Democrat Al Franken won Senate seat

The Minnesota Supreme Court on Tuesday declared Democrat Al Franken the winner of a tight U.S. Senate race over Republican Norm Coleman, which should give Democrats the 60-seat majority they need to overcome procedural obstacles and push through their agenda.

Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty has said he will certify the election winner based on what the state court decides.



Filed under Elections

13 responses to “Democrat Al Franken won Senate seat

  1. It was a unanimous decision!

    I do understand there are some yellow-dog liberals, but procedurally, this makes Republicans as insignificant as they should be. Not that I’m against at least two strong parties, I just think the Party of No has proven to be nothing but obstructionists. If the Republicans ever come up with an idea, a policy or solution someone will let us know so we can evaluate its merit. Until then they need to sit down and shut up instead of continuing to behave much like small children throwing hissy fits.

  2. jammer5

    Look for Ann Coulter to go into nuclear meltdown mode đŸ™‚

  3. David B

    Al is a really smart and witty, humorous fellow. I cannot wait to hear him speaking as a U.S. senator.

    I’ll bet he will be able to slice and dice the Republicans like no one else can…

  4. G-stir

    “Look for Ann Coulter to go into nuclear meltdown mode”

    I though that’s how she ended up looking like she does! It must be the radiation, or maybe pulling too many Gees.

  5. Iraqis are celebrating Franken’s victory.

  6. Norm Coleman concedes.

  7. tosmarttobegop

    Franken is intelligent and insightful.
    Yes I too look forwarded to hearing him.

  8. I was all for the Jesse Ventura win but Minnesota…this is getting ridiculous. Could Michael Vick rehabilitate his name by running for office there since they seem to vote for celebrity.

    • jammer5

      Hey Bear, doggone it, Vick chances are just doggone short of winning, or even running: Felon. I’m afraid he’s dogged on that one. But it is Minnesota, so anything could happen.

      Love your cartoons.

  9. The Votemaster has some interesting comments about Senator Franken’s win and upcoming bills. Some of his comments made me wonder how does the Democratic Party take away Harry Reid’s leadership role?? Seriously, anyone know the procedure for doing this and is there anything we can do to help it along? Be sure to read all The Votemaster has to say, below are a couple of excerpts.

    — snippets —

    “The seating of Franken means the Democrats will have 58 seats as well the the support of two independent senators who caucus with them, Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT). In theory, they will then have the necessary 60 votes to invoke cloture and end filibusters. The last time they had 60 seats was in the 94th Congress, from 1975 to 1977. But as Yogi Berra once put it: “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.” Whereas minority leader Mitch McConnell has a more-or-less iron grip on his caucus, majority leader Harry Reid does not. And McConnell has no weapons at his disposal to enforce discipline whereas Reid has many, but he doesn’t use them.

    Health care reform is a different story. Probably all Republicans and a handful of democrats–including some surprising characters like Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC)–are dead set against any bill with a public insurance option in it–Medicare for all. It will be very hard for Reid to get 60 votes with a public option.

    On the other hand, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that a bill without a public option does not have the votes to pass the House because the 77-member progressive caucus won’t go for it. If the Senate won’t pass a bill with a public option and the House won’t pass one without a public option, what is going to happen? One possibility is no bill at all.

  10. lilacluvr

    I thought the Republicans had vowed to take this all the way to the Supreme Court? Has anyone heard the speculation as to why Coleman decided to concede at this point?

    I know his chances were small to none – but I remember one Texas Senator (Croyn?) who was doing the most talking about pushing Coleman to fight it all the way.

    • I’d heard Coleman’s legal bills were piling up. I truly doubt the SCOTUS would have accepted the case. Maybe it’s because I want to believe it will be a long while before they interject themselves into an election decision again.

      • lilacluvr

        But didn’t the Supreme Court just rebuke Obama’s request to keep the powers that Bush gave himself to fight the war on terror? Interestingly enough, which ones of the Justices were denying this – the 5 Conservative justices that just all happen to be what is called the ‘Bushies’.

        Funny how when Bush was in office, both he and Cheney gave themselves all these powers but when a Democrat gets into office – then whoa….. we need to keep that check and balance thing going – don’t we?

        Do you think Republicans are arrogant hypocrits?