An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« ‘Tis Creative Time For Tax Exemptions

North Korean Moon »

Say Goodnight, Norm

Posted by DENNIS SANDERS in At TMV.
Apr 9th, 2009 | Comments

I have to agree with Ramesh Ponnuru; it’s time for Norm Coleman to give up his fight for the Senate seat here in Minnesota.

Now, I’m not a fan of Coleman, but I did vote for him because he was and is a better candidate than Al Franken. Franken comes accross as mean-spirited and while Coleman has been faulted with doing what the political winds told him to do, he was at least independent enough to be respected. Franken is nothing more than a liberal yes-man who will add nothing new to the Senate.

That said, I think Coleman should give up his fight and let Franken have the Senate seat.

Why? For some of the same reasons, Ponnuru says, we have been deprived of a Senator, it makes him look like a sore loser, and so on.

Some Democrats and some in the media have long ago claimed that Coleman should do the honorable thing and drop out. Of course their claims were disingenuous, this wasn’t an appeal to honor, as much as it was being “sore winners.” (One doubts they would be asking Franken to do the honorable thing if the situation was reveresed.)

But, Coleman should drop out with honor while he still has some. After nearly six months, the people of Minnesota want this election resolved. Yes, it means that the GOP loses one more seat and yes, liberals will talk about how great they are. But that’s what happens in elections: one person wins and another loses.

But the thing is, Franken may well be the vulnerable one here. Even if he is the winner, it is by a razor thing margin, which means that the Republicans will be lying in wait for 2014. If Coleman tries to keep fighting and manages to win, Democrats will see him as having stole the election and will make his next six years a living hell.

So, Coleman should step down. Do something else for a few years and try a run again in 2012 or 2014.

Sometimes one has to swallow their pride and let the other guy win. It’s not fun and it sucks, but life sometimes sucks.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

mlhradio

And yet - I don't see Coleman conceding, until the senate seat is metaphorically pried from his cold, dead hands. Coleman has known for quite some time that he doesn't have a ghost of a chance of being declared the winner. All of the political maneuvering over the past several weeks really has nothing to do about actually winning - I think the goal all along has been nothing more than pure, bullheaded obstructionism. Various leaders from the Party of No have been leaning extremely heavily on him, folks like McConnell and Sessions and Graham, to drag this out as long as possible - years-long. This is because flipping two senators from the Party of No to the Democrats is twice as hard as flipping one senator - so if the Party of No can keep the Democrats' advantage in the Senate at 58 instead of 59 for as long as possible, so much the better.

Various other commentators and blogs have theories involving Coleman's debts and how he'll pay them off in the future. Others talk about future gubernatorial ambitions. Others surmise that Coleman is in a fantasyland and actually still believes he can win this. Nah - I don't see that. I just see this as pure partisan obstructionism, plain and simple. And because of that - don't expect any concessions any time soon.

GreenDreams

Franken is a pretty good comedian and a decent writer. We can use both in the Senate. He was calling it as it was while most others were afraid to speak out, while the Bushies drove our country into the ditch.

Don Quijote

Scalia's Nightmare

Ponnuru doesn't mention it, but I can't help but wonder whether the prospect of Norm Coleman before the Supreme Court, a highlighted copy of the 14th Amendment in hand, doesn't have something to do with his (and Powerline's Scott Johnson's) sudden conversion to cheese-eating surrender monkeying.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it was the electroshock therapy. But I've suspected for some time that conservatives would eventually have serious reservations about where Norm and his mouthpieces are trying to take them. Maybe it's finally dawning on some of them that making a federal case out this election contest risks a long-term disaster for the GOP -- one that would completely outweigh the short-term benefits of depriving the Democrats of their 59th vote.

After all, what Norm is threatening to do -- if he can't get his way in state court -- is to demand that the US Supremes go storming through the equal protection door they opened just a crack, and then promptly tried to close again, in Bush v. Gore.

But if we're really going to start vigorously applying the 14th Amendment to how votes are cast and counted in this country, then a whole bunch of GOP-friendly election realities are going to be open to constitutional challenge. How, for example, is it "equal" for poor and urban precincts to have 1/5th the number of voting machines per capita as wealthy surburban ones? Is it "equal" for election officials to routinely deny elderly, undereducated or inexperienced voters the assistance they need to understand complex, confusing and/or poorly constructed ballots? Is it "equal" for prosecutors to aggressively pursue registration fraud cases against ACORN, while generally ignoring those against GOP-leaning groups?

Can you say "disparate impact"? How about "protected class"?

GeorgeSorwell

If Coleman loses, he will never be elected to anything again. Why should he care what anyone else thinks?

AustinRoth

GS -

Why should he care what anyone else thinks?

For a silly little thing called 'doing what is right for the country.' It is not the 'equal protection' malarkey - it is the real lesson to be learned from the 2000 election.

Using the courts, an adversarial system, to try and manipulate a vote count or recount in a partisan manner to your favor, as BOTH side did then, and have done now, only serves to bring the legitimacy of elections in general into question.

I have no illusions, nor should any political junkie, that 'dirty trick' are part and parcel of the game, and always have been. But once the election is over, and any mandated or requested recount done, then that should be it. The truth is both sides bent and broke the rules (and I can say that with no worry of being wrong in ANY disputed election), but the process needs to at least maintain a veneer of fairness for the public.

Of all the examples out there, it is beyond ironic that Richard Nixon, one of the dirtiest of political players, knew and understood this when he choose not to contest the 1960 elections.

elrod

I don't think "honor" has anything to do with it, either way. It's more about finality. The ballot review process was probably the most transparent in the history of American democracy. Viewers could even review contested ballots on the Star-Tribune website and judge for themselves. There is no real case of backroom shenanigans here. Every objection from Coleman has been heard in open court, as it should be.

And the final result is Franken winning by 315 votes.

I don't see the MN Supreme Court changing that. And I certainly don't see the Federal courts changing that.

Once the MN Supreme Court rules on the matter, the MN Secretary of State should certify the election. Even if MN law allows candidates to take their case "through the courts", the US Senate should seat Franken even if the Sec. of State is not yet able to issue a cert. If a Federal court overturns the MN courts, Franken will be removed from the Senate and replaced with Coleman.

There is simply no justifiable reason for keeping Franken out of the Senate anymore. Republican threats of "World War III" are just that: threats. What, are the Republicans going to start filibustering everything? Oh yeah, they already do. Are the Republicans going to start voting as a complete bloc against Obama's agenda? Oh yeah, they already do.

Don Quijote

For a silly little thing called 'doing what is right for the country.' It is not the 'equal protection' malarkey - it is the real lesson to be learned from the 2000 election.

ROTFLMAO...

When you lose the popular vote by half a million, but you can squeak a electoral victory by using the supreme court to suppress the vote count in Florida, doing 'doing what is right for the country.' is going home and admitting defeat...

Unfortunately, that is not what Shrub and the Repugs did...

Two pointless lost wars, one Missing Major landmark, a drowned city, a seies of Torture scandal and a full blown depression later, it's too little late to talk about 'doing what is right for the country.', and not have people laugh in your face.

GeorgeSorwell

AR--

I agree that Coleman should concede.

I just doubt that Coleman sees it that way.

AustinRoth

the US Senate should seat Franken even if the Sec. of State is not yet able to issue a cert.

Except, of course, the minor fact that it would be un-Constitutional for them to do so. Which is why Coleman should concede the race.

AustinRoth

DQ - except, of course, that the attempt to try and determine what would have happened if any of the recounts in Florida occurred still had Bush coming out on top. The only ones that showed Gore winning were hypothetical recounts never attempted or proposed by either camp, or the State.

An inconvenient truth, I know.

kritt11

I agree with Elrod.

I don't think that its appropriate for federal courts to get involved in a state matter unless there's evidence that the state authorities mismanaged the voting process or the recounts. There is no evidence of that. The Minnesota Supreme Ct should rule, and both parties should accept that ruling. Afterward the Sec of State should certify the winner and he should be seated in the Senate. Period. Why should the will of the Minnesota voters be stymied by one sore loser?

BTW- if I lived in Minnesota, I wouldn't have been able to vote for either man!

HemmD

AR

Florida got sucked into the courts because of the state political moves of the Republican party. Yeah, I know you probably disagree.

What makes that whole recount fiasco infamous for those on the left is SCOTUS issuing a decision not to be used in any future legal descision. Talk about stare decisis.

“Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes presents many complexities.”

Here's our decision, but don't quote us.
An Inconvenient Ruling for a legal system based on precedence.

MinnesotaCentral

Although it is good that The Moderate Voice is speaking out, who will tell Coleman that his actions are hurting the MN-GOP ?
There is a leadership void in the MN-GOP that has allowed the RNC to dictate the candidates -- they selected Coleman (as opposed to allowing a primary contest with Pawlenty) in 2002 and Kennedy (as opposed to allowing a primary contest with Gutknecht) in 2006. Pawlenty needs to step up and have a heart-to-heart with Coleman. As lawyers they know that even a questionable legal argument may be used to justify a court hearing, but as politicians they must know that their court battle could do more harm than good. Barkley did not get 437,505 votes because he represented the Independence Party … he got a lot of them because he wasn’t Coleman or Franken.
Pawlenty has looked like a shill for the RNC and this is not the impression that he wants in the minds of the independent voters in future elections.

Janjanjan

One of the most important foundations of the United States is the expectation that the individual who loses an election will graciously allow the winner to take the office. I know that in 2000, I feared that Bush wouldn't ever concede and would attempt to block Gore, no matter what. I've spoken to conservatives who told me that they feared that the Clintons wouldn't leave the White House and wouldn't leave the field to allow Bush to take over. My fears were never tested as Bush was declared the winner, and my friends' fears were proven groundless.

We have a long, proud, and civil history of peaceful turnovers of power. I think this is the paramount issue here. It was certainly fair to recount the ballots, and it has certainly been fair for Coleman and Franken to advocate for the recount procedures they believe best. But the recount is over. At this point, even when Coleman seems to win a legal battle, it turns out that the newly admitted ballots favor Franken, not him. Based on Minnesota's election board's final determination, Franken will be declared the winner. Is that determination perfect? Maybe not--but the issues being raised are just a fraction of the complaints that have been raised by all parties in every state, and litigating elections hasn't historically been accepted by the American people.

We don't have coups; we don't have elections which result in no successful formation of a government; we don't have elections which are overruled by a monarch. We have a peaceful and orderly transition of power. The key has been that when an election is lost, the loser concedes. Politicians and supporters must support and reinforce this foundational expectation.

AustinRoth

HemmD -

Florida got 'sucked in' due to (a) a ballot created and approved by a Democratic-controlled district and (b) 'political moves of the Republican party'. i.e., enforcing the election rules and laws as written. Then Gore tried to change the rules on the fly, which the Florida Supreme Court kept trying to be complicit in doing, and SCOTUS prevented that chicanery.

Do remember, the ruling on the actions of the Florida Supreme Court, for which your quote was applied, was 7 - 2. The 5 - 4 vote, that did stop the madness, was the ruling that said insufficient time remained to determine the appropriate rules for yet another recount attempt, to have that recount, and certify it in time to meet the Constitutional requirements for the timing of the Assembly and Vote of the Electors.

So, in short, yes I disagree with you. Gore and the Democrats tried to game the system to their advantage, had NO interest in 'counting every vote', and succeeded in one of the great misdirections of political history to avoid the blame THEY rightly deserve for dragging the election un-needlessly through the courts.

They played the role currently being played by Coleman in Minnesota, frankly, who I have said for some time (in writing, on this board) should give up his appeals and allow Franken to be seated, even though I DESPISE Franken.

HemmD

SCOTUS waited 3 days before issuing their ruling that there was not enough time. Convenient.

Thank God I wasn't around here back then. We would have run out of electrons to type with.

Don Quijote

We would have run out of electrons to type with.

There are two types of people in this world, those who think GW Bush won the election fair and square and those who think he stole it fair and square, and neither group will ever convince the other of their position, so why waste the electrons?

On the other hand one should never let people forget that he lost the popular vote by half a million and the he was a real conservative republican who got at least 95% support from elected republicans in the House and Senate, a real anti-Croesus who turned every thing he touched to shit, undoubtedly the worst president since Hoover. He is the gift that keeps on giving, he just needs to be hung around the neck of every republican candidate for the next 50 years.

HemmD

Andrew Jackson lost his first bid for Presidency even though he had the most of the popular vote. There's nothing new in Gore's loss. What made the 2000 election different was that we all had a ringside, blow-by-blow seat. Thank God for the conservation of energy, or we'd have burned through all those electrons long ago. :)

AustinRoth

DQ - there is a third group, that says in reality no politician every wins any election 'fair and square'.

Put me in that group.

You know who else is in that group? Every politician. That is why they don't the courts involved, were mad at Gore (and they were), and are mad at both Franken and Coleman. The don't want the People or the Courts to get in the habit of poking around election results.

blog comments powered by Disqus