 |
|
Daylife/Getty Images used by permission
|
| Why is this man smiling? |
A poll reveals Minnesotans, by and large, want Republican Norm Coleman to concede the state’s U.S. Senate race to Democrat Al Franken.
Public Policy Polling said its survey (.pdf) indicated 63 percent say Coleman should call it a day rather than continue to fight in court, USA Today reported. That percentage includes “almost all of Franken and (independent candidate) Dean Barkley’s supporters, as well as a third of respondents who voted for Coleman last fall,” the polling organization said.
Fifty-nine percent said Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, should certify Franken the winner and he should be seated immediately.
A three-judge panel has voted that Franken won by 312 votes out of nearly 3 million cast.
Like Coleman, maybe Pawlenty will have to get an honest job after the next election cycle?
#32
Speaking of comedy…will Franken revive his one gag from Saturday Night Live as the reporter with the helmet-mounted camera and satellite dish? Now THAT would be comic gold!
I guess it would be like the live-streaming JustinTV (but hopefully with bathroom breaks!).
It was unfortunate that Coleman took over Paul Wellstone… Its even more unfortunate that Colemans planes never crashed.
I met Franken when I lived in Minneapolis, during the Demo caucuses. Seemed like a nice guy, and he was certainly funny on SNL, onscreen or as a jokewriter. Coleman may be just as much of a nice guy, but seems to have bad information from his handlers.
Give it up, Norm. If Franken does a poor job, you can try running again against him in 6 years.
Democrats and Republicans vote as a group. (for the most part) This race means NOTHING since it does not change the majority within the Senate.
#37 Democrats and Republicans vote as a group. (for the most part) This race means NOTHING since it does not change the majority within the Senate.
Well, Coleman is a Republican, and Franken is a Democrat so that’s +1 in the Democratic column.
But it doesn’t put the D’s over 60, and since the obstructionist Republicans have promised to filibuster each and every bill the Democrats propose that they don’t like (which is going to be pretty much everything), and the gutless Democrats seem like they’re not going to call their bluff, you’re right that it’s not going to change much.
Is there some reason it is important for the court system finish thia case?
Typo:
I meant:
Is there is some reason it is important for the court system to NOT finish this case?
It’s already been a long time so what’s the hurry?
#37 dogday said “This race means NOTHING since it does not change the majority within the Senate.”
On the surface you are right but in underground Washington it means Barney Frank has another toy boy to spank if Franken doesn’t vote like mush-mouth commands.
8-years later and you guys are still spreading misinformation about the 2000 election.
You guys really need to do some research, they continued a “unofficial” count according to the Florida Supreme Courts rules and the end result was Bush ahead by just under 500.
Look it up, I have several times.
Talk about not being able to let things go!!
#41, He’ll be Spank’en Franken! Sound naughty!
>almost as bad as Texas style gerrymandering
Republicans win 60% of the votes and 40% of the seats. Can’t believe they would think that is unfair and try to pass a different map than what the Democrats had.
>filibuster each and every bill…, and the gutless Democrats seem like they’re not going to call their bluff,
How do you propose they do that?
#43 BigBoyBC said “Spank’en Franken!”
Good one! Yeah, the word is old mush-mouth loves the new meat and talks that way for a reason.
#44 How do you call their bluff? Make them filibuster, make them stand up in the Senate day after day after day reading the Washington D.C. phone book. It would be a public relations disaster for the Republicans. The filibuster was meant for rare and extreme cases. If the public saw them do it day after day for every bill the Democrats tried to pass, they would rightly look like they were screwing America. If America votes to put a majority of Democrats into Congress, then the Democrats should be given a shot at running the country. Endless filibustering by the Republicans would rightly be seen as obstructing the will of the voters.
But so far, the Democrats haven’t had the guts. Currently, the “gentlemen’s rules” in the Senate say the minority leader just has to tell the majority leader he has 40 votes to filibuster, and the majority leader withdraws the bill in question, or changes it until he can get at least 60 votes.
Since the Republicans are violating the intent of the filibuster, I don’t see why the Democrats should feel beholden to these “gentlemen’s rules”.
Make them filibuster!
#29, “Why are Republicans so bad at understanding Democracy?”
Because what they really want, deep down in their little shriveled hearts, is an oligarchy.
#46 – you’ve almost got it right except blocking Dems is “saving” America.
Actually, instead of 60 it would be nice if every bill required 75 votes to pass. None of us would have to worry about OUR money being wasted as much.
Mr Franken, I have fine porcelain stool here from American Standard – please be seated.
>Make them filibuster, make them stand up in the Senate day after day after day reading the
That’s how it works in Hollywood movies from the 1950s. In the real world it’s the majority that has to hold the floor, not the filibusterers.
MikeN…Clinton called the R’s bluff and won. After the current uncomfortablenless passes, maybe Obama will encourage the D’s to do the same. At least it is entertaining.
#42 bigBoyBC on 2000 election
Conservative hero Pat Buchanan himself said that he got thousands of votes in Palm Beach that were probably meant for Gore. That alone would do it but add to that the falsely turned away voters you guys should be embarrass to say you belong to a party that would do such things.
Why do you guys fear fair elections?
Even though it was a stolen election I was willing to let go until your bad boy Bush screwed up the world and brought our country’s good name to the breaking point, gesh it’s easer to forgive Nixon
Gotta give the Repugs an ‘A’ for persistence.
However, it’s time the citizens of Minnesota to storm Coleman’s house and taser him to make a point – WE DON”T WANT YOU!
I recommend he simply quits but in a dramatic way like setting himself on fire on our nations Capital.
This is a win/win. Franken is off the radio for at least six years and Minnesotans will get Franken out of the state most of the time.
I’m glad it’s resolved, now I’ll be able to buy FrankenBerry cereal again.
#49 That’s how it works in Hollywood movies from the 1950s. In the real world it’s the majority that has to hold the floor, not the filibusterers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster
I suggest you read this. The only reason to “hold the floor” is to stop the majority from forcing a vote on the issue.
n current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster where no floor speech and no quorum is required may therefore be more powerful than an actual filibuster that would require attendance by a quorum of Senators as well as the physical presence of the Senators speaking.
Previously, the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently, they need only indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the Senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.
The bolded part is what I was talking about earlier. The filibusterers don’t actually have to filibuster any more, they only have to say they are, and all progress stops. Since the Republicans plan to filibuster everything the Democrats do, I think it’s time to revoke Senate Rule 22. And as you can see, the Senate Majority Leader can require a traditional filibuster, but the Democrats are such gutless wimps, I’m not holding my breath.
You’re right about the changes to the filibuster and it’s being used more often now. However, this is something that wikipedia got wrong too, what a surprise.
It’s not the threat of a filibuster that I’m disputing, but the actual filibuster itself doesn’t require the minority to do anything but have a member around to suggest the absence of a quorum. They can keep doing this, and the majority has to produce 50 members to keep going. So filibustering group has to have one member, giving no speeches, while the majority has to have 50 people there.
#55 You have some other source of information than wikipedia, please show us. Yes, only one member of the minority has to be present to keep the filibuster going, we know that. But 60 senators must vote to end the filibuster. And since the D’s don’t have 60, the R’s are going to filibuster everything the D’s do (and then blame them in the 2010 for not getting anything done). But the R’s don’t have anything better.
Yea, and again I ask you how should Reid and Obama call their bluff?
#52 I don’t think Coleman’s that flamboyant. HAR!
#57 from the wikipedia article I linked to:
although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses.
If the Republicans are forced to actually stand in the Senate and talk non-stop to keep a bill from passing, they’re going to look like obstructionists. Which they are, of course, but if they’re not actually forced to get up and do it, it’s harder for the American people to really appreciate how much the Republicans are blocking things.
And it’s so hypocritical of the Republicans (I know, nothing new). Back in 2005 when the R’s held the Senate, and the D’s had the nerve to suggest they might filibuster some of Bush’s judge appointments, oh, the hue and cry from the Republicans! How dare the D’s even suggest filibustering! Remember the “nuclear option”? That was when the R’s talked about getting rid of the filibuster. How times have changed, now that they’re in the minority, and using the filibuster far more than the D’s ever did.
Look, maybe the Supreme Court should step in, temporarily abandoning its stated policy to never interfere with a state’s right to determine its own recount procedures.
Oh wait — that would benefit the Democrat in this case. Never mind…
Is it to late to give this state to Canada?
Dateline 2098: Titan
Minnesota senatorial candidate Norm Coleman’s head-in-a-jar said today’s decision from the Solar System Supreme Court declaring Al Franken’s head-in-a-jar the winner of the 2008 Minnesota senatorial election will be appealed to the Orion Arm Supreme Court as soon as preliminary legal work is done, perhaps as soon as 2120.
Seems no one is discussing the merits of the lawsuit? Are there any?
I must ask with regards to the rules in effect at the time of the election..
Were all legally casted votes counted?
Were all illegally casted votes thrown out?
Were the above tabulated correctly?
If the answers are yes yes yes be on with it.
If not how do we know what the will of the people is????
My pet peeve is the contention that every vote be counted, I feel that in any populated district there is more likelihood the election is thrown by over voting than under voting.
I define over voting as ballots that are casted by those that are not entitled to vote– or who have chosen to vote twice. And just the opposite for under vote.
I feel that proper ID is a prerequisite to an accurate and fair election.
So please if anyone knows the merit or lack of merit to the suit itself please respond.