All clear on the recount?


MPR’s Steve Mullis has put this graphic together showing Web pages status updates of the U.S. Senate recount in Minnesota on the MPR, Star Tribune, and Pioneer Press Web sites.

MPR’s numbers are based on the Secretary of State’s recount site, which treats the results the same way they’re treated on election night.

The Star Tribune and Pioneer Press are focusing on the gap between Coleman and Franken on election night, and then subtracting or adding to that as differences in each precinct are reported from election night to the recount.

Clear as mud?

  • I realize this is an important story and nooze outlets feel obliged to cover it, but doesn’t this seem … how shall I put it … deathly dull?

    It’s going to be quite a while before we have this settled because we have to go through Lizard People ballots and all the rest before we’re sure.

    I really wonder who’s paying attention to every detail. I know, I know – someone *has* to, this is our democracy and all that. But I’d go absolute nuts if I was on top of this. Sorry, more nuts.

  • P.J.

    I would be interested in the vote margin reported based upon the original ruling of the local election official – prior to any challenge. (along with the number which you are presenting which excludes all challenged ballots pending review). Coleman continues to “game” the news media by artificially inflating his vote margin with hundreds of frivolous ballot challenges. If people knew that Coleman was presently only winning by 50 votes with the large Democratic population centers yet to be re-counted, that would paint a whole different picture. The Coleman camp can win the spin war with this phase of the recount, if the local news media continues to fail to report this aspect of the recount.

  • Bob Collins

    //If people knew that Coleman was presently only winning by 50 votes with the large Democratic population centers yet to be re-counted,

    Maybe, but when I left here early on Weds. Nov. 5th, they were saying the same thing because the Iron Range was still out.

    Part of me just says “wake me when we have a winner” because everything else is just showbiz.

  • Gary Rowell

    I have been looking at these challenged ballots and I am wondering . . .

    Does the entire State of Minnesota print ALL of their ballots with the names of the candidates in the b>same order

  • Bob- Your numbers guy at, Nate Silver, has a great post on the recount and challenged ballots.

  • Andra Keller

    Day 2, Ballot #3 – The X-factor didn’t provide enough info for me to decide.

    My initial thought was that the voter mistakenly marked an X, then filled in the oval dot; however, he/she filled in the adjacent “Yes” dot with no ambiguity.

    I then discovered Minnesota, like my home state of Wisconsin, had the Presidential contest at the top, making the context important:

    – if the Presidential contest likewise showed a filled in dot with an X through it, the voter was likely thinking with the old X-the-box mindset, then went back to correct it. In that case he/she probably meant to vote for Coleman.

    – if the Presidential contest showed a solid dot without a cross, then the X through Norm Coleman’s name probably meant a rejection.

    I wonder how the recount officials actually decided this one.