Minnesota court rules Democrat Al Franken won Senate seat

Status
Not open for further replies.
Netto Azure

Netto Azure

«The Ashen Knight»
Retired Staff
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
4,117
Reaction score
4
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8127589.stm

_45994012_franken_ap_226b.jpg

US Democrats win crucial Minnesota Senate seat​

President Barack Obama's party has secured crucial control of 60 seats in the US Senate, after the last undecided seat was awarded to a Democrat.

The Minnesota Supreme Court confirmed that Al Franken had narrowly won November's poll in the state.

On election night Republican Norm Coleman was given a small lead, prompting a recount won by Mr Franken but challenged by Mr Coleman.

Sixty of the 100 seats in the Senate can help defeat delaying tactics.

The Democrats need control of three-fifths of the Senate to overcome a Republican filibuster - a method used by minority parties to delay or prevent voting by excessive speaking.

But although Mr Franken's win gives the Democrats the biggest Senate majority in 30 years, the party cannot always rely on unanimity in its ranks, says the BBC's Richard Lister in Washington.

Two of the votes Democrats rely on come from independents, while some Democratic senators will not automatically back the administration's agenda.

Even President Obama has acknowledged that he does not anticipate having what he called a "rubber-stamp Senate."

In addition, two prominent Democrats, Senator Ted Kennedy and Senator Robert Byrd, have missed a number of votes because of illness and cannot be relied on to be present in the chamber.

Comedian

Mr Coleman, the Republican candidate, fought a protracted legal battle to overturn the results of the recount.

His legal team argued that a number of absentee ballots had been unfairly rejected by local officials.

But the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Mr Coleman's arguments.

"The Supreme Court has made its decision and I will abide by the results," Mr Coleman told reporters.

Mr Franken hailed the result, saying he was "thrilled and honoured by the faith Minnesotans have placed in me".

Mr Franken first came to prominence as a comedian, appearing on Saturday Night Live.

He later became a best-selling author and a host on the liberal Air America radio station.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid issued a statement to "congratulate Senator-elect Al Franken, the next senator from the state of Minnesota".

He added: "The people of Minnesota will now finally get the brilliant and hardworking new senator they elected in November and the full representation they deserve."
Click to expand...

WELL FINALLY THE NEVER ENDING MINNESOTA SENATE DEBACLE HAS ENDED! THE DEMOCRATS SHOULD STOP HALF-ASSING EVERYTHING AND GROW A SPINE! >=D
 
Last edited:
All wanted to say about this was it's about time. Now the governor is under order from the supreme court to sign the certificate of election.
 
Yeah, I can't really say that I'm surprised, I knew that it would lead this way eventually. Pity really, Coleman should go to federal courts, but He's not going to, so I guess Franken won.
 
The federal courts wouldn't hear it. The state supreme court has already verified the election. If he wanted to pursue a federal case, he should have started before their decision. Now, it would look like he's just stalling and federal judges would just throw his case out.

Also, Pawlenty would be violating a court order if he refuses to sign the certificate.
 
Yeah, I understand that at this point that Franken won, and that he's going to be signed in as the senator. I still maintain that he stole the election however, and that Coleman would actually have a chance if he pursued. Of course, since Franken is going to be signed in anyways, and persisting would just hurt Coleman's popularity, I bet he's not going to the federal courts.
 
As I said before the topic was reset (grumble): it's about damn time they announce Franken is the winner. Coleman was being such a sore loser about the whole thing.
 
@ Snake Bandage:

Coleman's not really being a sore loser exactly, but he does believe that he won. If you've looked at this for any long period of time, they have been inconsistent in Minnesota with how they handled the recounts. Partial recounts and decisions on which absentee ballots have been counted have all strangely benefited Franken.
 
@ Snake Bandage:

Here, I dug up this highly relevant Wall Street Journal article. It's a couple months old, but it showcases the situation in Minnesota pretty well:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124000875842430603.html

Originally written in the Wall Street Journal:
Even without any irregularities, this is as close to a "tie" as it gets. And there have been plenty of irregularities. By the end of the recount, the state was awash with evidence of duplicate ballot counting, newly discovered ballots, missing ballots, illegal voting, and wildly diverse standards as to which votes were counted. Any one of these issues was enough to throw the outcome into doubt. Combined, they created a taint more worthy of New Jersey than Minnesota.
Click to expand...

the state Supreme Court and the canvassing board oversaw a haphazard process by which some counties submitted new batches to be included in the tally, while other counties did not. The resulting additional 933 ballots were largely responsible for Mr. Franken's narrow lead.
Click to expand...

If all this sounds familiar, think Florida 2000. In that Presidential recount, officials couldn't decide what counted as a legal vote, and so different counties used different standards. The Florida Supreme Court made things worse by changing the rules after the fact. In Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this violated Constitutional principles of equal protection and due process, which require that every vote be accorded equal weight.
Click to expand...

Basically, they're required to use the same standards for all the votes, something which they have not done. Coleman has every right to persist IMO.
 
Snake- That's what people said about Al Gore no? =P

Glad it's coming to an end, but the whole process has been iffy at best from the looks of it.
 
Phoenicks said:
@ Snake Bandage:

Here, I dug up this highly relevant Wall Street Journal article. It's a couple months old, but it showcases the situation in Minnesota pretty well:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124000875842430603.html


Basically, they're required to use the same standards for all the votes, something which they have not done. Coleman has every right to persist IMO.
Click to expand...
If by "showcase the situation pretty well" you mean "disingenuously copy word-for-word the Coleman list of arguments".

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/01/did-wall-street-jorunal-fire-their-fact.html
 
As a Minnesota voter who actually voted for Norm, I'm just glad this is finally over. Coleman isn't going to appeal to the Supreme Court so Franken is in.

It just shows that the voting process needs to be redone. It was Floria-like here.
 
LOL. Reset. XD (Didn't know you can do that XP)

Well you guys know what I think. Now that Coleman has officially conceded defeat well...you guys now know what we felt when Al Gore did the same thing in front of the Senate back in 2001. :<
 
@ Evil Figment:

First, 538 isn't that reliable of a source for information, I can't imagine why you'd go there. But on topic, it seems to me like the author of that article started with his conculsion of Franken being the winner and discrediting the WSJ article instead of looking at the facts and going from there. There's one part where he ignores the point of the WSJ article about the votes needing to be counted in a uniform way, and instead talks about how it's 'right' for all of the votes to be counted. In the end of the article, he stops addressing the points and instead uses his pre-conceived conclusion to back up his argument.

@ Netto Azure:

Yeah, I guess that's how you guys felt, but I'm still not a Republican. I don't care that the Republicans lost one seat, I'm more concerned that the Democrats have the 60 seat majority they need. At least there's good ole' senator kennedy!

EDIT: I meant to write 'not' instead of 'now'. I'm not a Republican in any way.
 
Last edited:
Phoenicks said:
@ Netto Azure:

Yeah, I guess that's how you guys felt, but I'm still now a Republican. I don't care that the Republicans lost one seat, I'm more concerned that the Democrats have the 60 seat majority they need. At least there's good ole' senator kennedy!
Click to expand...

LOL. Senator Kennedy has one of the more liberal Health-care bills that's going through committee right now. XP

But it's sad that he cannot be there to lead the Senate Health Care reform package due to medical problems. :<
 
@ Netto Azure:

Oops, I made a typo there. I didn't mean to say that I'm 'now' a Republican, but that I'm 'not' a Republican. Sorry. o_0

Yeah, although my dad had some interesting things to say about Kennedy. He said that Kennedy used to be a drunk, and that Kennedy's new wife tried to break him of it or something. Apparently, he had cancer and reverted. Also, on Obama's inauguration, Kennedy had to be taken to the hospital for 'medical' reasons. My dad said that his friends in Washington said that the reality was that Kennedy got drunk. Either way, without Kennedy in D.C. full time, and with Spector being only a partial Democrat, it's unlikely that Franken will cause them to have the full 60 they need at all times. They'll have it occaisonally, sure, but not always.
 
The argument of 538 is precisely that the votes ARE being counted according to a standard: the standard that, when in (reasonable) doubt as to the legitimacy of certain votes, it is preferable to risk accepting votes that shouldn't be accepted, than to risk depriving legitimate voters of their right to vote.

Which is, in fact, just an extension of a very, very basic legal standards. When it comes to depriving someone of their rights (such as voting rights, or their freedom, or their lives), you only do so if their guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Otherwise (at least according to the existing theories and standards), the accused is innocent, because it's preferable to allow the guilty to enjoy rights they should not, than to deprive the innocent of rights they have every right to.

And here the extension is - unless it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that a ballot was filled illegitimately, it should be counted.

So it is a standard. It's just a standard the WSJ editors behind this piece (and, apparently, yourself) dislike.
 
Last edited:
@ Evil Figment:

The Supreme Court Ruling in Bush v. Gore was there needs to be one uniform system for ballot counting. You can't selectively apply recounts in one area, but not in another. If you believe that all people have the right to vote (I share this belief too), then the standard should be to accept the ballots in all cases. Of couse, in Minnesota, they didn't use one uniform system, but applied selective logic wherever they felt like applying it. This is what lead to Franken's victory. Although, they should have held a run-off like they did in Georgia to settle this a long time ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom