“Only Waste The Right Time”
By Mitch Berg
The MinnPost has a new design. It’s a lot more readable, so kudos to them (or to whoever did the redesign).
Of course, with the new design comes what seems to this long-time reader a renewed commitment to passive-aggressively support the DFL even more.
Jay Nord asks if W voters will mind that Voter ID will delay election results:
Are Minnesotans willing to wait up to 10 days after the election to find out who won in races ranging from governor to local officials?
That prospect was raised at Wednesday’s Senate Local Government and Elections Committee meeting during discussion of the proposed Voter ID constitutional amendment.
The measure passed 8 to 6 on a party-line vote after an hour and a half of discussion. That action drew a round of boos from the hearing room filled with protesters.
At the session, the Minnesota Secretary of State’s Office expressed concern that implementing provisional balloting could stretch the amount of time needed to count election results and that it could force earlier primary dates.
“Nobody’s going to know who won any of the elections until at least 10 days or more afterwards,” Secretary of State staff member Beth Fraser told the committee. “I know that people are on pins and needles on election night. That feeling is going to last for quite a while if we don’t know for more than 10 days who won anything in Minnesota from governor down to school board.”
Speaking just for myself here? Who cares. Oh, I think the “ten days” figure is a sign of the Secretary of State is sandbagging to try to gin up yet another public meme to give the pro-corruption forces something to chant about.
Outside the media – including the MinnPost – who want to sell lots of papers and have lots of eyeballs tuned in to their election-night coverage or websites? I’d be amazed if you found anyone that cared about a wait (and if Mark Ritchie’s office says “Ten days”, assume it means “two days”). Outside the media? Most of our lives don’t hinge, day by day, on any of these races – even those of us who follow this stuff closely.
But let’s take Ritchie at his word (always dangerous) and answer the question.
Yes. I’ll trade a “ten day” wait for actual election integrity (which’ll involve a lot more than just voter ID, but it’s a start). Every time.
But let’s stop for a moment here. Apparently in the world of the liberal “alternative” media, some delays are better than others.
I don’t recall the MinnPost caterwauling over the delays forced on election results by “Instant Runoff Voting”, which has led to long, pointless delays to getting election results, and to a system with a byzantine, convoluted vote-counting formula that is both opaque to most voters and which admits up front that it disenfranchises voters.
So let’s summarize: results delayed due to a system blessed by one-party DFL governments that obfuscates the election process and guarantees a certain percentage of votes will end up not being counted? Just hunky-dory to the MinnPost.
Results delayed (maybe, according to a Secretary of State who reports to George Soros) due to a “GOP plan” that will be a solid first step to ensure our elections have integrity and don’t disenfranchise legitimate voters with a wave of illegitimate ones?
Oh, what do you think?
February 17th, 2012 at 6:25 am
‘At least’ 10 days delay. Because that happens in every state that requires photo ID to vote…or not.
February 17th, 2012 at 7:16 am
Like you said, Mitch, voter ID will put Mark Ritchie will put him at odds with George Soros. He has to make stuff up to get outrage from the brain dead libs that can’t think for themselves. If we really have the best election system in the country as Markie proclaims, adding voter ID shouldn’t be more than a hiccup!
February 17th, 2012 at 7:37 am
Really? We won’t know that Ellison won in CD 05 until ten days after the election? I think we can safely say that the vast majorities will be clearly settled on election night.
February 17th, 2012 at 7:57 am
Whereas without voter ID, we knew right away that Norm Coleman had beaten Al Franken.
Oh, wait. . . .
February 17th, 2012 at 8:29 am
Are Minnesotans willing to wait up to 10 days after the election to find out who won in races ranging from governor to local officials?
As opposed to a recount that lasts weeks? Yep.
February 17th, 2012 at 8:31 am
Also, in the old days (1800’s) people didn’t know election results for weeks yet they somehow managed to survive, with this culture of immediate gratification we can’t wait for something as important as election results, good God. Not to beat a dead horse but if the networks in 2000 hadn’t called Florida/the presidency for Gore while VOTING WAS STILL GOING ON IN THE PANHANDLE we wouldn’t have had to go through that mess.
February 17th, 2012 at 9:12 am
It isn’t a problem if, as Hugh Hewitt says, “If it ain’t close, they can’t cheat.” Without fraudulent votes, it won’t even be close.
February 17th, 2012 at 9:37 am
And Minnesota will be just like the wild west, with blood running in the streets.
Ooops, wrong panic meme. Apologies.
February 17th, 2012 at 10:33 am
It’s my opinion that ballots should be collected and secured, only, on election night. That we should ensure that none of them are counted until after every poll has closed.
February 17th, 2012 at 10:44 am
Three thoughts:
1) Assuming for the sake of argument that it will in fact take ten days to count provisional ballots and there are enough provisional ballots to possibly change the outcome of the elections, a ten day delay is small price to pay to better ensuring the integrity of the election process. It’s more important to have the right result than the fastest result.
2) I suspect that many or most of the races that are close enough where provisional ballots could change the outcome are the ones that are likely to face a recount (either an automatic or an optional recount) so it’s not clear that this will actually be much of an additional delay.
3) If we want to avoid “delays” caused by provisional ballots, we could always eliminate same day voter registration.
February 17th, 2012 at 10:59 am
Seinfeld episodes we love to see:
Scene: George Soros’ office. We see the back of Soros’ head sitting behind a huge desk. Pictures of a smiling Soros with Saul Alinski, Bill Ayers, Che, Kim Jong Il and Castro adorn the walls. A visibly uncomfortable Mark Ritchie stands front and center, wringing his hands
Soros: So Mark, what the fuck is going on up there, fer Mao’s sake!
Ritchie: I can’t explain it sir. We did so well the last couple of years; Franken, Dayton, they’d never have had a chance!
Soros: Blah, blah…what have you done for me today!! If this thing gets passed, do you have any idea what it will cost to fix the next election?
Ritchie: Yes, sir. Lots.
Soros: More than I’m willing to pay to keep YOU in office, pal!
(Sound of urination)
Soros: Are you pissing your pants Ritchie?
Ritchie: Yes, sir.
Soros: Well then dance boy, dance!
February 17th, 2012 at 11:12 am
I still cant believe Ritchie beat Severson by 8 points last time in such a heavy republican year, that’s why I am still undecided on supporting his senatorial campaign.
February 17th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
What Wisconsin is seeing with things like voter ID is that the anti-ID people are doing everything they can to make it complicated. They are trying to make the ID law unworkable by stalling and finding the most obscure reasons for it not to work.