Al Franken may have been declared the winner of the Minnesota Senate seat, but Norm Coleman is clinging on with a law suit.
Coleman alleges that "irregularities left Franken with a 225-vote lead." Coleman wants the court to reconsider the absentee ballots that were rejected.
Apparently both camps have gone back and forth in wanted them counted or rejected in opposing step like some strange dance. Coleman's apparently at the courthouse while Franken is on vacation. Franken's attitude is that the Coleman camp is going through a "formality" and that Franken is the victor as it should be.
At least some of the ballots were rejected because signatures were illegible. Minnesota law requires
a signature that is not a smudge or a scribbled, faint, small, unreadable mark.
The Coleman camp put a voter on the stand whose ballot was one of the rejected. This is what he testified:
...perhaps my signature is not quite as good as it once was. ... Things have changed a little bit. My vote's worth nothing anymore. Maybe I'm worth nothing - I don't know. I'm entitled to my vote - Gerald Anderson
I suppose Coleman wanted everyone's eyes to tear up with examples of people whose ballots were rejected, but if they aren't to the quality required, why should they count? Is there some expectation that Coleman voters are more competent than Franken voters? Perhaps.
Coleman went to court, Franken went to Florida; How do you get to D.C.?