Coleman's lead over Franken in the US Senate race has dwindled to 221 votes and the wingnuts are getting jumpy. Over at Power Line, the boys are up to Part 3 of posts titled "What's Happening in Minnesota?" The last installment consists of a statement put out by the Coleman campaign followed by Scott Johnson's conclusion that "the election seems to be in the process of being stolen." I take the word "seems" to be tacit acknowledgment that there is no evidence to support the (very serious) accusation. The inevitable small shifts in results that are being checked and rechecked makes for what mathematicians call a random walk. It happens in every election, between the first reporting of results and the final certification, but now, in a race so close, the phenomenon is suddenly novel and suspicious. There was around a fifty percent chance that corrections, in the aggregate, would benefit Franken. That chance has apparently been realized. To be believed, the claim that Franken is stealing the election requires more than his shrinking deficit and right-wing paranoia.
Here is the statement of the Coleman campaign quoted at Power Line:
"Not content to allow the recount process to move forward as prescribed by law, the Franken Campaign and its supporters are attempting a campaign of undue influence. The increasing questions about unexplained and improbable shifts in vote counts, coupled with Franken Campaign antics over the past 24 hours, compelled us to seek legal action to protect the rights of Minnesota voters. We had an election. Senator Coleman won. And we now must have a legal and transparent process conducted in the light of day - and that is our goal and intent.
"Late last night, after another unexplained shift in votes occurred when the Secretary of State's Office closed, new ballots have suddenly appeared from a heavily Democratic precinct. These ballots have been unsecure since the election, yet the Franken Campaign is demanding they be stuffed into the ballot box, attempting to change a vote count that was already finished. Minnesota election laws provide specific rules for reviewing and counting ballots. Today's legal proceeding is an effort to ensure that a transparent and orderly process be in place. The Franken Campaign should be joining us in this action, not seeking to push the process outside the bounds of the law."
On the morning after the election, Coleman, with a lead of well under a thousand votes out of around 2.9 million cast, declared himself the victor and indicated that Franken should waive the recount required by law. I don't know what qualifies as an "antic" or the exercise of "undue influence" but it's clear Coleman was endeavoring to close down a process prescribed by law. Praising the integrity of the election process and the professionalism of its administrators, he asserted that there was virtually no chance that a recount would change the outcome, that the cost to taxpayers was not worth it, and that the time for "healing" had arrived.
Coleman is reminding me of McCain's erratic behavior in the immediate aftermath of the Wall Street financial collapse. There should be no recount but it is the Franken campaign that is not content to allow the recount process to go forward in orderly fashion. This recount, which either should or should not proceed, depending upon whether it is the morning after the election or the day after that, had better not reverse the outcome, because "we had an election" and "Senator Coleman won." The integrity of the election process and the professionalism of the people who administer it are not to be doubted. Also, the election is being stolen.
I have to admit that not every high-ranking Minnesota Republican is full of it. Brian Sullivan, who in 2002 ran for the Republican endorsement for governor, positioning himself to the right of eventual winner Tim Pawlenty, is talking sense. Friday's Star Tribune article on the Senate race includes the following graphs:
Brian Sullivan, a Republican National Committee member, said that "Norm is in the best position because he's still got the most votes, but if he was nervous on Tuesday, he's really got reason to be nervous today."
Sullivan said that in talking to party officials around the state, new voters are becoming a point of concern.
First-time voters may have marked ballots in a way that optical scanners could not read, Sullivan said, but they could be caught by a hand tally.
"We're not talking about improper activity," Sullivan said, "but ballots where votes may not have been recorded if they weren't properly marked."
I agree with all of that.
Comments