We've decided it's time to start blaming the absentee voters who couldn't seem to figure out the instructions for voting properly. Yes, it is their fault that we are now finishing up the third week of this election trial with no end in sight. We thank the clueless Minnesotans who half-assed their ballots and we now have to wait for the court to debate their intentions with their ballots.
Please end our misery soon.
What are they debating? Whether to count ballots when the application or registration materials are unsigned, when certain boxes or unchecked. Yes, errors where Minnesotans can't seem to read the instructions provided. Voting is serious, so take the application seriously.
There are some instances that can be blamed on the election officials. The voter did everything correctly, but something happened with the ballot after it left the voter's hands that led to a rejected vote. That's different.
But how much longer can we be sympathetic to voters who can't figure out the process? Absentee voting is hard and if you can't figure it out, your best bet is to show up at the polls like most Minnesotans. Look at all the pain you've caused this state.
We're just kidding (sort of). Our patience is just running low. At least the process should be streamlined by Monday as the judges determine which categories of rejected ballots will actually be considered. Coleman is trying to get as many votes as possible counted while Franken is trying to stick to the books and follow the laws already in place.
For these reasons, we do support Franken's standing on the issue, despite disagreeing with his flipflopping that is just as bad as Coleman's.
From the Star Tribune:
Franken attorney Marc Elias said the court's only job is to determine the number of legally cast votes by strictly following state law. Minnesota sets out a number of rules that absentee voters must follow to prevent fraud from seeping into the process.
If a voter does everything right but an official errs, the ballot should count, Elias said. But he said state law shows a preference for voting at the polls and that the judges should strictly apply statutory requirements for absentee ballots.
The judges didn't indicate when they might issue a ruling.