DF's picture

    Burning Question: The Coleman Factor

    The U.S. Presidential election of 2000 still evokes uncomfortable memories of election regularities, former Secretaries of State waxing legal and some stodgy butthole named Chad.  Even though the whole debacle had to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, which seemed to take for-eh-ver, the resolution was reached in a tidy 38 days.

    Well, we're now at day 112 of the ongoing legal circus surrounding election results for a U.S. Senate seat in the state of Minnesota.  While watching Norm Coleman and his team of legal, ahem, experts is certainly entertaining, I've begun to wonder how long this can really drag on.  On Thursday, the Coleman factor, a metric I have devised for measuring just how protracted this process is, will reach 3.

    My question to you is: How high will the Coleman factor get?  Will it reach 4?  That would put us into the month of April.

    Bonus question: Given Al Franken's history as a comedian, how much is he sweating having to follow Coleman right now?  Comedy-wise, this is a lot of pressure.


    Time-wise, I think the meter will peak at 3.5. The panel of judges have displayed more patience with Coleman's case than any humans actually possess.

    You simply can't withdraw a legal stipulation you and the other side made jointly. You can't reintroduce ballots you formally objected to. It's laughable.

    I see a decision within two weeks at most; the full ruling may take longer. I want to read that ruling in its entirety when it comes down. It should tear a legal strip off Coleman and his counsel.

    Who is paying for all the legal shenaigans?  I agree with you that it has gone way over the top and I myself, from what little I have read about it, am surprised it has continued on.   Could be we are looking at it the wrong way and should be thinking the 2000 farce should have taken more time?  There should have been ballot counting in the court over and over again?

    Latest Comments