The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

AustinRoth — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:09:22 -0000

I actually have the same viewpoint I did about Bush/Gore in Florida - it was a tie.

All vote counts, and all recounts, we so far inside the margin of error as to make any pronouncement of the &#39actual winner&#39 by vote count as statistically relevant as a coin flip.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

MudEngineer — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:39:23 -0000

Typically, the initial count is more accurate than any most likely biased recount could possibly be. Based on that, I am wondering how a new count of showing a winner by 312 votes outweighs the original count of Coleman winning by over 700 votes. In a recount, the challenger should have to win by at least as many votes as the original count. Can you imagine the outrage if Franken won by only one vote and the original count difference was over 700?

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

DaGoat — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:47:04 -0000

Well DE, for me it was initially a tingle going up my leg and over the years it developed into a chill running down my spine.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

kritt12 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:31:02 -0000

Dorian----

I do remember, and it was in the late 70&#39s. Carter was president and got a lot of grief from Ted Kennedy in the Senate. He was not successful in getting many of his initiatives through- even though there was one party rule.

Also, in the 60&#39s many Democrats bucked LBJ--- liberal ones because of the Vietnam war and southern ones because of his civil rights and poverty programs which aimed to end the subjugation of blacks.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

keelaay — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:26:07 -0000

Not that long ago sir -- under President Clinton as a matter for fact. Coming from this yellow dog Democrat, the only tingling I expect to feel his Messers Reid and Pelosi reaching for my grandchildren&#39s wallets. Not that the last one party ruler, W, didn&#39t already steal them.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

D. E.Rodriguez — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:28:55 -0000

DG and TidBits:

Since I don&#39t remember the last time Democrats had a "one party rule," I am really curious as to whether I&#39ll experience a tingle going up my leg or a chill running down my spine...will let you know

Dorian

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

polsarecrooks — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:18:34 -0000

Lol@the Blue Dogs!!!

Oh yeah an 52 member caucus in the House which usually splits its votes between progressive drivel, toeing the party line, and conservative hyperventilating constitutes a bi-partisan Congress.

Lol, you cannot be that dumb so you must be smoking some good stuff.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

tidbits — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:17:02 -0000

"I wonder if Republicans felt the same chill running down their spines when their party experienced &#39one party rule&#39?"

DER - I can&#39t speak for Republicans since I am not one. I feel a chill run down my spine whenever either party achieves one party rule.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

Jim_Satterfield — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:09:52 -0000

But of course it isn&#39t really one party rule, given the Blue Dogs.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

AustinRoth — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:09:22 -0000

I actually have the same viewpoint I did about Bush/Gore in Florida - it was a tie.

All vote counts, all recounts, were so far inside the margin of error as to make any pronouncement of the 'actual winner' by vote count as statistically relevant as a coin flip.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

DaGoat — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:57:16 -0000

I wonder if Republicans felt the same chill running down their spines when their party experienced "one party rule"?

Some of us did, now we&#39re not Republicans any more.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

D. E.Rodriguez — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:55:04 -0000

"it&#39s a chill running down my spine at the thought of one party rule."

I wonder if Republicans felt the same chill running down their spines when their party experienced "one party rule"?

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

MudEngineer — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:39:23 -0000

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

tidbits — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:27:57 -0000

Congratulations, Senator Franken.

But, that isn&#39t a tingle going up my leg; it&#39s a chill running down my spine at the thought of one party rule.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

$199537 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:47:04 -0000

Well DE, for me it was initially a tingle going up my leg and over the years it developed into a chill running down my spine.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

kritt12 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:31:02 -0000

Dorian----

I do remember, and it was in the late 70's. Carter was president and got a lot of grief from Ted Kennedy in the Senate. He was not successful in getting many of his initiatives through- even though there was one party rule.

Also, in the 60's many Democrats bucked LBJ--- liberal ones because of the Vietnam war and southern ones because of his civil rights and poverty programs which aimed to end the subjugation of blacks.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

keelaay — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:26:07 -0000

Not that long ago sir -- under President Clinton as a matter for fact. Coming from this yellow dog Democrat, the only tingling I expect to feel his Messers Reid and Pelosi reaching for my grandchildren's wallets. Not that the last one party ruler, W, didn't already steal them.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

kathykattenburg — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:17:50 -0000

Oh my god, I thought this day would never come. Hallelujah lord.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

D. E.Rodriguez — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:11:29 -0000

UPDATE: Norm Coleman has just conceced. Congratulations, U.S. Senator Al Franken!

It’s now 60!

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

DLS — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:03:51 -0000

I hope Al Franken isn&#39t going to become the next Michael Jackson on this "moderate" [sic] non-partisan [?] site in the next day, or two, or more. How many threads will there be on this tiny news item, that is the question...

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

Dorian — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:28:55 -0000

DG and TidBits:

Since I don't remember the last time Democrats had a "one party rule," I am really curious as to whether I'll experience a tingle going up my leg or a chill running down my spine...will let you know

Dorian

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

polsarecrooks — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:18:34 -0000

Lol@the Blue Dogs!!!

Oh yeah an 52 member caucus in the House which usually splits its votes between progressive drivel, toeing the party line, and conservative hyperventilating constitutes a bi-partisan Congress.

Lol, you cannot be that dumb so you must be smoking some good stuff.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

tidbits — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:17:02 -0000

"I wonder if Republicans felt the same chill running down their spines when their party experienced 'one party rule'?"

DER - I can't speak for Republicans since I am not one. I feel a chill run down my spine whenever either party achieves one party rule.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

Jim_Satterfield — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:09:52 -0000

But of course it isn't really one party rule, given the Blue Dogs.

Re: Franken vs. Coleman: Numbers Don’t Lie

$199537 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:57:16 -0000

I wonder if Republicans felt the same chill running down their spines when their party experienced "one party rule"?

Some of us did, now we're not Republicans any more.