If someone comes into court and testifies "no, I had someone else my signature, but that ballot does reflect my vote and I'd like it to count," do we really think that is a plausible way to run an election?  I'm in favor of "count every vote," for obvious reasons, but is there any limit on that principle whatsoever?

I watched Mark Ritchie live on CSPAN talk about the Senate election in Minnesota and the subsequent recount at a meeting last week of the National Association of Secretaries of State.

Mark was very clear, that Minnesota's election laws, many of which have been on the books for several decades, leave NO wiggle room about how to do a recount.  Mark also talked about getting advice from his colleagues, including Sam Reed, the secretary of state for Washington State which had a very close election in the governor's race in 2004.

I suggest you watch it (its about 20 minutes) to get a better feel about what is going on.

Count the damned votes and get it over with.  Neither candidate is a prize package to begin with so none of us are sitting here with bated breath expecting much more than lackluster performers each toadying to the party line.  

Neither candidate is a prize package to begin with so none of us are sitting here with bated breath expecting much more than lackluster performers each toadying to the party line.

Are you joking?  There are only two candidates here, and the differences are stark.

The categories touch on a range of situations, such as when application or registration materials are left unsigned, when boxes are left unchecked on an envelope, or when voters are issued a ballot for the wrong precinct or vote in a precinct where they are not registered.

Seems to me if a voter was issued a ballot for the wrong precinct, then that's not the voter's fault.  I don't know how many votes were talking about, but it doesn't seem like they are all extreme arguments.

From the Brad Blog: (emphasis mine)

Coleman: Count the Felon's Vote!: By way of demonstrating just how hypocritical some of Coleman's arguments have been (including arguments to include many ballots that they'd previously argued to reject during the post-election hand-count phase), there was one rejected absentee ballot, that Coleman would now like counted, which came from a guy in jail. He was sent a ballot for the county he was serving time in, instead of his actual county of residence, so the ballot was rejected. And in either case, convicted felons aren't allowed to vote in MN. But Coleman wants it counted.