December 21, 2008

Franken campaign's absurd statement

In Minnesota, Mark Elias - Al Franken's campaign attorney is claiming they will win by 35-50 votes when the Senate recount is complete. The fact that the statement has been been is absurd.

1) If they know that is the case, then to paraphrase Corporal Hudin the movie Aliens, why don't we just put him in charge? Did his team count faster than the official recount?

2) The comments mean nothing, since the recount is NOT FINISHED. On top of that it's inappropriate to claim victory during a recount. What happened to every vote must be counted? Is that only true when you're behind, Democrats?

3) How can they possibly know the outcome before it happens unless they know something others don't know? Which they shouldn't know by the way. If that's the case, then the fix is in - so why advertise it?

The real question is whether this election is being stolen. It sure seems like the recount will continue until the outcome Franken is looking for is accomplished. Sort of reminds me of 2000, when Democrats tried to steal the election from Bush. If indeed the election is being stolen, Americans have a right to know. This should be a more open process - as the rug is being pulled out from underneath Senator Coleman there needs to be brought into the light of day the underhanded tactics in play from the Franken camp.

Secondarily where is Coleman on these questions? I would be all over every comment out of the Franken camp. Decorum has no place in this situation. Every comment, no matter how inane has to be challenged and requests for tangible proof must be forthcoming. If I were part of the Coleman team, every day I would be talking to the media, explaining the latest Franken tactic and why each questionable one is being allowed and what it means for Democracy. This is a knock-down drag out fight being fought on one side and the Coleman camp has no reason to remain above the fray - they're in it whether they want to be or not. The votes are in, public image doesn't matter for these guys until 2014. So fight for every vote, procedurally and publicly. Make your case publicly because whether you want to admit it or not, public opinion can cause a bias on anyone, including election officials.

Lastly, the US Senate does not need another blowhard demagogue right now, and Franken fits that bill to a T. And if he's corrupt to boot, it compounds the image of the Blagojevich/Rahm scandal. Surely the electorate, particularly the Democrat electorate, is not so cynical as to say "who cares if he's a crook, he's on our side' he's the guy we want". And surely, if that's the case, the effort should be started right now, if evidence is there, use it to make the point about political corruption. This is not change, unless change for the worse counts as change. I guess technically it does, but I'm pretty sure it's not the change the Obamabots were voting to get. Then again, maybe it's not the type of change they are prone to want to notice.


  1. Coleman has already declared victory three times. Franken is just playing along. The Coleman campaign is also confiodent of victory, and they did respond to Franken's statement. Dueling PR releases. Deal with it.

    Everything is proceeding normally and on schedule. Coleman never won. He was ahead when the votes were counted, but by Minnesota law he was not the winner because a recount was required by law. There will be no winner until the end of the month at the earliest -- later than that if Coleman sues, which he probably will. (And so, probably, will Franken, if he's behind.)

    Most claims of fraud have been checked and found to be false. The Republicans have been on the job. They just don't feel able to claim fraud without evidence.

    You don't have to like Franken, respect him, or agree with him, but if you accuse him of stealing the election you have to have evidence. There really isn't any.

  2. I'm not the only one adding the numbers together and suspecting something rotten in the state of Minnesota.

    Here's just one succinct example;

    There's no proof, and there may never be any. But the oddities keep compiling.

  3. Believe me, I know that lots of people are talking about fraud. I've been doing a study of the internet "stolen election" rumors for the last several days, and knocking down misconceptions when i find them.

    The process in Minnesota is pretty transparent, with Republicans involved at all levels, and Republicans in Minnesota haven't found the fraud that national Republicans are talking about.

    I'm not asking for proof, but you need to give evidence. Hunches aren't worth a dime.

    The widest swing enyone has reported is about 1000 votes, from +700 Coleman to + 300 Franken. On Tuesday the Franken advantage will go down to 100 when the released challenges are counted, because Coleman has fewer of them. That will leave a net swing of about 800 votes, which is about 0.03%, or 3 votes out of every 10,000. That's not a wide swing.

    Furthermore, the first 500 vote swing was the difference between the unofficial late-night phone-in tally the night of election, which was corrected the next day in the official tally. That's at the low end of the normal range for overnight corrections of that type. Usually it doesn't make any difference. (The Coleman people are no longer talking about this issue, but you can be sure they've looked into it carefully).

    People in Minnesota, including Republicans, are proud of the state's reputation for honest elections, and a lot of people, many of them Republicans, have been working hard to get a good count. Your fact-free rumor spreading is an insult to all of them.

  4. I notice that you've visited a few other sites posting the same propoganda under the same psuedonym.

    and here where you call Republican's morons;

    or here where you apparently write for the Minnesota Progressive;

    Instead of allowing us to question a seemingly unusual situation that actually merits discussion you are asking us to shut up and let the election possibly be stolen. C'mon you're supposed to be a 'progressive' all concerned about Democracy. I guess that only applies when you get things your way. Do you work for the Franken campaign or something?

  5. Nobody pays me anything. I've given the DFL party and Al Franken a total of $200 this year out of a monthly take home of $1700.

    What I've been doing is going from place to place and asking people to justify their ungrounded assertions. There are a large number of people who are repeating false rumors. Sometimes I ask people what their grounds are, and sometimes I explain what actually happened. I'm not being intolerant and I'm not suppressing anyone. I'm trying to counter an erroneous point of view which I oppose. I've followed this case very closely and am on top of what's actually happened. (Lott's article was refuted the next day by the Minneapolis Tribune.)

    What does the word "propaganda" mean to you? Anything you disagree with? I've been following this recount pretty closely and have a pretty good idea what happened. Some of the people I argue with have no facts at all; others get erroneous facts from Fox, the WSJ, Sean Hannity, etc. Stories that were disproven long ago are repeated again and again -- for example, the ballots in the trunk of the car.

    Everyone in Minnesota, including the Republicans, is making a good faith attempt to have a clean election. It's really insulting for uninformed people to demean that.

    Neither Coleman nor Pawlenty is backing any of the rumors of fraud that are out there. It's only national Republican media people who are doing that.

    My main point up until yesterday was that if you accuse someone of a crime you need to provide evidence. Yesterday and today I've switched over to saying that there are too many Republicans who are willing to commit slander and repeat false rumors. And no, I can't respect that. If you slander good people people will get mad at you.

  6. But again, that's being subjective - is it okay for Al Franken to call Rush Limbaugh a "big fat idiot". In Al Franken's opinion, that's what Rush is, but there are no facts that support slander.

    There is reason to be suspicious of what's happening. Why do you claim on your that Coleman is attempting to steal the election, but the reverse can't be claimed? It's even in the title of your post;

    Or do you have undisputable proof?

  7. Read the first line of my post at Mnprogressive project. The headline was a joke.

    Insults are not slander. Accusing someone of crime is slander. With political figures it isn't actionable, but it's still slander.

    Here are some links for people talking about a stolen election. John Lott is not reliable, and in his most recent piece he relied on an inaccurate Star Tribune story.


Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This