Let Democrats recount votes and they will keep recounting until their guy wins!

I first warned readers about Democrat attempts to steal the senate seat of Norm Coleman (R-MN) on November 11th. Coleman had won the election a week earlier by a several hundred votes and there was every indication that subsequent recounts being conducted by the Secretary of State George Soros’s group hand picked for the job (warning: they are doing the same thing in other key states) would continue to use every technicality and twist of law to overturn the result and give the election to the idiot Al Franken.

But with the brouhaha over the alleged sale of Barack Obama’s senate seat to the highest bidder in Illinois I admit I took my eye off the ball. That was a mistake! As Gomer Pyle used to say: “Surprise, surprise, surprise!” Democrats have now taken a narrow but steady lead for Coleman and turned it into a lead for Franken.

Track the latest recount update with this widget from the Minnesota Star Tribune:

How is this possible? Simple. In the last week nearly every dispute has been settled in favor of Al Franken. Even when hand recounts showed the vote in a particular precinct favoring Coleman, the Democrats insisted that the election night electronic tally be used. The same electronic tally that they reject in precincts favoring Coleman. Ballots mysteriously went missing in some precincts and were found in others. All seemed to favor Franken. And the issue of questionable absentee ballots which many thought was settled has now been reopened by the state Supreme Court.

In at least one precinct the number of new ballots discovered exceeds the number of voters who signed in to vote. But who cares?

Ann Coulter describes one curious set of circumstances:

The day after the November election, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman had won his re-election to the U.S. Senate, beating challenger Al Franken by 725 votes.

Then one heavily Democratic town miraculously discovered 100 missing ballots. And, in another marvel, they were all for Al Franken! It was like a completely evil version of a Christmas miracle.

As strange as it was that all 100 post-election, “discovered” ballots would be for one candidate, it was even stranger that the official time stamp for the miracle ballots printed out by the voting machine on the miracle ballots showed that the votes had been cast on Nov. 2 — two days before the election.

Democratic election officials in the miracle-ballot county simply announced that their voting machine must have been broken. Don’t worry about it — they were sure those 100 votes for Franken were legit.

Keep an eye on the vote tracking widget above. In the last few hours it’s showed a miraculous and steady lead for Franken. After weeks and weeks showing Coleman ahead, it must seem like the Christmas miracle. Even to liberals who don’t believe in miracles!

  • Share/Bookmark
Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Friday, December 19th, 2008 at 1:12 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

26 comments so far

 1Reply to this comment  

I’m in general agreement that most of the news which has come out about the specifics of the recount indicates an effort to — shall we say — give Franken the benefit of the doubt at every turn. It’s the converse of the situation in Florida in 2000, when the other Party controlled the Secretary of State’s office and made decisions seemingly favorable to their candidate.

I don’t think that any statewide election separated by only a few hundred votes can ever be decided unequivocally.

On a personal level, I’m rooting for Coleman. I want to lower the threshold for successfully filibustering legislation. This will prevent Congress from forcing Obama too far to the left on a range of divisive issues. I like the idea of the GOP helping to cover Obama’s a– with the most liberal sector of the Democratic base and, at the same time, to help Obama avoid alienating conservative-leaning centrists.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach

December 19th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
 2Reply to this comment  

“It’s the converse of the situation in Florida in 2000.”

No Larry it’s exactly the same as Florida 2000 where Dems tried to disenfranchise military voters and selectively recount counties where Al Gore was strongest.

Such moral equivalism on your part only serves to enable this kind of anti-democratic tactic in the future.

December 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Craig
 3Reply to this comment  

“This will prevent Congress from forcing Obama too far to the left on a range of divisive issues.” (Larry W.)

LOL! Now Larry thinks that Obama is a puppet… lol and re-lol! Is your admiration for your gourou fading off? It is about time.

“I want to lower the threshold for successfully filibustering legislation.” (Larry W.)

LOL! So now you do not trust Democrat Congress and Obama anymore? Would you be a flip-flopper like you master? Like attracts like.

Back to the subject:

The USA voting system stinks. Get rid of these voting machines, they are too easy for manipulation and fraud. Stop that early voting process; aloud it only in special cases, like people who will be out of the country on election day or other special cases. Try to unify the voting processus thru the States. Paper ballots are the best to avoid fraud. Do not aloud voting thru mail or Internet or in small places like stores or whatever.

I don’t know how your system works exactly, but here in Canada, on election day, in every polling places, at every tables, there is a representative of each Party that supervises the voting. At the end of the day, when they open the ballot box at each voting tables, it is counted in front of the two representative of each Party and then the box is sealed with the results on top of the box. It is then picked up by two other representatives of each party and brought to the general head office of election in each provinces. We never have the problem that you have, unless a candidate win by a margin less than 50 votes, those ballots are recounted in the presence of both Parties.

December 19th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
 4Reply to this comment  

Can you provide a “cite” for Democrats “trying to disenfranchise military voters?”

Here’s the best summary I could find:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?ex=1229835600&en=b632baa2261708a8&ei=5070

“A statistical analysis conducted for The Times determined that if all counties had followed state law in reviewing the absentee ballots, Mr. Gore would have picked up as many as 290 additional votes, enough to tip the election in Mr. Gore’s favor in some of the situations studied in the statewide ballot review.

“But Mr. Gore chose not to challenge these ballots because many were from members of the military overseas, and Mr. Gore did not want to be accused of seeking to invalidate votes of men and women in uniform.”

With regard to the possible strategy of recounting the entire state, including initially rejected ballots (as is being done in Minnesota), this was precluded by Kathryn Harris imposing unrealistic deadlines for vote counting, in addition to the deadlines imposed by the electoral college. It’s not like the situation in Minnesota, where there is literally unlimited time to complete a comprehensive recount.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

December 19th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Craig
 5Reply to this comment  

Poor Larry, you still think that Gore won? LOL! You really like fraudulous people, do you? Gore is just another manipulator like Obama. Gore and his fraudulent Global Warming … what an idiot! But like I always say: Like atracts like.

December 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
 6Reply to this comment  

Craig, I’m going to give a gold star to Larry on this one for recognizing that absolute power corrrupts absolutely. We do not need to compromise our precarious position by having a supermajority. And most level-headed Americans know a checks and balances system is healthy.

Franken, IMHO, would be a disgrace to grocery baggers, let alone a Senate seat. However with him in the lead by dredging up everything he can, I suspect he now will be the one to start screaming “stop now!”

December 19th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Real American Patriot
 7Reply to this comment  

Mike,

First of all there is NO stealing going on in this recount. It is totally above board.
BOTH sides watching very closely.

There is a 5 Member board consisting of both Republicans and Democrats. The scrutiny is extreme.
It is being done in a room open to the public and is being watched very very closely.

To even suggest it’s stealing an election is OUTRAGEOUS and Arrogant on your part.

For those who want to know the real story check here:

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36438459.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUxWoW_oD:EaDUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiU

December 19th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
 8Reply to this comment  

Larry: Military absentee ballots. Sorry I don’t have a citation as authoritative and objective as the NY Times but didn’t they also conclude that by every objective ballot counting measure Bush won?

Mata: Is it feeding time again?

December 19th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
 9Reply to this comment  

Obama is certainly no “puppet.” But he is a politician, and a very skilled one, at that. What he is trying to do (as I have been explaining ever since the election, more than a month ago) is to try to squat down in the middle of the political spectrum. He wants to “own” 65% of the electorate. The way he does that is to govern as far to the right as he can get.

Lemme give you a for instance:

The Dems try to enact legislation denying federal funds to hospitals which don’t provide abortion counseling. Something like that. Or legislation which has the effect of promoting official government recognition of same sex “marriages.”

If Obama signs such legislation, he alienates the right. If he refuses to sign it, he infuriates the left-most part of his base.

But, if the GOP filibusters the legislation, he’s off the hook. I can see a certain amount of that stuff happening. Clinton had it far easier, in a sense, when the GOP took control. He wasn’t presented with such far left legislation.

On the other hand, I’m sure that Obama will be very effective in forging a filibuster-proof consensus on a range of clearly meritorious legislation.

Anyway, I also think that Coleman is a better Senator that Franken is likely to be, based on the few times I listened to extended segments of Air America.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach

December 19th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
 10Reply to this comment  

LOL, Mike…. I doth believe the feeding time must be overdue, evidenced by the voracious appetites for moonbat sniping. Not to mention desperation.

Uh… ever heard of stealing in plain sight with the help of the courts, CRAP/Sky55110? I do believe that was the Dem battle cry in 2000. Now you suggest that “every vote must count” (tell that to Hillary and the PUMAs, bubba), and that this is just insuring a legal election.

My my.. how does it feel to swap the shoes on your feet, RAP/sky? Can you walk a less less to the left now?

Didn’t think so….

December 19th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Craig
 11Reply to this comment  

“To even suggest it’s stealing an election is OUTRAGEOUS and Arrogant on your part.” (Crap)

lol! Obama’s thugs hacked the voting machines, I am sure of that. And this was done with no fingerprints and no witness. You are very naïve and do not realize how your Obama is corrupted. I am even sure that Obama did not win this election. It was all fraud since the beginning.

December 19th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
 12Reply to this comment  

Lemme give you a for instance:

The Dems try to enact legislation denying federal funds to hospitals which don’t provide abortion counseling. Something like that.

Is this a prediction for Obama’s response on the “conscience rule”, Larry? Interesting subject, BTW. Trying to pull it all together now. But you know me… must have some background. Patience, please…

December 19th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
 13Reply to this comment  

The NYT concluded that Bush would have won with either of the only two vote counting strategies ever advanced by the Gore team, which were selective re-count of a few counties or re-count only of “accepted” ballots state-wide (realizing that there wasn’t enough time to count the initially rejected ballots). There were, however, several scenarios where Gore might have won, had the initially rejected ballots been counted on a state-wide basis. These are detailed on the link I provided.

In all scenarios, however, vote margins were in the 100s, not thousands, and the election was effectively a draw, just like the present Minnesota election.

- Larry Weisenthal/HB

December 19th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Craig
 14Reply to this comment  

Just to give you an example here, how fraud is easy in voting machines:

In New Hampshire, nearly 90% of our votes are counted by a private corporation with a criminal history using trade secret software with known defects that threaten the integrity of the vote count. This technology was originally developed by a convicted embezzler by the name of Jeffrey Dean. His specialty was alteration of computer records. The corporation that owns and markets the technology has a history of partisan ties and questionable business practices. It is currently implicated in a lawsuit tying the company to a widespread conspiracy to defraud the nation’s elections.

When election watchdogs attempted to provide citizen oversight during the 2008 Primary recount, they were met with intimidation and obstructionism. Afterwards, the legislature, at the urging of the Scretary of State, responded by tacking on a rider to pending legislation in order to tighten the noose around our democratic processes and make recounts more difficult to obtain.

When citizens attempted to provide oversight to the central tally following the 2008 General Election, the state responded by locking them out and warning them to stay clear of where the counts were being conducted in “nonpublic” rooms within the offices of the Secretary of State.

This kind of obstructionist behavior on the part of our election officials is alarming. Do our public officials remember that they are public servants, that the elections belong to the public, and that open vote counting is mandated by the New Hampshire Constitution?
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/6291

December 19th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
 15Reply to this comment  

CRAP: Glad you were able to take advantage of the full story offered by the Star Tribune. Do me a favor and go back and count the links to the star tribune (including the widget) that I have offered in my two posts on this subject.

I’ll stand by my conclusions. Dems are trying to steal this election.

Larry: Here are some more examples for you via Ann Coulter:

In 1974, Republican Louis Wyman won his race for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire, beating Democrat John Durkin by 355 votes. Durkin demanded a recount — which went back and forth by a handful of votes until the state’s Ballot Law Commission concluded that Wyman had indeed won by (at least) two votes.

Wyman was certified the winner by the New Hampshire secretary of state and was on his way to Washington when … the overwhelmingly Democratic U.S. Senate refused to seat Wyman.

Despite New Hampshire’s certification of Wyman as the winner of the election, this was the post-Watergate Senate, when Democrats could get away with anything — up to and including a prank known as “President Jimmy Carter.”

The U.S. Senate spent months examining disputed ballots from the New Hampshire election. Unable to come up with a method to declare the Democrat the winner that didn’t require a guillotine, the Senate forced New Hampshire to hold another election.

It was a breathtaking abuse of power. New Hampshire had certified a winner of its Senate election, but it was a Republican, so the Democratic Senate simply ordered a new election.

Demoralized Republicans stayed away from the race and, this time, the Democrat won the re-vote.

Even more egregious was the Indiana House race in 1984. On election night, the incumbent Democrat Frank McCloskey appeared to have won a narrow victory of 72 votes. But after a correction was made in one county, it turned out his Republican opponent, Richard McIntyre, had won by 34 votes.

McIntyre was certified the winner — which is when the trouble usually starts for a Republican.

Again, a majority Democrat House refused to seat the certified winner in a close election. I’m sure it was just a coincidence that the winner was a Republican.

Consequently, Indiana performed yet another recount of the entire district, which again showed that Republican McIntyre was the winner — this time by 418 votes. Now he was really asking for it. The nerve of this guy! Hey, buddy, do you mind? We’re trying to throw an election over here!

As The Washington Post reported at the time: There were “no allegations of fraud” in the recount and 90 percent of ballot disqualifications had been agreed to “by election commissions dominated by Democrats.”

So naturally the House refused to seat the Republican even though he had received the most votes (hereinafter referred to as “the winner”). The House proceeded to conduct its own recount. (If you haven’t detected a pattern by this point, please ask your doctor if Prilosec is right for you.)

This time, instead of ordering the district to hold another election, the Democratic House saved all concerned a lot of time and money by simply declaring Democrat Frank McCloskey the winner by four votes.

The vote-theft most like Minnesota this year was the infamous 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State. The Republican won the race on election night, but ballots favoring the Democrat kept being “discovered” until the Democrat finally eked out a majority. At that point, the recount was immediately halted and the Democrat declared the victor.

You would have to go back to Reconstruction to find an election that was stolen by the Republicans this way, but it’s all in a day’s work for the Democrats.

That’s why they were so testy about the 2000 Florida election. It was the one time in the last century Republicans wouldn’t let Democrats steal an election they lost by less than a thousand votes.

No matter how many times Democrats steal elections, Republicans keep thinking the next time will be different. Minnesota is famously clean, isn’t it? It must be different. It’s not different. It’s still the Democrats.

December 19th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Craig
 16Reply to this comment  

Make sure you listen to the two videos in the article that I have linked in my previous post # 14.

December 19th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Hard Right
 17Reply to this comment  

Larry, Gore called in the lawyers first and initially attempted to keep the military ballots from being counted. When it became clear it would be hugely bad publicity for him, he backed down.

December 19th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Hard Right
 18Reply to this comment  

Here’s an article Larry:

How Gore Cheated American Troops Serving Overseas

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/5/8/225831.shtml

December 19th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Hard Right
 19Reply to this comment  

Oh and Larry, Katherine Harris seemed to be aware that allowing the dems to get all the recounts they wanted would create what we see in MN and the examples Ann wrote about. They have no problem gaming the system or even cheating to win.

December 19th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
 20Reply to this comment  

The article you cited is hardly neutral and objective. Even giving the article the benefit of the doubt, it seems obvious that this was a fairly crude and fairly short-lived effort by a handful of the legion of lawyers on the ground and there is no indication that Gore himself had anything to do with it.

Not that I think it’s the ultimate source for information about the Florida recount, but the HBO show “Recount” made it pretty clear that Gore was not infrequently over-ruling initial decisions which were made on his behalf by his team of lawyers. Lawyers will be lawyers. Their first instinct is to do what can be done to win using any tactics which are legal. Politics, a wise and knowing FA blogger wrote, is war. I seriously doubt that GOP lawyers are any different than DEM lawyers, in this regard. It strains credulity to believe that Gore himself would be so politically tone-deaf as to try and disqualify the votes of servicemen overseas on a technicality.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

December 19th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Craig
 21Reply to this comment  

Larry disqualifies every articles against his Party, but will believe any lies on Sarah Palin… lol

December 19th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Craig
 22Reply to this comment  

Well, well, well! Due to the miraculous timing of the financial crisis, Congress should take a cut in their pay check this coming year. After all, they get paid with the taxpayer’s money, so they should lower their salaries during this awful “recession” that they have created.

December 19th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Real American Patriot
 23Reply to this comment  

Craig stated:
“Obama’s thugs hacked the voting machines, I am sure of that. And this was done with no fingerprints and no witness. You are very naïve and do not realize how your Obama is corrupted. I am even sure that Obama did not win this election. It was all fraud since the beginning.”

Show some real proof! I am certain you have none.

Would that be the same kind of hacking that happened on voter machines in Ohio 2004???

You are so full of yourself!! YOU lost get over it!!

December 20th, 2008 at 3:39 am
Scott
 24Reply to this comment  

Would that be the same kind of hacking that happened on voter machines in Ohio 2004???

Rap, do you even KNOW how ironic that statement is, or how it degrades the 8yrs of whining from Dems about stealing elections? This is like if someone spelled ‘moron’ w two R’s (sometimes appropriate, other times…not-so-much)

December 20th, 2008 at 5:35 am
simply done
 25Reply to this comment  

Coleman adjusting to ‘59′:

“I feel fairly confident. In the end, the good Lord’s going to decide,” Coleman told the local Fox affiliate. “The numbers look good to us. Certainly there’s uncertainty. I’m not worried about it. I’ve done everything I can do. I’m not really agonizing about the outcome.”

…”Life goes on, regardless of what your job is. I certainly love what I do. If I can keep doing it, I’ll be thrilled, and if not, I’m sure we’ll do something else.”

December 23rd, 2008 at 5:10 pm
simply done
 26Reply to this comment  

(bloomberg) The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled against Republican incumbent Norm Coleman in his U.S. Senate recount battle with Democrat Al Franken, refusing to order election officials to throw out more than 100 ballots Coleman’s campaign says may have been double-counted.

Looks like it’s gonna be 59.

December 24th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

If your comments get caught in spam a lot please log into your registered account before trying to comment again. You can email me if your comment is caught in spam

 

Identity Verification: If you wish to verify your commenter identity, so no one can steal it, click the below button: