relevant if I actually expected the GOP to fight the thing instead of just trying to get a bit more of the gravy poured in their direction. Which I don’t.
-exits
It doesn't change anything
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 10:56AM EST (link)Unless Burris is seated it doesn’t change the numbers at all - with Franken there would be 99 senators, 60 needed to break a filibuster and 58 Democrats. So they would need two republicans to cross over. Without Franken their are 98 sentors requiring only 59 to break a filibuster and with 57 democrats they need the same two republican crossovers.
Read the news, they're going to seat Burris (n/t)
Finrod Wednesday, January 7th at 11:02AM EST (link).
Finrod’s First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.
“Obama: ancient Kenyan word for Kennedy” — Robin Williams
looks like it nt
lapert Wednesday, January 7th at 12:04PM EST (link)Coleman needs to publicize the election shenanigans
Finrod Wednesday, January 7th at 11:06AM EST (link)Coleman can win this if he combines a court challenge with a media blitz publicizing the two-faced nature of the recount. He does need to get his ducks in a row so he can show that decision A, B, and C gave Franken X more votes than he should have where X > Franken’s certified margin of victory.
Finrod’s First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.
“Obama: ancient Kenyan word for Kennedy” — Robin Williams
Exactly. Coleman needs to mount up a scorched Earth media campaign ...
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 6:31PM EST (link)This is no time to worry about hurting Democrats’ feelings. It’s a fight to the finish - that’s all he should be concentrating on.
This one is really tough to answer.
Steph C Wednesday, January 7th at 11:57AM EST (link)I see there are a lot of opinions arguing for and against but, given what took place, is contesting it actually going to do any good? That’s what Coleman has to look at, not whether he’ll keep his seat, which I doubt he’ll do no matter what evidence he provides. Franken’s “win” was as blatant in your face voter fraud as there as ever been.
On the other hand, if he contests, it will keep the story in the media for a longer period of time which might be helpful in the future. In battle, it’s not always the offense that wins the day. Sometimes, a strategic retreat and defense gains more than pushing forward.
Not being “on the ground” and experiencing events there except through the media filter…
“[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772
Hillbilly Politics
There is nothing tough about it. The answer is "Hell No!" Coleman should fight. [nt]
Martin Knight Wednesday, January 7th at 6:33PM EST (link)5555! When someone kicks sand in your face and steals your lunch money, the one thing you DON'T do is walk away like a victim
JSobieski Wednesday, January 7th at 7:48PM EST (link).
There is strategy to be considered. <nt>
Steph C Thursday, January 8th at 12:44PM EST (link)“[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772
Hillbilly Politics
I have a question
MelZ Wednesday, January 7th at 3:56PM EST (link)Why with something like 700 votes did they do a recount? But now that Frankin has “won” with less than 300 it is suppose to be settled. If I were Coleman I would keep fighting, he had won by a larger margin, there are blatent discrepencies, and really Frankin should not have even been allowed to run….
I just want to know why being 250 or so “up” made Frankin an obvious winner, but being 700 or so up made it a tie?
MelZ
Of course he should fight
zuiko Wednesday, January 7th at 7:22PM EST (link)I don’t expect him to prevail on any of his challenges, because the Minnesota Supreme Court is just awful (”Republican” justices… what a laugh). And some of those sitting on the canvassing board are going to be ruling in judgement of their very own thievery.
He needs to get that thievery on record. Challenging this in court, even if he loses, will be the only way he is going to do that.
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
I also agree
zuiko Wednesday, January 7th at 7:25PM EST (link)That Coleman does not (or at least should not) have a future in politics. I think he did fine in the Senate, all things considered, but there are other candidates who could do just as well or better. And I have no interest in seeing him in any executive capacity. So he has nothing to lose.
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Republicans should never give another inch to a liberal
Elizabeth Christian Wednesday, January 7th at 10:01PM EST (link)fight them and beat them. Part of the problem the GOP has had was trying to be “nice” and as McCain calls it “honorable” which = let the opposition run all over us if need be as long as we can be friends at the end of the day. Just like any job, we should try and be nice to our co-workers at get a long with them, and some may even be friends but that is not why we go to work to make friends - we go to work to get a job done and a paycheck, perhaps if the GOP stays focussed and at the task at hand and fight the liberals every chance they can (regain their spines) then the GOP will be back (I think it will - I just hope it is sooner than later).
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
~Benjamin Franklin
We can dream, es, we can dream
olsmithie Wednesday, January 7th at 11:04PM EST (link)of a world where Republicans are not “gutless” wonders.
I believe it can happen, but we’ve a long road ahead.
Regards