Monday, February 23, 2009

Post wants do-overs for Republicans

Balloon Juice's DougJ wonders where the f%$# this is coming from:

Baltimore, Md.: Speaking of junior senators, do you see Al Franken being seated anytime before 2010?

Shailagh Murray: Perhaps, but it seems more and more likely that the Minnesota race will wind up as a re-vote. At this point it seems like the quickest way to resolve the situation.

and later:

Al Franken Revote Really?: Star Tribune just published an article on the front page which discusses Coleman’s dwindling chances. The Politico last week published an article discussing Coleman’s need for a miracle. Election experts from Minnesota are discussing the math which makes a Coleman comeback extremely difficult and the higher courts taking this case an unlikely prospect. How did you arrive at this recount theory? I think the only folks advocating this are a FEW Republicans who see this as Coleman’s only realistic hope for overturning the results of November.

Shailagh Murray: I don’t have a revote “theory.” I’m just wondering how long this is going to sit in the court system. If Coleman looks desperate, why not just hold another election and beat him handily?But there’s a process in place here, and we can only assume both parties will abide by it.

From the comments we see that a non-reporter has recognized that a revote isn't an option. Funny how the Post's political reporter can't seem to figure that out.

And yeah, sure, why not just hold another election? That's what the Post called for in the aftermath of the disputed 2000 presidential elections? Remember? Oh yeah, they didn't. Between Murray who wants a revote for this one special election that the Republicans keep litigating and op-ed writer George Will who thinks state legislatures should take back the selection of U.S. Senators, WTF?

And what if the revote came down to a few votes difference just like this one, Shailagh Dearest? Do we keep demanding a revote until Coleman comes up ahead?

Again from the BJ comments, KC in DC says:

[Murray]If Coleman looks desperate, why not just hold another election and beat him handily?

Maybe because that’s not what the law says? How does that question even make sense? "If Coleman looks desperate"? Hey, McCain seems pretty desperate now, why not have a revote of the presidential election?