|Re: Court ruled based on "Standing".... Official Contest is written within the MN Law.... (400733)|
|Home > OTChat|
Re: Court ruled based on "Standing".... Official Contest is written within the MN Law....
Posted by JLenard on Wed Jan 7 19:18:35 2009, in response to Re: State Supreme Court rules against Coleman Re: Minnesota, posted by AMoreira81 on Wed Jan 7 17:27:43 2009.I believe you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion on how/why the decision was made.... It was a question of appropriate STANDING as I put forth and backed up by this quote " the double-counting argument and the reconsideration of rejected absentee ballots — Coleman's lawyers were told by the Canvassing Board or the Supremes that the appropriate place to have those issues considered was an election contest." (from this MinnPost story: Senate recount: It's unlikely Coleman will win in court). Despite the Headline interjecting the Papers Editors preconceived conclusion (their opinion, as we have and make our arguments) the stories early comment of "... in officially announcing that he would contest the election result, struck the right tone. Having a small mob of supporters cheering and chanting ...." (MOB? Mob implies a negative connotation and implication toward the Coleman campaign in this instance) makes me wonder how much of the Story is "reporting" and how much is the usual MSM attempting to INFLUENCE (Libs don't confine Opinion to the Editorial pages) the story/outcomes (as put forth: here: RS: MSM Election Spin/Narrative, to influence Votes rather than just report on election and
here: RS: Vote Psychology (Bandwagon, Bradley, etc) effect) providing cover and setting up the reasons why MN Courts (depending on the specific jurisdiction, doesn't mean a "Republican" staffed Judges court) could dismiss before holding actual Evidence hearing/presentation....
But AGAIN.... The suits were dismissed based on STANDING and procedure.... Now is AN OFFICIAL ELECTION CONTEST and the appropriate STANDING.... IMO, it will be suspect if it is all dismissed "out-of-hand" without arguments heard and an actual ruling being made - additional appeals will be a certainty!
If you have support for your arguments I'd appreciate the opportunity to review it. I do know, however, it is hard to find "TV reports" that have been made.... This MinnPost story was the absolute BEST full reporting of all the issues I've come across yet and it just came out Today!! It is tough, sometimes, to find the information we've based our opinions/arguments on - I know I don't always have the info handy and/or links lying around.
(There are no responses to this message.)