Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss is an unlikely hero for the Republican party. His record has just enough questionable votes on key issues to make religious conservatives nervous, but not enough strong positions on civil liberties issues to make libertarian Republicans entirely happy. He's often dismissed unfairly as a moderate, despite a record of fiscal and social conservatism. All that was forgotten when a very close election in Georgia put Chambliss in a runoff for what could have been the 60th Senate seat giving Democrats a filibuster-proof majority, reducing Senate Republicans to near-irrelevance.
Chambliss ended up in a runoff largely because of Libertarian candidate Allen Buckley who drew 3.41 percent of the vote, more than enough to push Chambliss from 49.75 percent to well over 50 percent and victory. Chambliss sought support from the Libertarian Party of Georgia in the runoff, but when it was not forthcoming he was able to get backing from libertarian Republican groups to win over Libertarians and libertarian Republican voters. Although he did not get their endorsement in the original election, the combination of his fiscally conservative record and the importance of keeping total control of the House out of the hands of Democrats helped convince the Republican Liberty Caucus of Georgia to endorse Chambliss, and when he agreed to sign their Liberty Compact, the national RLC threw their support behind Chambliss as well.
That extra bit of support from the RLC won over many Libertarians, and their votes along with some votes from independents who had previously voted for Chambliss' opponent Jim Martin, were enough to give Chambliss a comfortable 57 to 43 percent win in the runoff election on Tuesday, sending him back to Washington with a strong reminder that a lot of voters in Georgia and around the nation would like to see him focus more on fiscal conservatism and defending civil liberties in his next term.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dr Dreadful
I'm glad Chambliss won. It's healthy to keep the Senate majority party reminded that a metaphorical bolt-cutter is poised constantly over their collective nuts.
Somehow, I have a feeling that Saxby will find it much less difficult to fight for civil liberties now that he no longer has to rationalize why his own boss is taking liberties with them.
Now on to Minnesota. It's a tie, goddamnit. You're absolutely right that a runoff election would have been the best solution to the current impasse there, especially with the third-party candidate taken out of the equation. Unfortunately, that's not the law in Minnesota, so you can hardly blame Franken or Coleman for using all the tools at their disposal to try and win. Your snide accusations of foul play against the Franken campaign are not at all helpful here. The result was so close that no amount of recounts, court cases or investigations are ever going to prove conclusively who won.
2 - Baronius
Chambliss is reluctantly becoming the new Jesse Helms. The mainstream media have become obsessed with this guy. There's no limit to the smears they'll make against him. But that could make him a permanent fixture in the Senate. The funny thing is, he's not really like his image (but that's what happens when the press starts to lie).
Check out the personal attack that Time.com put up.
3 - Dave Nalle
Dr. D. Read up on some of the stuff the Franken campaign is doing. They are proving every Republican accusation against the Democrats for election rigging to be true, at least in this one election. They are trying every sleazy scheme and fraud to basically steal the election, and if they succeed it will be truly damning for the Democrats.
Read up on Mark Elias and how he helped steal the Oregon gubernatorial election in 2006 with many of the same techniques.
If Franken wins the people of Minnesota will be far from happy, because if they did have a system like a runoff Coleman would have won hands down and Franken would not have had any chance to slime his way to a win.
Dave
4 - Ruvy
As for Minnesota, guys, the Strib(Mnnesotan for Star Tribune) has Coleman ahead by 295 votes. Franken's campaign has him (Al Franken) ahead by 12 votes. There is an interesting little point made in the video that goes along with the article.
The United States senate can seat who they want so long as they follow the intent of the voters. If that intent can not really be determined - in the eyes of the senate - they will seat whom they want until court challenges are over. With 58 Democrats, is there any real question? Maybe.
Heck, screw all this politics stuff! Time to cut me a piece of lytefisk, along with some shnaps!
5 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
Y'know, I really am surprised that you would castigate the Dems for trying to steal votes!
Do you not remember how in a previous topic I pointed out all the dirty tricks the Republicans were pulling...and how they were FALSELY accusing Democrats of the same?
Do you not remember your reply, and how I proved almost every one of the accusations you listed were either blown way out of proportion or completely false?
Do you not remember how I pointed out that even if all the accusations you listed were true, the number of votes affected by the same were perhaps one-hundredth of the votes affected by Republican disenfranchisement efforts?
Tell you what, Dave - I haven't researched it at all, so this should give you the advantage, an opportunity to get me to publicly eat crow (again). How about you post your proofs, your references showing how the Dems are engaging in election-rigging in Minnesota, and I'll verify the facts and see if they are the proof you think they are.
Even without looking at it yet, I say that you (like the conservative pundits who pound the pulpit about it) are either flat wrong on the accusations, or the accusations are being blown out of proportion...or - and this is against the conservative pundits and NOT you - outright lies.
That's a blind claim I just made, and a wonderful opportunity for you to make me look foolish for making such a claim (not that I need help to do so).
So the deal is this: if I'm wrong, then I get to grovel publicly again - and will do so sincerely. If I'm right...then all I ask is that you learn to objectively challenge the claims made by those you like and not be so quick to dismiss the arguments made by those you don't like.
Deal?
6 - Dave Nalle
How about this deal. We'll just look at ONE thing the Franken campaign is doing and work with that.
You explain to me how going through ballots which have a vote for Obama and no vote at all for the Senate race and declaring them to be unmarked Franken votes is in any way reasonable.
Dave
7 - Cindy D
For everything one side does the other does something just as questionable.
8 - Dr Dreadful
'Declaring' them to be Franken votes? Or merely pointing out the possibility that they could be?
I suppose the best outcome would be the way the 1974 New Hampshire Senate race was eventually resolved - with the Senate declaring the seat vacant and a special election being held to fill it.
Unfortunately, that took several months of bickering before Wyman, the original declared winner, got fed up with the whole thing and suggested the run-off.
Which he proceeded to lose heavily. So with that historical precedent in mind, I don't see Coleman doing anything similar off his own bat...
9 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
Again, references, please. It's not that I don't believe you, but I want to verify your source.
And in reply, here's something the Coleman campaign is demanding:
"And then, there's the Coleman campaign's attempts to challenge ballots simply because the voter had voted for John McCain, and thus, as they argue, a vote for Al Franken, or for no Senate candidate at all must have been a mistake, and the ballot should be counted instead for Norm Coleman."
Do you see that, Dave? EVEN AN ACTUAL VOTE FOR AL FRANKEN should be changed to 'Coleman' just because they voted for McCain.
So what does that mean? Once more, ASSUMING your accusation is true, it's just like it always is - the Republicans are accusing the Democrats of doing what the Republicans have already been doing to a much greater degree....
But I still want to see your reference.
10 - Clavos
So what does that mean? Once more, ASSUMING your accusation is true, it's just like it always is - the Republicans are accusing the Democrats of doing what the Republicans have already been doing to a much greater degree....
Or, more objectively, they're both trying the same slimy shit, which since they're all politicians (an inherently slimy group), is the more likely interpretation.
11 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
Until the assumption is proven, it's only an assumption. Dave's ASSUMPTION against Franken is that his campaign demanded that BLANK votes on ballots that counted for Obama should be counted for Franken...
...but the PROVEN FACT against Coleman is that his campaign demanded that BLANK VOTES AND VOTES CLEARLY MADE FOR FRANKEN on ballots that counted for McCain should be counted for Coleman.
But YOU, Clavos, try to pretend it's all the same.
One side ALLEGEDLY wants the blank votes...but the other side HAS STATED that they want not only the blank votes but ALSO votes made for the opposing candidate.
So even if Dave proves his accusation, it's still NOTHING compared to what the Coleman campaign is trying to pull.
But I forget - whatever the Dems do must be wrong and evil, and whatever the Republicans do (no matter how illegal) is PATRIOTIC, and to point out any wrongdoing by Republicans is grounds for prosecution (or at least entry onto Homeland Security's "do not fly" list).
12 - Baronius
Glenn, there's a great example I've seen where the voter had filled in the Franken circle, whited it out, and filled in the circle for Coleman. The Franken people challenged it because the ballot was still marked for Franken under the white-out.
As near as I can tell, the lawyers on both sides are challenging everything, but neither side is getting away with much. At least I hope they're not.
13 - Lumpy
I've seen the complaimt about the franken undercounts in the media, but I've seen no coverage of these supposed 0coleman undercounts. how about a source for your assertions.
14 - Dr Dreadful
Well, Baronius, that one needs to be thrown out altogether. You can't use flippin' whiteout on a frickin' ballot paper!
The voter should (assuming it's allowed in Minnesota - it is where I come from) have gone back outside, explained that he or she had messed up, handed over the spoiled ballot and asked for a fresh one.
15 - Clavos
But I forget - whatever the Dems do must be wrong and evil, and whatever the Republicans do (no matter how illegal) is PATRIOTIC, and to point out any wrongdoing by Republicans is grounds for prosecution (or at least entry onto Homeland Security's "do not fly" list).
You obviously did not read my post, Glenn.
I said no such thing. What I said was THEY ARE ALL (republicans, Democrats, independents communists--whatever) SLIMY, BECAUSE THEY ARE POLITICIANS, WHO ARE INHERENTLY SLIMY, IMO.
I have offered this opinion and ones like it about ALL the politicians repeatedly on these threads for years.
So you're wrong. I think they're all shitheads, not just the democrats.
One other thing: the franken campaign's attempt to get blank votes that voted for Obama counted as franken votes is all over the media. google it.
16 - Dr Dreadful
OK. All right. Settle down, everyone. There's only one way to settle this.
Who's wearing the white hat?
Send him to Washington.
[rides off into sunset]
[realizes it's already dark, moseys sheepishly back into room, flips off light switch, leaves before anyone else sees him]
17 - Ruvy
Gentlemen,
We're not talking about Illinois or Louisiana or Missouri here. And even though Coleman is from sleazy, slimy New York, and Franken is hauling in all the out of town lawyers (from sleazy, slimy New York), we're still talkig about MINNESOTA. They're not exactly blushing virgins - but elections are honest there.
This will be for the canvassing board to deal with - and when Coleman is named winner by 100 votes or less, for the supreme court to decide - cause Franken - Al Franken - really does care about AL FRANKEN...
18 - Baronius
Dread, I assume that was an absentee ballot. I learned the hard way that changing a vote with white-out makes a mess, especially on the kind of machine we use.
I've got a question about this run-off suggestion: why? Are elections like ping-pong, where you have to win by two? I don't care how close it is, you have a fair count and recount, and you accept the results. If we've learned one thing in the last eight years, it's that casting aspersions on a close victory does a lot of damage. We're adults; there are rules.
19 - Dr Dreadful
I've got a question about this run-off suggestion: why?
Because of the numbers involved, Baronius. Millions of votes were cast, and it's come down to at most a couple of hundred. I guarantee you that there are enough errors and irregularities that you could keep on recounting this thing until the Last Trump and you'd come up with a different winner and/or different numbers every single time. It's a statistical tie.
You can't possibly say what the will of the people is in a case like this. Just suppose for the sake of argument that two hundred people had intended to vote that day, but for whatever reasons - they got into a car accident and landed in hospital, their boss sent them overseas on a last-minute business trip, they couldn't get a babysitter, their car broke down, any number of things - they weren't able to. Now I can't say that they would have voted for Franken, Coleman or Pedro, but neither can you. But their votes might have changed everything.
I don't care how close it is, you have a fair count and recount, and you accept the results.
Normally I would agree. It's how things are done in Britain, and it's very rare - if not unheard-of - for a candidate to issue a legal challenge to an election result. But there we're talking about constituency elections, and a far smaller number of votes. The potential for error is significantly less. When the number of ballots runs into the millions, errors are a statistical certainty. And since there's no way of compensating for those errors which all sides would accept as sound, the only fair solution is to run the whole thing again - without the candidates who came third and below.
But nevertheless, let's indeed wait for the result of the recount - which I believe isn't due until December 19th. So until then it's all moot.
20 - Dave Nalle
Do you see that, Dave? EVEN AN ACTUAL VOTE FOR AL FRANKEN should be changed to 'Coleman' just because they voted for McCain.
I saw your link and it raises a LOT of questions. The first one being who the HELL let some blogger with a video camera have direct access to the challenged ballots, which is a major violation of election security and probably a felony, or was the video in fact faked - or a dramatization of what may have been reported to them from other sources.
And if this story is true, as someone pointed out earlier, why is there almost nothing about it anywhere on the web. A fairly exhaustive google search doesn't turn up your link or the link for the video or anything else about Coleman undercounts in any media outlet, but it does turn up enormous numbers of reports from MSM and new media outlets about scads of Franken attempts to skew the votes.
The latest and most troubling is the discovery of various ballots which apparently just disappeared during the election, were never counted and have now shown up out of nowhere weeks later with no evidence of chain of custody and which Franken thinks ought to be counted. Not surprisingly they all come from heavily democratic precincts.
I will say this for Minnesota. Many of the democrat dominated election boards which the Franklin campaign has approached with some of his challenges have rejected the challenges immediately and definitively. Only a few have cooperated. That speaks well of the democrats running the election, and puts even more suspicion on those few areas which are going along with the Franken challenges.
Dave
21 - zingzing
thing is, it doesn't matter anymore. we don't have the filibuster, so i'm just as glad to keep a comedian out of office. my family is all from minnesota, and i love the place, but damned if they aren't some silly people. only in minnesota, i like to say, about a great many things. it's a wonderful place to visit... the summers are like nothing else... til the sun starts to set... and the mosquitoes come out... and there's blood on the walls...
22 - Dave Nalle
The worst thing about Franken isn't that he's a comedian, it's that he's an unfunny and self-indulgent comedian.
Dave
23 - Ruvy
Dave, you're right about Al Franken - he is generally unfunny and self-indulgent. Trouble is that Coleman is just as self-indulgent, and he's an asshole to boot. So Minnesota loses either way.
The only decent candidate in the senate race was Barkley - the one nobody is talking about.
24 - Clavos
the summers are like nothing else...
My sister lives in Eden Prairie. In my visits there, I've noticed that summer is July 3, 4, and 5.
25 - bliffle
Is it important to save the filibuster?