Norm Coleman concedes

Bfgrn

Bfgrn

New member
Republican Coleman ends fight for Senate seat
Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:19pm EDT

MINNESOTA (Reuters) - Republican Norm Coleman on Tuesday conceded the tightly contested race for Minnesota's U.S. Senate seat and congratulated Democrat Al Franken after a protracted recount.

Coleman, who held the seat for one term, said he would abide by the decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court which turned down Coleman's appeal that thousands more absentee ballots be counted.

(Reporting by Todd Melby; Writing by Andrew Stern; Editing by Will Dunham)

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE55T6VL20090630
 
Thank you for being the third person to post this. Feel free to add to the current discussions on threads ongoing all ready.
 
Interesting, if such a decision were made in Coleman's favor (denying the counting of the ballots), the lefties here would say the righties were "suppressing the vote"...
 
Damocles said:
Interesting, if such a decision were made in Coleman's favor (denying the counting of the ballots), the lefties here would say the righties were "suppressing the vote"...
Click to expand...

Considering Franken got more votes, that is probably true.

The big difference between this and Bush's case was Coleman had about 9 months to make his case that Franken didn't get more votes and failed to make a valid case for it. But he got his chance. Bush got a favor from SCOTUS who said we can't be bothered to keep counting.
 
Ahh just in time for health care reform.
It must be embaressing as hell to lose to a goof like Frankin.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Considering Franken got more votes, that is probably true.

The big difference between this and Bush's case was Coleman had about 9 months to make his case that Franken didn't get more votes and failed to make a valid case for it. But he got his chance. Bush got a favor from SCOTUS who said we can't be bothered to keep counting.
Click to expand...
We'll never know, unless we count those few thousand that the courts said no to. I just find it interesting.

Frankin is the Senator. I'm not really complaining, only pointing out the silly hypocrisy.

I don't know how many times I have heard it is the "right" that wants to "suppress votes" and yet the left argued in this one to keep votes from being counted.
 
Damocles said:
We'll never know, unless we count those few thousand that the courts said no to. I just find it interesting.

Frankin is the Senator. I'm not really complaining, only pointing out the silly hypocrisy.

I don't know how many times I have heard it is the "right" that wants to "suppress votes" and yet the left argued in this one to keep votes from being counted.
Click to expand...

My guess is you're full of bullshit. When I was still following this story about 5 months ago, all the votes Coleman was arguing for were ones he wanted to exclude -- like ones where people were voting for the lizzard man for president, etc.

Please link me to the bit where the DEMOCRATS were arguing for the exclusion of "thousands" of votes and I'll find where you're full of bullshit.
 
Damocles said:
We'll never know, unless we count those few thousand that the courts said no to. I just find it interesting.

Frankin is the Senator. I'm not really complaining, only pointing out the silly hypocrisy.

I don't know how many times I have heard it is the "right" that wants to "suppress votes" and yet the left argued in this one to keep votes from being counted.
Click to expand...


You're such a typical Republican. And it's fucking fascinating given your longing to have an independent streak.
 
ib1yysguy said:
My guess is you're full of bullshit. When I was still following this story about 5 months ago, all the votes Coleman was arguing for were ones he wanted to exclude -- like ones where people were voting for the lizzard man for president, etc.

Please link me to the bit where the DEMOCRATS were arguing for the exclusion of "thousands" of votes and I'll find where you're full of bullshit.
Click to expand...
The last ruling by the court, and the one that finally ended this, was to exclude thousands of votes. It's on the first post with a link and everything.

Are you this deliberately obtuse every day, or only when you see a post that you think is a good "gotcha"?
 
Dungheap said:
You're such a typical Republican. And it's fucking fascinating given your longing to have an independent streak.
Click to expand...
LOL. Says the person who cheers the decision by a court to reject ballots and name a D.

It's just fricking weird.

Again, it's no skin off my nose. He isn't my Senator and I don't particularly care other than to point out direct hypocrisy because pointing out hypocrisy is fun.

The typical partisan would be "angry" and "upset" about the loss. I just don't really care about it.
 
If I'm a Patriots fan, it's the tuck rule. If I'm a Raiders fan, the refs handed the Patriots the game.

It's not really hypocrisy to feel either way about it.
 
Damocles said:
LOL. Says the person who cheers the decision by a court to reject ballots and name a D.

It's just fricking weird.

Again, it's no skin off my nose. He isn't my Senator and I don't particularly care other than to point out direct hypocrisy because pointing out hypocrisy is fun.

The typical partisan would be "angry" and "upset" about the loss. I just don't really care about it.
Click to expand...

while technically true, he will vote on national issues that will affect you and i
 
Damocles said:
LOL. Says the person who cheers the decision by a court to reject ballots and name a D.

It's just fricking weird.

Again, it's no skin off my nose. He isn't my Senator and I don't particularly care other than to point out direct hypocrisy because pointing out hypocrisy is fun.

The typical partisan would be "angry" and "upset" about the loss. I just don't really care about it.
Click to expand...


It's weird that you see hypocrisy where there really is none. It's typically Republican of you to conflate a state Supreme Court decision rendered 7+ months after a contested election certifying that all state election laws and recount procedures were followed and certifying the election result with a United States Supreme Court decision overruling the state Supreme Court, ordering a halt to the recount procedures provided for in the state law and decreeing an election winner just over a month after the election.

Apples and aardvarks, my Republican friend.
 
Onceler said:
If I'm a Patriots fan, it's the tuck rule. If I'm a Raiders fan, the refs handed the Patriots the game.

It's not really hypocrisy to feel either way about it.
Click to expand...

The analogy is inapt.

Franken won. Both parties presented the best evidence that they had to several layers of review in and out of the courts and every time the lawful votes got counted Franken won. An appropriate sports analogy would be something where one team scored more points than the other and the losing team challenged the count through several layers of review and the score always ended up the same.
 
Dungheap said:
It's weird that you see hypocrisy where there really is none. It's typically Republican of you to conflate a state Supreme Court decision rendered 7+ months after a contested election certifying that all state election laws and recount procedures were followed and certifying the election result with a United States Supreme Court decision overruling the state Supreme Court, ordering a halt to the recount procedures provided for in the state law and decreeing an election winner just over a month after the election.

Apples and aardvarks, my Republican friend.
Click to expand...
Not particularly.

I believe that if Coleman had won with those ballots still uncounted we'd be hearing how he 'stole' the election for six years from almost every D on the board. Desh might even have come back to start it.

But really, this to me is like watching a Browns game. I can see similarities with past games that I cared about because the Broncos were in them, including bad calls by the refs, or good calls by the refs, but I still don't care about the outcome of the game. I'll point out to my friends what I see, we'll have a conversation about it, but it doesn't matter to me who wins the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top