+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Franken pulls ahead in recount (/showthread.php?tid=68728)
Franken pulls ahead in recount - Black Landlord - 12-20-2008
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/20/politics/main4679466.shtml
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - freeradical - 12-20-2008
I get the very bad feeling that Al Franken is going to manage to steal this election.
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - Black Landlord - 12-20-2008
freeradical wrote:
I get the very bad feeling that Al Franken is going to manage to steal this election.
With about a zillion eyes on the process, I'd say that anyone who could still manage to "steal" an election has almost proven themselves too clever for political office.
Also, did you read the article?
The big unknown is how many of the withdrawals were an attempt by each campaign to stifle an opponent's vote - rather than an attempt to get one for themselves off an unclear ballot. Among those the board considered, Franken had far more challenges where he secured an extra vote for himself than Coleman.
Looks like Coleman's main strategy is to try to knock out votes for his oponent, while Franken's is to reclaim lost, legitimate votes for him.
So who's "stealing?"
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - freeradical - 12-20-2008
In all seriousness, when an election is this close, there really is no way to tell when someone has won. So what good is a recount when both sides are trying to game the recount to their own advantage? Franken should have simply conceded the race. After all, Nixon was man enough to concede the 1960 Presidential campaign even though he knew that Democrats in Texas and Illinois stole the election for Kennedy.
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - mattkime - 12-20-2008
>>Franken should have simply conceded the race.
Coleman should have conceded the race!
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - Black Landlord - 12-20-2008
freeradical wrote:
In all seriousness, when an election is this close, there really is no way to tell when someone has won. So what good is a recount when both sides are trying to game the recount to their own advantage? Franken should have simply conceded the race. After all, Nixon was man enough to concede the 1960 Presidential campaign even though he knew that Democrats in Texas and Illinois stole the election for Kennedy.
biased much?
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - lafinfil - 12-20-2008
I was under the impression that a hand recount was done (or mandated in this case) when an election
was so close that it could not be called under conventional means.
This has obviously been planned for under the states election laws and that process is being played out.
Why should anyone concede ? Why shouldn't the process be allowed to run it's legal course ?
As long as we're at it, why shouldn't Coleman concede ? He is the on trailing - correct ?
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - Gutenberg - 12-20-2008
I don't think you can say that anyone is stealing the election when a bipartisan panel of judges--not election officials, but judges and Supreme Court of Minnesota judges--are doing the counting.
Most of the challenged ballots have turned out to be valid. Coleman has challenged roughly twice as many ballots as Franken has, so it makes sense that Franken is gaining ground. There's no jiggery-pokery here, just a breathtakingly close election that will break the loser's heart, whoever that proves to be.
If you want to talk about stolen elections, talk about Florida in 2000. Don't stop at 1960, which has since been proven to be a valid election.
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - $tevie - 12-20-2008
Minnesota law triggered the recount. There is really no reason for either candidate to concede. It is a very tight race, and a person would have to be a real pessimist to give up for no reason.
Re: Franken pulls ahead in recount - freeradical - 12-20-2008
Gutenberg wrote:
If you want to talk about stolen elections, talk about Florida in 2000. Don't stop at 1960, which has since been proven to be a valid election.
No, Bush won that election fair and square. It was Al Gore who was tried to steal that election with his attempts to cherry pick which ballots were going to count.