The not-so-good news, there are roughly 5,700 challenged ballots that won’t be decided upon until the 16th.

Oh please, man. You’re accusing me of not having shame or honor? Let me remind you, I’m the one who has admitted I’ve been wrong on here. I’ll also remind you that you mocked me for doing so.

You, on the other hand, we’re just flat out wrong in another recount thread, failed to post proof that you weren’t (because you couldn’t) and just went on to attack liberals and myself. You.Are.A.Joke.

Now, because I do correct myself when I’m wrong, I do see now by going to that flicker page that the photo was taken during the recount, but that information was not posted on the page Ed linked to. Further more, it’s still incredibly weak evidence that vote fraud had occurred. No one — not any recounter, election judge or Coleman spokesperson — is making that claim aside from Ed and this guy (as far as I can tell). It’s base insinuation, and I will not apologize to Ed calling him out for using this tactic because he does it all the time.

I suppose he’ll charge vote fraud in this case too:

http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_11129187?nclick_check=1

Oh, how convenient that these ballots turn up and favor in Coleman — in Minneapolis a liberal, NPR-loving haven. Awfully fishy! (i mean, it’s very easy to do).

I mean, stuff like this most likely happens all the time in every state on election day. But most races aren’t this close, so none of it is brought to light. Human error occurs, but in most races, it doesn’t matter. The margin of victory is large enough for those errors not to matter. But in this case, it’s not and those mistakes are being caught. You can accept that reality, or be like Ed here and just insinuate voter fraud without any real evidence of misconduct to present.

So spare me your indignation… maybe back up your claims once in a while and i might start to take you seriously.

Minnesota, the sister state of Zimbabwe.

Absolutely.

Minnesota is a pathetic, corrupt state.

Prior to the recount, Coleman’s lead wasn’t 295 votes, but 215 votes. He also lost a net 37 votes in the “newly found” ballots, so that would take him down to 177 votes pre-recount.

It’s difficult to project the results from the 1,000 challenged ballots to the entire sample, because the MPR website only posts partial samples in some of the larger counties, but complete samples (all the challenged ballots) in smaller counties where less than about 100 ballots were challenged.

Since my last post, I’ve looked at two more counties, and the pattern is holding. So far, I’ve studied six counties, all of which had over 90% of the challenged ballots posted on the MPR website.

Washington Co: Recount Coleman +12; challenges Franken +11.

Meeker Co: Recount Franken +43; challenges Coleman +41.

Steele Co: Recount Coleman +9; challenges Franken +6.

Todd Co: Recount Coleman +10; challenges Franken +7.

Lac Qui Parle Co: Recount Coleman +13; challenges Franken +11.

Mille Lacs Co: Recount Franken +16; challenges Coleman +14.

In each of these six counties, where nearly all the challenged ballots were posted online, an objective evaluation of the challenged ballots erased the differential from the recount to within 3 votes.

In a state with 87 counties, even the twos and threes per county can make a difference, if they’re all in the same direction. We still don’t know whether the partial samples of challenged ballots in the big counties such as Hennepin, Ramsey, Dakota, and Saint Louis are representative of ALL the challenged ballots.

But the trend in the six counties I studied is clear: most of the vote differential between the original count and the recount is due to differences in the number of challenges by each candidate, and resolving the challenges fairly (discerning the intent of the voter) tends to nearly wipe out that vote differential, meaning that the vast majority of challenges will be overturned. If none of the vote challenges are upheld, we get Coleman +120. With four counties plus 7% of the largest county (Hennepin) left to be counted, I would venture a guess that the final result will be between Coleman +100 and Coleman +150.

“In a conference call, Elias said Franken leads Coleman by 22 votes at the end of last night’s count.”

Cheat till you win!

According to the current numbers, Coleman finished the original voting with a 295 advantage.

Thus far in the recount, Coleman has gained an additional 80 votes in the recount. Since they’re nearing the completion of the recount, I’m ignoring the uncounted portion of the 5 counties that haven’t finished. The final here won’t change much as the counties that haven’t finished are small or nearly complete. This gives Coleman a net of 375 after the recount ends.

We now have some information about the challenges. We don’t know where the original 1000 that have been released came from so the breakdown between candidates doesn’t matter. However of the original 1,000 had 100 or 10% that could be eliminated. In addition another 21% doen’t get clear guidance from the law. Here are 3 different methods to project from this group of ballots:

The challenges will go like the MPR review: On the Minnesota Public Radio review of 1/6th of the challenged ballots, Coleman gained 20 votes. This is a fairly large sample, but we don’t know where it comes from nor what will happen with the 200 votes that Minnesota law gives unclear guidance. However projecting this gives Coleman another 180 votes.

Most challenges will be overruled — Coleman has challenged 3,095 vs 2,922 for Franken — this gives Franken a 138 ballot advantage in the challenges after subtracting 20% of truly bad ballots. This is actually my most likely case — I think that most of the challenges will be BS by both camps.

All challenges will go proportionately the way of the rest of the county: Proportionately more ballots were challenged in Coleman counties. Again subtracting 20% for truly bad ballots gives Coleman a 55 vote gain.

Adding these projections to the current totals gives Coleman a victory margin of between 237 and 555 votes. Tsunami Norm survives.

Normal caveats apply — The biggest one is that this assumes that 1 side was more vigorous in challenging ballots and will be disproportionately overturned. Or maybe another set of ballots will be found. Or maybe….

Tom_Shipley on December 3, 2008 at 12:47 PM

And why is it, every time you post, I have to come along and correct your lies.
This has to be at least 6 or seven times in the past couple of weeks that you have posted garbage and I have to correct you.
Have you no shame? No honor?

Boy, you take one photo of an empty incident log and extrapolate that a voting machine must not have malfunctioned? Ever think that the photo was taken at 6am?

A little advice, when making an accusation as large as vote fraud, try gathering a little more evidence first.

Tom_Shipley on December 3, 2008 at 12:47 PM

Take your own advice, the sheet is not in “any ones” hands, until it is released to be reviewed…after the polls have closed and the Secretary releases these logs to be analyzed…that is when the picture was taken, during the recount. It could not have been taken prior.
Here is some advice from you to you…

when making an accusation as large as vote fraud, try gathering a little more evidence first.

So now we will wait for your apology to Ed…as if…

By the way the Pearson’s chi-square test is an approximation. With computers today, it’s easy to get the exact number, but then I would have do some research and I doubt it would make much difference.

We need Jimmy Carter and UN monitors to supervise our elections. If we can do it in Haiti we can do it here.

This entire recount has become absolutely insane.

Democrat voting fraud is now common place thriughout the nation and no one seems to care.

pat on December 3, 2008 at 12:13 PM

Well, we all care, but it feels like we’re screaming in a phone booth.

“Progressives” will do whatever they have to for power.

It’s one reason Ed gets by on his lazy, dishonest habit of insinuation.

So spare me your idiotic name-calling.

Tom_Shipley on December 3, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Let’s see Lil Shipley Sheep – hit too close to home?

So spare me your idiotic name-calling.

Will do, when you stop pretending you are not a total poseur from another planet, imAo, and apologize to Ed of the insinuation that he is lazy? and/or dishonest?

So spare us your idiotic musings.

btw, Lil Shipley Sheep, Arianna is calling: your deadline is approaching so you might like to bugger off of the “annoy conservative blog duty” and get something up pronto-like at HuffPo so the Lame Stream Media can pick it up from Media Matters before Sissy M hits the air at 5:00….

p.s. almost forgot therighteous indignation “sigh” that accompanies all too often the Lil Shipley Sheep tyes [i.e. Wolves in Sheep clothing]

Agreed. It’s hilarious watching Franken’s life imitate his art. He thinks he’s in control of his starring role in his farce. You just can’t write comedy this good!

Some examples:

Washington County: Coleman nets 12 in the recount, challenges 59 ballots, Franken challenges 52. Challenged ballots: Franken 55, Coleman 44, Barkley 2, No Vote 5. Franken nets 11 votes, within 1 vote of wiping out Coleman’s adjustment for the recount.

Steele County: Coleman nets 9 in the recount, challenges 10 ballots, Franken challenges 2. Challenged ballots: Franken 8, Coleman 2, no vote 2. Franken nets 6 votes in challenges, within 3 votes of wiping out Coleman’s adjustment for the recount.

Todd County: Coleman nets 10 in the recount, challengees 44 ballots, Frankcn challenges 33. Challenged ballots: Franken 42, Coleman 35, no vote 2. Franken nets 7 votes in challenges, within 3 votes of wiping out Coleman’s adjustment for the recount.

This can work the other way, as in Meeker County: Franken nets 43 in the recount, challenges 51 ballots, Coleman challenges only 7. Challenged ballots: Coleman 45, Franken 4, Barkley 2, no vote 1. Coleman nets 41 votes in challenges, wiping out all but 2 votes of Franken’s adjustment for the recount.

If this pattern holds, most of the challenges will be rejected on both sides, and the final result would be close to what would be obtained by adding Franken’s challenges to Coleman’s votes and adding Coleman’s challenges to Franken’s votes. As of now, with four full counties and 7% of Hennepin County left to count, Coleman leads by 303 votes, and has made 3,093 challenges to Franken’s 2,910 challenges. If all challenges are rejected, Coleman wins by 303 + 2,910 – 3,093 = 120 votes.

The counties left to count include two counties which Coleman won by over 13,000 votes each, two counties about evenly split, and 7% of Hennepin County, which Franken won by 91,000 votes.

This situation seems like it should favor Coleman holding his lead, unless HopenChange waves a magic wand and new Frankenballots appear out of nowhere.

Or that maybe they didn’t log the complaint.

A little advice, when making an accusation as large as vote fraud, try gathering a little more evidence first. It’s serious charge, especially against people who volunteer their time on election day.

Tom_Shipley on December 3, 2008 at 12:47 PM

What, do we need videotape of a pollworker wearing “Obama 08″ stickers filling out 37 ballots and sticking them into the machine before we’re allowed to question if these magically appearing ballots are valid?

Get a life.