Norm Coleman tries to get Franken ballot tossed because the voter wrote, "Thank you for counting my vote."
Moe sez, "In Minnesota's Senate race, the candidates are now just 5 votes apart. The courts, sorting through ballot challenges, finds the leader (by 5 votes) had tried to have a ballot rejected because of stray markings.
And what were the stray markings?
In addition to the actual vote, a voter had also written 'Thank you for counting my vote.'"
The Worst Ballot Challenge Of All (Thanks, Moe!)
the latest
latest episodes
Yes, it sounds insane. But there are rules about ballots and they should be followed. One of the reasons is anonymity. It's important to force people to make their vote anonymous (be alone in the booth, no photos and no markings on the ballot) as they could otherwise sell their vote or be forced to vote for a certain candidate.
@1 Hear Hear!
We do need to make sure that people are made abundantly aware of the consequences of marking their ballot - otherwise we risk disenfranchising the less politically educated.
Part of me thinks that this was someone who was trying to void their ballot in an ironic fashion.
Thats nothing compared to the Brett Favre vs. Lizard People challenge: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/brett-favre-beats-lizard-people.html
I am afraid this is a valid challenge. Any kind of "distinguishing mark" on a ballet paper is valid reason to disqualify it. If this was not the case the mark could allow some one to prove how they voted, either for money or because they where threatened with violence. Disallowing any kind of distinguishing marks helps to protect the secret ballet.
The final call on these issues is often the returning officer, who uses his judgement on the night of the count.
Everyone claiming that these are valid reasons for disqualifying the vote due to maintenance of anonymity must not be considering absentee voting. If you vote in the privacy of your own home, then quite obviously, you've removed the strict enforcement of anonymity. Anyone could be in my house forcing me to vote in a particular way.
Now in Minnesota, this is probably less common than in a lot of other states. Minnesota does not allow early voting, and absentee voting requires that an application be completed. Nonetheless, the point holds. If it's possible to force someone to vote in a particular way, it's certainly possible to force them to apply for the absentee ballot.
@1, @2, & @4:
There's a difference between the spirit and the intent of the law. "Thank you for counting my vote" is not a clever way to prove to some handler that they voted in a particular way.
@Glyn,
By that logic, shouldn't you be required to wear gloves when you vote? After all, someone COULD pay you for your vote, then get access to the ballots and dust them for fingerprints to make sure you voted as promised. For that matter, all write in votes would have the same problem, since you could signal your ballot by a write in vote for an unimportant office. ("E.g., write in 'Big Bird' for city council); and that's not to mention handwriting analysis.
Seriously, things that don't include your name or something else very specific couldn't be used on a large enough scale to matter. If you threaten 100 people to vote for your guy and write "Thanks for counting my vote," and not all of them comply, how would figure out which ones did and which didn't? The risk of that particular form of marking being used to undermine the secret ballot is quite small; too small to overrule the importance of counting a vote when the voter's intent is clear.
Of course it's ultimately a matter of how the law sets out the balance between these considerations, and how those tasked with executing the law interpret the case. But legality aside, this challenge (along with a number made by both sides) could not have been made in good faith.
Here is the problem with MN "ballot marking" laws. Anyone who wants to sell their vote will just vote absentee and sell the ballot to someone who mails it in. Also, you would be silly to mark your ballot in an obvious way especially when the law is that ballot will be thrown out.
If you were a hypothetical MN vote buyer you would either tell people to write in some pre-determined name like "Edna Nottingham". Or a voter could code their ballot with stray marks like a triangle of dots in the upper corner .'.
It's a really stupid law because elections officials now get to decide if your vote for Jerry Seinfeld is marking a ballot or perhaps there is a resident of MN named that.
As someone living in Minnesota, I can say that this Senate seat fight is irritating a lot of people on every side. It began with the nasty mud throwing ads from both of them and has now crossed over to these two bickering like children.
Personally I think the vote should count if the oval is clearly filled in for a candidate. it should be counted no matter what the voter may write on other parts of the form.
In regards to anonymity - I understand it is there for the voters protection, but why is it forced on a person if they do not want it? I wouldn't care if the whole country watched who I voted for. I try to consider my choices thoroughly and am not ashamed of who I pick. If I don't care then why should the government force me to be anonymous? This is a serious question. I really would like feedback to explain it to me. Thanks.
For a while now, part of me has wanted (nay, hoped) this would come down to a single vote, and it looks like that might be the case. Politically, I know very little about either candidate, but if this election comes down to a single vote (either way), it will underscore the importance of every vote - something I feel is sorely lost in today's cynical political environment...
Anonymous voting -- the secret ballot -- is very
very important indeed. If a voter were able to
prove to someone else how he voted, a number of
ugly scenarios crop up.
* Vote for my candidate and I will give you $$.
* Vote for my candidate or I fire you.
* Vote for my candidate or I break your arm.
Considerthis said:
and
Taking you at your word, the serious answer is that it is not so much that your vote is annonymous, it is that you can't prove you voted a certain way - your military commander can't force you to vote a certain way, neither can your parents, a teacher, a union representative, organized crime, the nurse in the hospital ward at your retirement home, the nice young fellow from the _______ party that drives you to the ballot on election day, etc.
As for the marking, I'm reminded of the ballot in florida a few elections ago where one voter marked all candidates except George W. Bush, and hand wrote on the ballot anybody but George Bush - that vote didn't count for anyone, and other votes like it actually may have helped George W. Bush get elected, as it reduced the votes for his main opponent Al Gore (if it was in fact the 2000 election, which I think it was)...
Should the vote count, not if the law says not to mark on the ballot except to register votes. If the law is silent, but the card says do not mark the ballot, then it probably should count.
Let's not confuse the law with guidelines printed on the ballot...
I would remind you all that Minnesota elected Jesse "The Body" Ventura as governor and unleashed Garrison Keillor upon the world.
I have lived in Minnesota. It is deeply strange territory.
@ConsiderThis #9, it's one of those things that you don't need when it's working well. You only really need it when it's not there.
@ #3 - as much as Nate Silver is my secret internet boyfriend, in this case he's actually wrong about something. The "Lizard People" ballot wasn't thrown out as an identifying mark, it was thrown out as an over-vote because the moron voted for 2 "people" in one race (writing something in the write-in section counts as a vote, regardless of whether you fill in the bubble or not). The guy who wrote Brett Favre only voted for one person in each race (didn't write Brett Favre in the Senate race spot), so his vote counts.
And nobody's commenting on the Flying Spaghetti Monster votes yet?
And now Franken is ahead by 85 votes. This whole situation is a mess. Maybe Minnesota will move to a Runoff system.
And I still think MN has a pretty solid voting system- no dangling chads, pretty clean layout, no diebold tampering, a paper trail, etc. (sure, it's theoretically possible to tamper with the scanner OS to juke the numbers around, but the recount would have definitely found any big anomolies.)
The problem with humans voting is that there's humans involved.
If the voter's intent is clear, one ought to give effect to that intent, eh?
Al is a stand up guy. I'll bet he is willing to save the tax payers a bundle. Let them square off in the ring, ultimate fighting rules. One round, winner take all. I'll bet the other guy is too cowardly.
As a Minnesotan who has met and spoken to both of these candidates, I can say with confidence that in the end the Smug, Arrogant, Carpetbagger from New York is going to win the the senate seat.
Single and double digits?? This is getting ridiculous. Split the seat. They're just going to have to sit in each other's lap and take those digits.
I mean... uh. Hm.
But.. why would you write on your ballot?
"#17 posted by MRKiscaden , December 19, 2008 8:44 AM
As a Minnesotan who has met and spoken to both of these candidates, I can say with confidence that in the end the Smug, Arrogant, Carpetbagger from New York is going to win the the senate seat."
Isn't it ironic that New Yorkers have to run for the Senate in other states because the state itself gives the seat to relatives/family of former presidents...
@6
"There's a difference between the spirit and the intent of the law. "Thank you for counting my vote" is not a clever way to prove to some handler that they voted in a particular way."
How can you be sure?
can someone explain to me how "marking a ballot" as identifiable is any different than me writing in a candidate in my distinctive and easily identifiable handwriting?
does writing in a candidate automatically nullify that ballot?
I sold my 2000 mail-in ballot (Oregon) to a British friend who got passionately involved in American politics and was frustrated by her ineligibility to vote. She was an excellent cook of Indian cuisine, so I traded my vote for a six-course meal. She took the ballot home, filled it out, brought it back, I signed it and mailed it in. She cooked.
We felt marvelously corrupt.
@ #12 Interesting. Seems strange though
Though I must admit my shock that Mr. Silver missed this one.
But hell, LIZARD PEOPLE, c'mon! ;)
@MRKISCADEN Aha, I see what you're getting at. But only one of them is a smug, arrogant carpetbagger from New York. The smug, arrogant native Minnesotan (Franken) looks like he's headed to victory right now.
@FRESHYILL
I consider them both from New York. One by upbringing, the other by career.
I really despise them both, and when asked whom I would vote for, I would always reply with the words "The Carpetbagger from New York". People always assume I mean the one they aren't voting for.
Strangely... I used to live in New York too.
It's as if Coleman is saying "No, Thank YOU for giving me 'just cause' to challenge that vote!"
There is also the issue of simply defacement. Anonymity, buying votes, and all that can be but a mere side issue as there are laws that, like writing on money, writing on any form of government document outside the confines of their principle use can be illegal and invalidate the document. So in writing this, it can simply be saying that it is a defaced document and thus cannot be counted.
Wow, wasn't this in a Simpsons episode? Lisa was disqualified from a beauty contest because on her entry form there was a box that said "Do Not Write Here" and Homer wrote "OK"
We need to end the anonymity of voting, anyway. Every citizen should be able to check their newspaper, or dial a number, or go online to confirm that their votes were recorded the way they voted. Perhaps have a way to opt-in to anonymous voting if you are paranoid.
@32 Scott -- tangentially, I always thought Norm Coleman sounded like Mayor Quimby.
This is a virtual dead heat and a rerun would be costly and potentially influenced by other events that have taken place since the election. I suggest a face off in the Thunderdome.
This is actually right on par with what we typically expect from Norm Coleman. In each one of the past four elections he's run in, he's sued his opponent for political gain.
This whole situation should serve as a warning to all states: When the deciding difference of an election is within the statistical margin of error, no amount of recounting is going to be sufficient, and a run-off election is necessary.
I think Mr. Franken's lead will come down to the quality of their challenges - as I understand it the Franken Campaign has more outstanding (more numerous, not more spectacular) challenges. If Franken's camp was a bit too overzealous in the challenge phase, their apparent interim lead may just vanish.
Also, every excursion from normal vote-counting policy granted the Franken campaign creates an opening for the Coleman team to argue later...
Can you imagine the noise if a candidate wins by exactly one vote when all is said and done? That wolud be interesting to watch, no matter who you vote for Franken, Coleman, or the other fellow.
For fun, play canvassing board member and vote on contested ballots yourself (you can see the actual contested ballots as PDFs and decide for yourself).
Link
Check out ballot 260 - it looks like someone lost their vote because they tried to scratch out Coleman and vote for Franken.
That is a non-vote, even though I believe I can infer the intention of the voter. Officially, they voted twice for Senator, resulting in an over-vote, or no vote for either candidate.