Watch What We Say, Not What We Say

I always love perusing the reader comments posted after articles on the Minneapolis Star Tribune website. Granted, most of them are poorly reasoned rants and unsubstantiated claims but that's what makes them so entertaining and, frankly, not too different from posts by yours truly on this wonderful website.

This is certainly the case for the multitude of comments recently posted in response to a piece by Rachel E. Stassen-Berger on the Star Tribune political blog "Hot Dish Politics" about the Emmer-Dayton gubernatorial recount that began today.

A few of my favorites follow:

Emmer should concede and save the taxpayers money. Sure he is "legally" entitled to the recount, but since statistically he cannot overcome the almost 9,000 vote deficit, he should save the taxpayers money and concede. He has the legal right to do so -- and be a hero!
posted by ginny6

The real "nazi" stuff is the republican party trying to make faith in our voting system non-existent. There have not been any real significant proven voter fraud in this state for the last 50 years. Spending a ton of money chasing ghosts is not a fiscally responsible thing to do. Why is it so shocking for everyone to accept that liberals win elections in a very liberal state?
posted by misterw

I just get (sic) this whole situation!? From what I have read, MN has a better chance of getting hit by an asteroid this month than Emmer does winning this election! But the Republican Party wants to fight this and at what cost?! I say that when the election recount is said and done, add up the costs involved and bill it to the Republican Party. As a taxpayer, I don't want any of my tax dollars going toward this fiasco!
posted by jackpinenomo

This is the general tone of the over 200 comments to this story. However, lest you think that EVERYONE reading the Star Tribune has the same opinion of the Minnesota recount system, there are these comments for a little balance:

...that the election process is followed correctly and every vote is counted correctly. The election is the foundation of democracy. If it means a recount, then so be it.
posted by mspshadow

This is an election, not a poker game! The law is there so that when the difference is this close, a recount must take place in order to display all the results to the public. All paper ballots will be handcounted to ensure that (a) all votes are indeed counted (b) the process is transparent, public, and fair. This means that the person who takes office, whoever that is, will not only be the one who received the most votes, but also be the legitimate candidate in the eyes of the public. The recount is to make sure the public can trust the system and not worry about baseless rumors spread by disgruntled partisans.
posted by gioia

Love it or not, a recount is a chance to ensure the system is working and to fix any glitches. One way or the other we'll know who we Minnesotans truly voted into office. I send my thanks to all our military veterans who served our country and protected my freedom and right to vote. I thank the Secretary of State's Office for their hard work
posted by ihatethisregistry

Wait a minute...those last three comments were to a different Star Tribune piece written in November of 2008 regarding the Coleman-Franken recount. An election, as you no doubt can recall, that had Coleman leading on election night and Franken winning after a long and painful recount.

What a difference two years makes.