WWTBAM Bored

Al Franken has pulled into a slight lead in the recount of the Minnesota Senate race, which may not be decided until the end of the year.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/e ... nate_N.htm

At issue right now are challenged votes. Minnesota uses an optical scanning system whereby the voter fills in an oval next to the candidate's name. The problems arise when voters don't do that but instead circle the candidate's name (or the oval) or use a check mark or "x" or some other way of voting. These have to be counted manually and the question becomes one of determining the voter's intent. Both parties challenged hundreds of ballots.

Minnesota law also requires rejecting a vote if there is an "identifying mark" on the ballot that would tend to identify the individual voter. This means that if a voter puts his initials or written comments on the ballot, it can disqualify the entire ballot. So if a voter writes in "Mickey Mouse" or "Brett Favre" (as one person did) for president, that can disqualify the entire ballot.

There is a state board that is right now considering these challenges. Once that is done, then a number of withdrawn challenges have to be added back into the totals. Then there are about 1600 more disputed absentee ballots to be considered. This could take until the end of the year and only then will they start considering any court challenges.

In my view, this is the main reason why we can't have a popular vote determination of the Presidency with the current state of our technology. Three million people voted in Minnesota and it boils down to a handful of votes and a lot of painstaking individual evaluation of these ballots. If the Presidential race came down to a few hundred (or even a few thousand) votes separating the candidates (Franken has made up about 700 votes since the election night totals were posted), you wouldn't just have one mess like this or like Florida in 2000, you'd have 51. There's just as much confusion and error in the other states; the only differenc is that election officials usually ignore these discrepancies and problems unless it could make a difference in the final result.

If ever there were a compelling argument for the Electoral College system, this is it. Could you imagine having to recount the entire country in a close Presidential race, and not just one or two states? We'd have an acting President for about the entire four years while things got straightened out.

I suppose neither candidate can claim a mandate here. That's the bright spot..........

Newsweek has a story on this complete with 4 examples of very badly filled out ballots, which are apparently, with many many others, on a web site accessible to the public.

(One person crossed out their 1st entry & wrote next to their 2nd "I really meant to vote for <2nd candidate's name here>".)

Even though the article has a lot of fun (quite sarcastically) with them, I believe these are not the ballots on which the vote rests; there are also quite a lot of ballots that have "gone missing" after they were 1st accounted for.

I saw he was behind by 2 votes this morning.

Whoever is in the lead according to any given news story seems to depend upon which candidate's press release any individual reporter believes. Furthermore, there seem to be thousands of yet unexamined ballots that remain uncredited toward either candidate's total.

silvercamaro wrote:Whoever is in the lead according to any given news story seems to depend upon which candidate's press release any individual reporter believes. Furthermore, there seem to be thousands of yet unexamined ballots that remain uncredited toward either candidate's total.

I think these numbers are coming from the Minnesota Canvassing Board.

It's not surprising or particularly significant, though, that Franken is leading at this time. Minnesota's procedure when a ballot is challenged is to remove that ballot from the count until the Board resolves the challenge. The Board started by going through Coleman's challenges to apparent Franken votes. Most challenges (by either side) will be rejected. Since these are Coleman's challenges, every rejected challenge adds a vote for Franken. The opposite dynamic will occur when the Board considers Franken's challenges.

Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com is now projecting, based on challenge acceptance rates, that when all is said and done (but prior to any court proceedings), Franken will end up ahead by roughly 40 votes. I believe the local Minnesota papers are projecting a similar result. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

silvercamaro wrote:Whoever is in the lead according to any given news story seems to depend upon which candidate's press release any individual reporter believes. Furthermore, there seem to be thousands of yet unexamined ballots that remain uncredited toward either candidate's total.

I think these numbers are coming from the Minnesota Canvassing Board.

It's not surprising or particularly significant, though, that Franken is leading at this time. Minnesota's procedure when a ballot is challenged is to remove that ballot from the count until the Board resolves the challenge. The Board started by going through Coleman's challenges to apparent Franken votes. Most challenges (by either side) will be rejected. Since these are Coleman's challenges, every rejected challenge adds a vote for Franken. The opposite dynamic will occur when the Board considers Franken's challenges.

Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com is now projecting, based on challenge acceptance rates, that when all is said and done (but prior to any court proceedings), Franken will end up ahead by roughly 40 votes. I believe the local Minnesota papers are projecting a similar result. --Bob

Challenged votes are not counted until the challenge is resolved. There are two categories of challenges. First are ballots in which Franken (let's say) challenges a vote for Coleman. The second are challenges in which the original decision was "no vote" or a vote for another candidate (there were three other candidates on the ballot, one of whom got 15% of the vote). A "no vote" occurs if it's determined that the voter left the senate ballot blank deliberately or voted for two candidates and it can't be determined which one the voter intended to vote for. If those challenges are rejected, the top two candidates' vote totals won't be affected.

After all the challenges are determined, then the canvassing board adds back several thousand other challenged votes whose challenges were withdrawn prior to the board ruling on them. That will take place the first part of next week. Obviously, this could swing the vote, because it's impossible to tell now how many of these withdrawn challenges will result in additions to a candidate's total or merely no change (due to a "no vote" challenge being withdrawn).

Then after all this, the 1600 additional absentee ballots must be counted, but apparently both candidates have to agree on the procedure for counting these votes (this was one of those weird state supreme court opinions). That may not occur until the end of the year. The new senator is supposed to take office Jan 6 and if this isn't resolved (which could occur if the losing candidate can go to court and get a TRO), the governor (who is a Republican) might have to appoint a temporary replacement or Minnesota might have to do without its senate seat for a while.

silverscreenselect wrote:Challenged votes are not counted until the challenge is resolved. There are two categories of challenges. First are ballots in which Franken (let's say) challenges a vote for Coleman. The second are challenges in which the original decision was "no vote" or a vote for another candidate (there were three other candidates on the ballot, one of whom got 15% of the vote). A "no vote" occurs if it's determined that the voter left the senate ballot blank deliberately or voted for two candidates and it can't be determined which one the voter intended to vote for. If those challenges are rejected, the top two candidates' vote totals won't be affected.

You're correct, not every rejected Coleman challenge will add a vote for Franken -- some will fail to add a vote for Coleman. But this latter category of challenges is a decided minority among all challenges. --Bob

Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

Write him back. Tell him you'll be generous as soon as he's funny.

silvercamaro wrote:

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

Write him back. Tell him you'll be generous as soon as he's funny.

I'm sending my money to Judy now!

The best place to follow this is
http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/

Their counter is close to real time and you can review the ballots ruled on today (and prior days).

If you click on Ballot Challenge on the left, you can see virtually all the ballots. My favorite is the one where somebody wrote in lizard people for all other offices, but voted for Franken. I think the Coleman campaign may have thought the voter's name was Lizard People.

Right now, the random draw has produced about twice the number of Franken challenges. Since the challenges were about even, this probably will reduce Al's current lead. He does seem to be slightly more successful in them going his way, however.

Bret Favre and the Lizard People would be a good name for a band.

Bob78164 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:Challenged votes are not counted until the challenge is resolved. There are two categories of challenges. First are ballots in which Franken (let's say) challenges a vote for Coleman. The second are challenges in which the original decision was "no vote" or a vote for another candidate (there were three other candidates on the ballot, one of whom got 15% of the vote). A "no vote" occurs if it's determined that the voter left the senate ballot blank deliberately or voted for two candidates and it can't be determined which one the voter intended to vote for. If those challenges are rejected, the top two candidates' vote totals won't be affected.

You're correct, not every rejected Coleman challenge will add a vote for Franken -- some will fail to add a vote for Coleman. But this latter category of challenges is a decided minority among all challenges. --Bob

As with the hanging chads, I wouldn't want to be the canvassing board. A lot of the challenged ballots appear to have been cast by complete morons who vote for one person, then try in some way to cross it out and vote for someone else. The problems occur when it's unclear if you're dealing with someone who changed their minds or is merely a complete slob (ie, two votes filled in with a small mark next to one of the candidate's names which might indicate that the person tried to cross it out or that he was just careless).

The "identifying mark" provision also causes trouble. Write-in votes are allowed in Minnesota, so voting for Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney for president would not invalidate a Senate vote. However, there are votes for Brett Favre, Adrian Petersen, Eric Cartman, and other real and fictional characters, as well as votes for unfamiliar names which might well be the person voting for himself or a close friend. If you put an identifying mark anywhere on the ballot (such as by voting for yourself for president), it disqualifies the whole ballot.

Both sides originally challenged about the same number of ballots, but Franken withdrew a lot more of his challenges than Coleman did. Now, a much higher percentage of Franken's challenges are being upheld. Translation: Franken decided to withdraw far more of the clearly frivolous challenges than Coleman did. This means that when the challenges are done, Franken rates to be ahead by several hundred votes. However, when those withdrawn challenges are added back in next week, Coleman will pick up a lot of votes. The only question is how many.

silverscreenselect wrote:
The "identifying mark" provision also causes trouble. Write-in votes are allowed in Minnesota, so voting for Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney for president would not invalidate a Senate vote. However, there are votes for Brett Favre, Adrian Petersen, Eric Cartman, and other real and fictional characters, as well as votes for unfamiliar names which might well be the person voting for himself or a close friend. If you put an identifying mark anywhere on the ballot (such as by voting for yourself for president), it disqualifies the whole ballot.

Both sides originally challenged about the same number of ballots, but Franken withdrew a lot more of his challenges than Coleman did. Now, a much higher percentage of Franken's challenges are being upheld. Translation: Franken decided to withdraw far more of the clearly frivolous challenges than Coleman did. This means that when the challenges are done, Franken rates to be ahead by several hundred votes. However, when those withdrawn challenges are added back in next week, Coleman will pick up a lot of votes. The only question is how many.

Very early on the board ruled that write-ins would not invalidate a ballot. As for identifying marks, they have been accepting ballots where people cross out one, vote for the other, and initial the change.

Yesterday, Coleman withdrew several hundred challenges and submitted some new ones, so they are about even again.

silvercamaro wrote:

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

Write him back. Tell him you'll be generous as soon as he's funny.

I find the Nigerian Penis spam notes more amusing than his pleas for money. I wonder who sold him my email address.

eyégor wrote: As for identifying marks, they have been accepting ballots where people cross out one, vote for the other, and initial the change.

I have problems with this approach to counting votes.

Is it really that hard to remember to only color in one oval?

(I'm an electoral elitist.)

eyégor wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
The "identifying mark" provision also causes trouble. Write-in votes are allowed in Minnesota, so voting for Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney for president would not invalidate a Senate vote. However, there are votes for Brett Favre, Adrian Petersen, Eric Cartman, and other real and fictional characters, as well as votes for unfamiliar names which might well be the person voting for himself or a close friend. If you put an identifying mark anywhere on the ballot (such as by voting for yourself for president), it disqualifies the whole ballot.

Both sides originally challenged about the same number of ballots, but Franken withdrew a lot more of his challenges than Coleman did. Now, a much higher percentage of Franken's challenges are being upheld. Translation: Franken decided to withdraw far more of the clearly frivolous challenges than Coleman did. This means that when the challenges are done, Franken rates to be ahead by several hundred votes. However, when those withdrawn challenges are added back in next week, Coleman will pick up a lot of votes. The only question is how many.

Very early on the board ruled that write-ins would not invalidate a ballot. As for identifying marks, they have been accepting ballots where people cross out one, vote for the other, and initial the change.

Yesterday, Coleman withdrew several hundred challenges and submitted some new ones, so they are about even again.

I saw one ballot on which the senate race was clearly marked. However, the ballot included write-in votes for "Scott Detterman" for both Congress and the State House of Representatives. I did a google search and found a Scott Detterman on Facebook who lives in Minneapolis, where the challenged vote came from. Was that his vote? Who knows? (The vote was rejected as containing an identifying mark.

Appa23 wrote:

eyégor wrote: As for identifying marks, they have been accepting ballots where people cross out one, vote for the other, and initial the change.

I have problems with this approach to counting votes.

Is it really that hard to remember to only color in one oval?

(I'm an electoral elitist.)

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:

Appa23 wrote:

eyégor wrote: As for identifying marks, they have been accepting ballots where people cross out one, vote for the other, and initial the change.

I have problems with this approach to counting votes.

Is it really that hard to remember to only color in one oval?

(I'm an electoral elitist.)

If Clem will allow me to pass on his points, I'll award them to PSM for her outstanding use of the Demotivator poster in her reply!

silvercamaro wrote:

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

Write him back. Tell him you'll be generous as soon as he's funny.

Now, that is funny!

minimetoo26 wrote:

silvercamaro wrote:

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Franken told me that he was ahead this morning.

My name got on his email list and he tells me what's going on, then asks for money.

Write him back. Tell him you'll be generous as soon as he's funny.

I'm sending my money to Judy now!

mini's reply was better than mine.