Subby (D-imwit).

Now why did I do that? I'm having people dyslexia. Mods, delete?

I like how he was against a recount or any lawsuits to hold up the process when he was winning.

(D)iogenes (I)s (R)etracting.

(L)OL

He said the case should proceed to the next step only if he gains "a sufficient number of votes" in the prior stage.

"If" is different than "once", subby.

Just give it up, already. Christ. The recount is DONE. It's OVER.

Isn't it usually the prospective winner who runs out the clock?

You know Norm, while it is incredibly embarassing that you lost to Al Franken, the simple fact remains: you lost.

/get over it, go out with somebody else

(S)elf (P)wned in the (B)oobies.

Isn't this the same Coleman that made a big deal about Franken being unpatriotic for wanting a recount? Funny how his standards change when they don't help him.

Funny how the Republican's, who are against frivolous law suits and were against leagal action in the presidential recount, are all over this.

Voters get the government they deserve. And that counts double in Minnesota.

i wonder when Coleman will SHUT UP and GO AWAY?

All2morrowsparTs
Funny how the Republican's, who are against frivolous law suits and were against leagal action in the presidential recount, are all over this.

Plenty of hypocracy to go around on this one. It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

GoldSpider: Voters get the government they deserve. And that counts double in Minnesota.

Why do you hate the concept of average Americans running for office?

MFL: It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

I have to agree with you on this.

GAT_00: I like how he was against a recount or any lawsuits to hold up the process when he was winning.

And Franken I'm sure is against recounts all of a sudden.

why are Republicans forcing our nation to think about overturning this election... Why put the nation through that? Why do they hate America?

Can the Minnesotans expect to get a federal tax return since they don't have representations?

They had a recount like the law said and Coleman lost.

He is being an ass.

Lando Lincoln: Just give it up, already. Christ. The recount is DONE. It's OVER.

Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

MFL: Plenty of hypocracy to go around on this one. It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

Except this time a full statewide recount was completed, and in a transparent and open fashion, which never happened in 2000.

Why don't we just throw them both out and appoint a monkey?

it would probably do a better job...

shirtsbyeric: GAT_00: I like how he was against a recount or any lawsuits to hold up the process when he was winning.

And Franken I'm sure is against recounts all of a sudden.

Nope he would just win again.

MFL: Plenty of hypocracy to go around on this one. It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

Except it was the Republicans suing both times to end the recount they would have lost.

shirtsbyeric: And Franken I'm sure is against recounts all of a sudden.

How do you mean? The recount was conducted fully -- with Franken's support.

shirtsbyeric: And Franken I'm sure is against recounts all of a sudden.

How many more recounts would you like?

MFL: Why don't we just throw them both out and appoint a monkey?

it would probably do a better job...

Senator Simian. I like that.

Ponzholio: Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

Germans?

Lando Lincoln: Ponzholio: Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

Germans?


Forget it, he's rolling.

Lando Lincoln: Ponzholio: Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

Germans?

Let him be. He's on a roll.

i thought monkeys only could write shakespear if locked in a room together...not govern

shirtsbyeric: And Franken I'm sure is against recounts all of a sudden.

Why do yet another recount? It wouldn't change anything. Each campaign has had the chance to review and challenge each ballot, and all rejected ballots have been twice inspected to make sure they were properly rejected. Any issues should have been brought up and resolved already.

There's very good cause for recounting once in close races -- which is why Minnesota has the law they do -- but there's very little point to recounting more than once.

Sum Dum Gai: but there's very little point to recounting more than once.

But the Republican lost to a comedian! The Democrats must have cheated.

Now I see why Republicans hate losing... It's because they're terrible at it.

The difference between Franken and Coleman is that when people laugh at Franken, he gets paid for it.

MFL: Plenty of hypocracy to go around on this one. It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

While it may seem childish, at least the Democrats can say, "Hey, we're just pulling a page from your playbook."

Besides, the Democrats haven't really pushed for anything they weren't legally entitled to in this case. State law called for an automatic recount, and the Republicans tried to act like Franken was trying to steal the election because he didn't demand the recount be stopped.

On the other hand, the Democrats never really got a proper recount in Florida. They started one in several counties, and it got stopped by the courts. But now the Minnesota recount has come out in Franken's favor, and the Republicans are filing a lawsuit.

Also, there's no evidence that Minnesota was arbitrarily disqualifying likely Republican voters or that Al Franken's brother was conspiring to win the election for him.

Britney Spear's Speculum: MFL: Why don't we just throw them both out and appoint a monkey?

Because we tried that with the Presidency and look what happened.

MFL: Link (new window)

Link (new window)

Since the legal wrangling focused on how votes were defined, the media-sponsored review did, too, calculating results under different standards _ for example, whether to count as votes "hanging chads" on punch-card ballots or ballots marked with an "X" instead of the required filled-in oval on optical scan ballots.

Under any standard that tabulated all disputed votes statewide, Gore erased Bush's advantage and emerged with a tiny lead that ranged from 42 to 171 votes.

CowboyNinjaD: Al Franken's brother was conspiring to win the election for him.

Dotto Dranken seen roaming the state with a 2x4.

MFL: All2morrowsparTs
Funny how the Republican's, who are against frivolous law suits and were against leagal action in the presidential recount, are all over this.

Plenty of hypocracy to go around on this one. It's like the roles of each party are reversed from 2000.

You must mean when Al Gore, on the conclusion of the recount, continued to press lawsuits intended to make sure that no president would be put in office on the planned inauguration day.

That is what you meant, isn't it?
Because that never happened.

I'm going to take this opportunity to remind everyone that Coleman was the guy on Nov 5th saying that Franken should concede because the cost of a recount "wouldn't be worth the tax dollars it would take to conduct". Now that he's on the losing end, it's apparently worth unlimited tax dollars to make officials sift through endless paperwork that's already been reviewed at least twice (and sometimes 3x).

You lost, Coleman. Suck it.

/And if anyone posts a comment about "more votes than voters" I claim the right to biatchslap them until they come up with a citation.

My sexual encounter with Naomi Watts will proceed only when my penis is sufficiently inserted in one of her obliging orifices.

It's kinda like that.

MFL:

Glad to see you haven't given up on being wrong about everything.

/2004 was stolen in Ohio

They won't seat Franken, but they will seat Burris? I don't understand this. Both apparently have papers which are not in order. Specifically, a signed certificate of election. Am I missing something?

eraser8
From teh first paragraph of your article
Florida presidential election indicates George W. Bush would have narrowly prevailed in the partial recounts sought by Al Gore, but Gore might have reversed the outcome

With an election that close you can always say using a different standard things might have gone differently. I mean fark, Gore wanted to count people who voted for Pat Buchanan for himself.

Minnesota won't have a second senator until February at the earliest after the state Supreme Court gave itself several weeks to consider Democrat Al Franken's request for an expedited election certificate.

I think if you give yourself several weeks to decide on "expediting" something, you've kind of already made your decision.

MFL: I mean fark, Gore wanted to count people who voted for Pat Buchanan for himself.

That's simply not true.

There were some very upset people in Palm Beach County who wanted a revote...but the Gore campaign never suggested that Buchanan's vote tally should be handed to them.

brigid_fitch: I'm going to take this opportunity to remind everyone that Coleman was the guy on Nov 5th saying that Franken should concede because the cost of a recount "wouldn't be worth the tax dollars it would take to conduct". Now that he's on the losing end, it's apparently worth unlimited tax dollars to make officials sift through endless paperwork that's already been reviewed at least twice (and sometimes 3x).

Coleman is apparently talking to the press. Has any reporter called him on this? I want to hear someone say "hey Norm, when you thought you won, you said Franken should step aside and somehow tell the state not to conduct the legally required recount. Other than falling behind in the count, why have you changed your mind?"

Hideously Gigantic Smurf: Britney Spear's Speculum: MFL: Why don't we just throw them both out and appoint a monkey?

Because we tried that with the Presidency and look what happened.

In my best David Attenborough voice:

Notice how MFL said appoint and Hideously Gigantic Smurf immediately referred to Bush because he wasn't elected, he was appointed.