Minnesota Recont - Challenged Ballots

And, for another thing, he didn't bubble in the name besides "write-in". It would be an overvote if he had written a name there, bubbled it in, and then bubbled in the one besides Al Franken. But he bubbled in Al Frankens name and wrote "Lizard people" on the ballot without bubbling that option in.
 
Last edited:
Watermark said:
That's the purpose of a write in candidate?

In most places you have to register to be a write in candidate. If someone puts an absurd name there that was completely unregistered anyway and then marks a real candidate on the ballot, it's clear what their intentions were.
Click to expand...

yes, their intent is to have their vote not count or to have it cast in protest of the candidates on the ballot. Because that is what happens when you do stupid shit like that.
 
Superfreak said:
Dumbshit... that is the purpose of a write in candidate... IF you write someone in, whether fictional or real, and you mark your ballot in this case for both the write in and a candidate, then your vote does not count.

I also note that the people who 'voted' on Dungs site all said the one with the arrow to Colemans name should go to Franken. Does that seem odd to you?
Click to expand...


I'm not even going to deal with your prior nonsense. As for the Lizard People ballot, if you look at the ballot itself the voter properly voted for the write in candidate in the race above the Senate race. You see that the voter wrote in "Lizard People" and filled in the appropriate oval next to the write in slot. In the Franken-Coleman contest, the voter wrote in "Lizard People" but clearly cast a ballot for Franken.

As for the "arrow" ballot, that "arrow" claim is just about as silly, if not more, than the underline claim. It doesn't really look like an arrow to me. It looks like stray marks.

Oh, and just for the record, the Coleman campaign is challenging far more ballots than the Franken campaign. Both sides have some ridiculous challenges though.

Finally, as for your quote above from John Lott, who seems to be the go-to source for right-wing horseshit regarding the Coleman-Franken race (including that steaming pile of horseshit you posted from the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page a few days ago), it is in direct contravention of Minnesota election law and the recount process.

This isn't 'Nam, Smokey. There are rules.
 
Watermark said:
And, for another thing, he didn't bubble in the name besides "write-in". It would be an overvote if he had written a name there, bubbled it in, and then bubbled in the one besides Al Franken. But he bubbled in Al Frankens name and wrote "Lizard people" on the ballot without bubbling that option in.
Click to expand...

there is ALSO an 'X' marked through the vote for Franken. Clearly he did not wish to vote for anyone.
 
Superfreak said:
there is ALSO an 'X' marked through the vote for Franken. Clearly he did not wish to vote for anyone.
Click to expand...

There's a somewhat visible "x" behind the bubble in on the clear vote for the lizard people above the senate race also. People often use X's when voting in optical ballots. The scanner machine probably told him that wouldn't work, so he went back and filled the entire thing in.

He didn't put fill in the bubble besides "Write in", so it's irrelevant what he wrote there. His other votes for "lizard men" on the ballot have a bubble next to "lizard men", so it's apparent that he understood this concept.
 
If I were the judge... I would...

Reject ballots 3 and 5
Count ballot 2

For Senate,

Coleman would get the vote for 1,7 and 11
Franken would get the vote for 4, 6 and 8
Barkley would get 9 and 10
 
Watermark said:
There's a somewhat visible "x" behind the bubble in on the clear vote for the lizard people above the senate race also. People often use X's when voting in optical ballots. The scanner machine probably told him that wouldn't work, so he went back and filled the entire thing in.

He didn't put fill in the bubble besides "Write in", so it's irrelevant what he wrote there. His other votes for "lizard men" on the ballot have a bubble next to "lizard men", so it's apparent that he understood this concept.
Click to expand...

no CLEARLY he started to vote for Franken and THEN "X'ed" it out.
 
Watermark said:
Again, we are probably talking about seniors and others.

You are crying because you can't disfranchise Franken voters. Go fuck yourself. In a tight race even voters who made a mistake should be counted.
Click to expand...
The ballot comes right back out at you if you undervoted. It tells you what the issue is, if you choose to the election judge can do either of two things, let you mark your ballot on the undervoted item, or if you elect the ballot will count with only those selections you undervoted not being counted.
 
Damocles said:
The ballot comes right back out at you if you undervoted. It tells you what the issue is, if you choose to the election judge can do either of two things, let you mark your ballot on the undervoted item, or if you elect the ballot will count with only those selections you undervoted not being counted.
Click to expand...


We've been through this a number of times now. You are not an expert on elections in Minnesota. You may know a thing or two about Colorado election law, but that is it. Please recognize your limitations.
 
Dungheap said:
We've been through this a number of times now. You are not an expert on elections in Minnesota. You may know a thing or two about Colorado election law, but that is it. Please recognize your limitations.
Click to expand...
I do know the machine they use. This is inane. I work the elections as a judge consistently and some areas use this exact machine.

My post had nothing to do with law, it had to do with how the machine works.
 
Any ballot with two people marked in the same race should be rejected. EVEN the one with Coleman marked then a "no" by it. It is TOO EASY to get another ballot and make it right. This is not rocket science gang. The one with the check mark by the name should be rejected. Again not rocket science.
 
Socrtease said:
Any ballot with two people marked in the same race should be rejected. EVEN the one with Coleman marked then a "no" by it. It is TOO EASY to get another ballot and make it right. This is not rocket science gang. The one with the check mark by the name should be rejected. Again not rocket science.
Click to expand...

no way jose... because these five people are experts at determining intent. They know how to process these. Just settle down lawyer man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top