Steele: 'Hell No, Coleman Won't Concede To Franken'
I know what you're all thinking. You're thinking that if the Minnesota Supreme Court next month determines that Al Franken should be seated, the national Republican Party will graciously accept their decision, and Norm Colemen will offer up a kind and thoughtful concession speech.
"[N]o, hell no. Whatever the outcome, it's going to get bumped to the next level," said RNC chairman Michael Steele.
So you were all wrong. "This does not end until there's a final ruling that speaks to whether or not those votes that have not been counted should be counted, Steele added. "And Norm Coleman will not, will not jump out of this race before that."
Somewhat implicit in that last sentence is the assumption that Coleman will ultimately lose. And implicit in that implication is the idea that the Republicans are doing this to keep another Democrat out of the Senate for as long as possible, and depriving Minnesotans of dual representation in the process.
Assuming the Minnesota Supreme Court sides with Franken, the question of whether to seat him, even if provisionally, will fall to Gov. Tim Pawlenty--a presidential hopeful who, as we've noted before, will face tons of pressure from his party not to certify the victory at all. If this is any indication, the GOP is already turning up the heat.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Well that's a relief. If Steele thinks he's got a plan it has to crash and burn. Has the guy been right about anything? Michael Steele is great!
May 11, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bet Souter smells this one coming.
May 12, 2009 7:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
This thing comes down to Pawlenty - period. Coleman can continue to fight this all he wants but MN deserves a 2nd senator in the meantime. And MN state law seems to indicate that the governor is expected to sign the certificate at that point. So it's not about Coleman's appeals...it's about Pawlenty. It'll be interesting to see what he does. And it will be even more interesting to see what the rest of the political community does if he doesn't sign it. It would set a terrible prececent.
In WA, Gregoire was acting governor the entire time that Rossi continued his contest of the election. That is the way the state laws should be written.
May 11, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Pawlenty will sign it. His political calculus goes like this:
If he doesn't sign it, his chances of re-election in 2010 dim considerably. Minnesota is a bluish state, and he can't afford to hand his opposition a ready-made campaign issue. There won't be a Senate opening in MN until 2012 and his chances of beating Amy Klobuchar are slim. If he thinks he can wrangle his way onto the national ticket in 2012, being an out-of-work ex-governor isn't such a good thing. Besides, the way the GOP is heading, he's too moderate for serious consideration.
So while I'm sure the RNC will put a lot of pressure on him, his own self-interest will force him to sign it. His only reprieve would be if Coleman gets a federal court or SCOTUS to issue an injunction preventing certification.
May 11, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really really hope you're right, Goofy Man's Best Friend.
There is a part of me that is secretly urging the Republicans to drag this out for as long as possible so that they look as obstructionist as possible, but the disservice done to both Minnesotans and the rest of the country washes out any petty desire to see the Republicans screw up ONE.MORE.TIME.
Mostly.
May 11, 2009 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
There will be no shortage of opportunities for the R's to screw up, and they seem hell-bent on not missing any of them. "The Party of No" is a brilliant labeling strategy: simple, pithy and easy to understand. Once a label like that sticks and works its way into the public discourse, it's very difficult to counter.
May 11, 2009 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Rehnquist was still on U.S. Supreme Court, they'd have their injunction. Might get it anyway -- Scalia, Thomas, Alito should be reliable on this, I'd think. I picture them sitting at home at night, tuned into Fox, softly cursing the injustice that poor Norm has to live with every day, and how they might rise to the occasion.
May 12, 2009 3:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Might get it anyway
I rather think not...Bybee may not be impeachable for acts committed prior to ascending the bench, but another thumb-on-the-scale piece of bullshit, and the filthy five who produce such a judicial abortion will (Precious Blood of the sweet baby Jesus, make it so!!) learn what congressional oversight (and impeachment) really means.
(nb--I talk tough between the hours of four and six a.m.--I'm really scared shitless that your initial premise may hold...)
May 12, 2009 4:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's hoping it's not so dire.
It could happen very fast -- Minn. S.Ct. orders the certification and takes Pawlenty out of the loop (and wouldn't he be grateful to dodge that decision?), Norm runs to the Federal Court, and within seconds, Scalia's Blackberry lights up!
Many feel they wouldn't get involved as they're already known as a kangaroo court from Bush v. Gore and don't wish to be tarred and feathered to boot. (BTW, where's there a good tar store in D.C.?!) If they indeed take the low road once more, at least the Stevens dissent should again be incandescent! :)
May 12, 2009 6:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
These are good comments.
If you think about it, it's and out-and-out rule of law issue that Pawlenty needs to sign the certification when the court rules for Franken. If he doesn't, he's placing his laughing-stock party's political fortunes before law and order. That's what Limbaugh would do, of course, and Palin -- public order be damned.
It's a funny dynamic, though, because e.g. Scalia might want to further befoul his already permanently-disgraced legacy by expanding the shameful, result-driven opinion in Bush v. Gore. Republicans will find it harder to thus secure another banana-republic 5-4 outcome without some brazen subversion by Pawlenty of law and the social contract at this stage.
May 11, 2009 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee what a surprise
May 11, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
While not a surprise or particularly newsworthy, this highlights how Franken's people have consistently thought ten steps ahead throughout this whole affair. Franken’s petition to get a certificate of election during the initial trial case (which the MN S.Ct. denied), though certainly not frivolous, seemed a bit premature given the plain reading of the statute. Now, of course, it looks like a brilliant strategic move. All of the issues have been briefed by both sides to the MN S.Ct., and, even more importantly, the MN S.Ct. has researched and considered the law. The MN S.Ct. may well order the issuance of a the certificate as part of its forthcoming ruling, but, if not, and if the Gov. refuses to comply with the law, things are all set up for a very quick petition to the MN S.Ct. (which I am sure is already drafted).
May 11, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really think Steele needs a good scandal, so he can exit public life on a high note. Ok, at least a higher note. If he orders a break in and gets caught, he can be compared with Nixon. If he dates an intern or his videographer, he can be compared to Clinton or Edwards. If he's having an extramarital affair or utilizing prostitutes while in the process of castigating someone else's behaviour, he can be the next Vitter or Gingrich. As it is now, it's just painful to watch him flail about the public sphere with no achievements, no victories and no clue.
May 11, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It amazes me that the Republicans keep repeating the same old thing regardless of facts. Do you suppose that Steele missed page 26 of the court decision?
In 154 they state that uniform standards were in effect and election officials "exercised reasonable discretion within...the law...."
And in 141,
Maybe this stuff worked better before people had access to the internet and could check the facts. Or maybe Steele isn't quite up on the "internets" yet. More likely, it plays well on Faux News.
May 11, 2009 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
But this is exactly GOP SOP. The facts be damned, make something up and repeat it until it is common wisdom.
The vast majority just don't pay that much attention and will believe the first thing they hear on the TV. After all everybody knows that "they" aren't allowed to lie on the TV. If the only thing people hear on TV is that those socialist/atheist/muslum lovein' DemocRATS in colussion with librul judges won't let peoples' votes be counted then that's the truth.
GOPers know how to play this game and count on Dems keep getting caught flat footed because the Dems keep expecting the public to think rationally. They always think, now people have finally caught on and we can just move forward. Dems better get it through their heads that they need to build their own noise machine and keep it running full steam all of the time. GOPers know that Al Franken is a big wheel in that machine because he knows how to make noise. He scares them spitless.
May 12, 2009 4:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Without the Coleman issue, what does Steele have to do? He might be out of a job. After all Darth Dick has the leader of the party angle all wrapped up right now and he's asking for a fight with the Jedi. I think he's counting on his interpretation of the unitary executive powers to save his behind where torture is concerned.
Steele really seems to be their 'token'. I guess they already put him on an allowance. What's next?
May 11, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it always opposite day wherever Steele is? I don't think he's batting his weight, even these days...almost every proclamation he makes has to be given the "what Michael Steele meant to say was..." treatment.
Anyway -- I came her to find Franken's reply to the Coleman appeal. It's been due for a few hours, has anybody seen it?
May 11, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a story from the MN paper:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/44733617.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUxWoW_oD:EaDUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUru
May 11, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Although, having now read it, I can't recommend it as more than a brief gloss. The title, "Franken won fair and square, lawyers tell court" kind of gives their bias away.
May 11, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the link.
I thought that story had a pretty good back and forth. Everybody had their say and the conclusion of the law prof that Coleman didn't seem to stand a chance in Minn SC summed it up. The idea that the Minn SC could split the baby by ordering Gov. and AG to issue election certificate but with a time lag to allow chance of federal stay sounds just about right enough to be ominous.
The torture never stops!
May 12, 2009 5:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a better article:
http://www.minnpost.com/ericblack/2009/05/11/8722/update_franken_brief_rips_merits_quality_of_coleman_case#comments_section
Although the Star Trib commentors do have some good back and forth, the same people have been saying the same things for months. The only noticable difference is some new folks who are clearly parroting the great Republican thinkers-you know, Rush.
May 12, 2009 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is how events have played out. Coleman lost the election and now the GOP has lost the Public Relations battle. It is a bit ironic that the Republicans are using law suits to promote their own cause, when they usually argue against trial lawyers filing suit.
Given all the time since the election and the time and care to count the votes, it is hard to support Coleman's case but the MN court of appeals will soon render a decision.
May 11, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
well, they are hoping for some help from activist judges.
May 12, 2009 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
They're giving voters so much to dislike at once.
Cheney is a gold mine in terms of generating and renewing public hostility -- he should be on the Sunday news shows every week. But this bad-loser-party is a whole separate line of provocation. Constantly reminds one of the Bush v. Gore railroad as well, and how wonderfully that turned out for the country.
May 12, 2009 1:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Republicans' myopic hubris is their own worst enemy. They think baiting their shriveling base with these vain anti-legal legal maneuvers will somehow de-shrivel that base.
Their logic escapes me. When the Minnesota Republicans appear so willing to ignore their own state laws, and flip off their own constituents by trying to take it beyond the state level, it only makes the fence-sitters all the more willing to jump to the Independent or Democratic party.
They are no longer seeking to protect some imaginary majority, they are seeking to keep their tiny circle of insiders entrenched, and the citizens of Minnesota and their legal code be damned.
The biggest victims of this are the sincere, honest-to-gosh, old time Republicans in Minnesota, who will soon see their beloved party on a whig trajectory because these selfish Coleman-connected power mongers are desperate to sink the whole boat rather than give up the wheel.
May 12, 2009 8:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know there is this notion that the court can order Governor Pawlenty to certify the election but I'm not sure that he is obligated to obey that order.
There must be some separation of the executive and judidial branches in Minnesota and as such, I just don't understand how the court can order the governor to do much of anything.
May 13, 2009 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink