What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
271 Comments
- Jericho6, on 01/06/2009, -5/+47I just wanted to say I'm disturbed about all these comments about "stealing" an election. This process was overseen by both sides, lawyers, and even broadcast live on the internet. For crying out loud, there are scans of the reviewed ballots online. If anything was fraud proof, this was it.
Most of the so called allegations made are either completely false or lack any real evidence to back them up. Folks, this is why states have mandated recounts. The original tallys are not accurate. In a close race like this, there's going to be some fluxuation in the vote count. It just happened that this race was close enough to where the winner changed. It's not fraud, it's not anyone's fault, it's simply the counting of votes.
Coleman's making any allegation he can to stay alive, but none of his allegations have any basis in fact. At least not yet. One of his lawsuits was already dismissed for lack of evidence. You may not like the result, but it was as fair a result as possible given the situation.
Some of the comments here make me think less of people. They're either trolling, ignorant, or so blindly devouted to one side that they make up any claim to further their "side". And sadly, they may even believe their own BS. - baldboy7, on 01/06/2009, -3/+43First off Coleman said before the recount was being considered that he didn't want Franken to waste the tax payers money on a recount. Now he is planning supreme court cases. Then during the whole recount he wanted uncounted votes to not be counted. For backwards logic there is always Norm Coleman.
- Jericho6, on 01/05/2009, -5/+41It's all over but the crying.
I'm sure people can argue about all the decisions made here, but this was heavily scutinized and overseen from the outset. This is about as fair a result as you can come up with given the situation. - MMusick, on 01/06/2009, -3/+38Diggie Howser? Really? Hell, I'd Digg this simply for your name.
- warpdesign, on 01/06/2009, -6/+34Hmmm. Too bad it didn't work for Gore then, we'd have been much better off!
- Gerz1219, on 01/06/2009, -7/+33Well, unless you've personally examined all of these ballots, you're giving away your bias without knowing all the facts. These 600+ rejected ballots were rejected for pretty good reasons, under standards agreed to by both campaigns, and Coleman is trying to make an issue about them because he lost. He cherry-picked these ballots because they came from Coleman-favored counties, but they're invalid for previously agreed upon reasons. If these same ballots came from Franken counties, you can be assured he would have fought tooth and nail to prevent them from being counted. Coleman is a man who challenged every ballot that split their vote between McCain and Franken.
This has seriously been the most transparent recount in history, and the state of Minnesota should be proud of running a contest that is a shining example of the democratic process. If there were a legitimate reason to count these votes, Franken would not have been certified the winner, because these votes would have been counted.
We now know that more voters voted for Franken on election night. But let's put that aside. Coleman was the incumbent senator in this seat, and 58% of Minnesota voters voted for not-Coleman. Barkley stole 16% of the vote from Franken and Franken won anyway. The will of the voters was clearly against Coleman staying in that seat. And therefore, I fail to see how he has any reasonable democratic claim to stay in the Senate. - KevenM, on 01/06/2009, -8/+32I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
- niradg, on 01/06/2009, -3/+25The Minnesota Board of Canvassers, who oversaw the recount and unanimously certified the vote today, is made up of 2 Republicans, 2 Democrats and 1 independent. And yet you have all these sour grape Republicans claiming it was stolen. What a bunch of wankers.
- Insightful, on 01/06/2009, -11/+31Startribune.com has all the blow-by-blow details enough to bore a C-SPAN fan.
Please do not call doubts and ask someone to prove you wrong without doing some work yourself. - durruticolumn, on 09/18/2009, -0/+20"Could you imagine if Yakov Smirnoff ran for office as Republican and won?"
Wait, who's the Governor of California? And you do know that Sonny Bono was a Republican, right? - costumemaker, on 01/06/2009, -1/+19and on top of that, franken didn't even ask for the recount in the first place.. it was mandated by law because of the close margin of the vote. Franken only asked that every vote be counted whereas coleman fought like hell to only count the votes he wanted to be counted.
- costumemaker, on 01/06/2009, -2/+19yah, can you believe how franken just LET the recount happen even though it was mandated by state law??? wtf is up with him!
- DillingerSmooth, on 01/05/2009, -11/+28Eventually all our politicians will be actors and actor will be politicians
- jboitnott, on 01/06/2009, -3/+19Politicians aren't actors already?
- FreddieD, on 01/06/2009, -0/+16No, 200 votes is not kicking ass.
Going from a 55-44 republican senate lead to a 59-41 democrat senate lead, a 231-200 republican house lead to a 257-178 democrat house lead, and a democratic president winning in an electoral landslide, all in only two election cycles is kicking ass.
And guess what, 19 of 34 senate seats that are up in two years are currently held by republicans! If this economy turns around and Obama doesn't overreach, kiss your filibuster goodbye. - tamaker, on 01/06/2009, -4/+20Cool. Bill O's head just exploded somewhere.
- Jericho6, on 01/06/2009, -0/+16Coleman was fighting not to count ANY erroneously rejected absentee ballots (when he had the lead). Now he wants even more absentee ballots counted than they already have (now that he's behind). The ballots Coleman wants counted have twice been reviewed by local election officials and still are considered ineligible. It's not like anyone's pulling a fast one here. Coleman's just throwing desperation lobs at anything. Most of his lawsuits have been dismissed for lack of evidence. There are plenty of claims he's making, just none with any actual backing.
- kingofinternet, on 01/05/2009, -1/+16would you believe that norm coleman went to high school with chuck schumer?
small world we got here - richlizard24, on 01/05/2009, -16/+31The Republicans are a bunch of douche bags. They damn well know that the Democrats would be saying the same thing had Franken lost the recount and the Republicans would be bashing them for it constantly.
- darkciti2, on 01/06/2009, -5/+20That didn't happen.
FoxNews said it happened, but as usual, they were lying. All of the military votes were counted. - inactive, on 01/06/2009, -4/+19Republicans need to stop whining and accept the will of the people.
- carbonfilament, on 01/06/2009, -3/+17Its too bad that we have to have lawsuits. What happened to gracefully losing?
Also, does anyone have references to legally contested elections before the Gore/Bush fiasco? Pretty sure there were, but I've been googling ***** all night and don't feel up to it anymore. - maz2331, on 01/06/2009, -5/+19Cue lawsuits in 5... 4... 3... 2...
- SteveMTyler, on 01/06/2009, -4/+18yeah. GOP attempts to steal the election didn't pan out because they didn't do it on a large enough scale. Must have messed up the math somewhere.
- thespiff, on 01/06/2009, -0/+13How does any of that, whether it's true or not, impact whether he got more votes than the other guy?
This isn't about your opinion of him. This is about whether votes for Franken were more numerous than votes for Coleman. The recount says they are. It should be over. - inactive, on 01/05/2009, -13/+26While I would be a supporter of Mr Franken had I lived in Minnesota, I am curious as to why the 600+ rejected ballots were rejected. I wasnt paying attention to every little detail leading up to this point, so can someone point me to a URL with the article why they were rejected?
Reading articles about the ballots being rejected, without explaining why, well I call mild shenannigans on that. Please prove me wrong on this, from a moderate POV. - mal1964, on 01/06/2009, -0/+12Bush's Baked Beans?
- biotch, on 01/06/2009, -0/+12What the hell man?
It was bush that brought a case to the supreme court to keep votes from being counted.
Did you mean the certified Bush attorney-approved law suit method of getting elected?
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_00_9 ...
And the lawsuit is being brought by Coleman ... the recount was mandated by law.... not by Franken. - FreddieD, on 01/06/2009, -0/+12I wonder if that crazy lady from Minnesota who called Obama an arab had a heart attack after seeing the election results.
- darkciti2, on 01/06/2009, -2/+14Democrats have seen it actually happen (in 2000).
We're not bitching, we're just more attentive to Republican corruption now. - bearsfan4sho, on 01/06/2009, -6/+18Not an Al Franken fan, but even less of a Norm Coleman fan.
- 13373h4X0r, on 01/06/2009, -2/+13Hear, hear! A voice of reason!
As if to make your point, Jericho6, the very next post (which I see has -1 diggs right now) begins with "Al Franken stole this election...". LOL! - toast3d1, on 01/06/2009, -10/+21Franken FTW!!!
- darkciti2, on 01/06/2009, -4/+14I'd rather have Al Franken and Caroline Kennedy in power than the Bush cabal.
Can you imagine if Jeb Bush ran for office and won? That's how desperate the Repugs are.
Your words, arranged logically. How does it taste? - trafficlight, on 01/06/2009, -0/+10I'm done cueing things.
- DirtyBinLV, on 01/06/2009, -1/+11The Chris Rock version is better-
Bush was such a bad President, that he made it difficult for a white man to get elected President. - FreddieD, on 01/06/2009, -3/+12For real! The nerve of Franken going through with a required state recount. He is clearly a corrupt politician.
- mikelieman, on 01/06/2009, -0/+9Imagine what their Facebook pages look like...
Or maybe not. - novenator, on 01/06/2009, -0/+9He and Cornyn also threatened to fillibuster any Franken seating after saying it is up to MINNESOTANS to resolve this, so they need to stop trying to stick their noses in where it doesn't belong
- Jericho6, on 01/06/2009, -0/+9But the Senate has temporarily sat the leader in such situations before. So they may sit Franken, even on a temp basis for now.
- sgtbutterscotch, on 01/06/2009, -1/+9That's probably why he said "Eventually all"
- TigerStar337, on 01/06/2009, -6/+14"Get over it." This is what the Republicans said after the 2000 Presidential election.
- darkciti2, on 01/06/2009, -2/+10There were no precedents. Republicans stole the 2000 election via Katherine Harris (the Secretary of State of Florida [a former leader of the Bush campaign]).
That point of failure has been fixed - permanently. Jeb Bush will _NEVER_ be elected President. - Jericho6, on 01/06/2009, -0/+8No one's refused to sit anyone yet. The Burris pick is just a political bomb. The Democrats want to distance themselves from any corruption. But in the end they may just sit Burris. Could all be hot air. Franken can be seated on a tempoprary basis if the Senate want pending resolution of any lawsuits.
- Jericho6, on 01/06/2009, -1/+9No lawyer will be able to overturn anything unless there's actual facts to support the claims. That's Coleman's biggest problem. For all his lawsuits, there's pretty much zero evidence to back it up.
- ThsGuyRightHere, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7Franken's stance the whole time has been "count every legitimate vote and if I win then great, and if not I'll concede." Coleman's stance changes based on whether or not he's winning.
- akchrs, on 01/06/2009, -5/+12They won't seat him until the lawsuits are settled.
- GlassAgate, on 01/06/2009, -2/+9I won't be happy until I see a once crooked politician doing
a commercial for a can of pork and beans. That will be the day. - ThsGuyRightHere, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7I'll say this much for him, for a rookie to politics he carried himself extremely well during this debacle. He claimed and held the moral high ground through the whole episode, something Coleman absolutely failed to do.
- hangman16, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8Yes, nobody who voted for Obama knows what he stands for or how the government works. I'm sure some fall into this category, but not the majority.
By your logic I could say the people who voted for McCain did so because Obama was a 'negro' and because Palin was the holy second coming. -
Show 51 - 100 of 275 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is