The man's ego has no bounds.

Get over it, Joe. Your 15 minutes of "fame" were over long ago.

Can we get Christine O'Donnell to tell him it is over...?

Everyone in the U.S. remember this, Especially the Republicans! If by some freak chance Sara Palin gets the Republican Presidential Nomination in 2012, Remember you can Write her OUT. Write in Murkowski if you have too. LOL she is tenacious at least!

So who really pays attention to Palin? Even her books sales have had an 84% drop in sales. I'm glad that Alaska saw through her shallowness along with Miller, whom she backed.

Miller is acting like the stage mom who refused to believe that "her little angel" didn't win the beauty contest.... on the count of her "little angel" having a face that quite frankly scared old folks, babies, and wild forest animals.

What happens after the mom's little angel came in 30th place winner (even though there were only 10 contestants)...... the judges had to drag the "little angel's mom's ass off stage by force - with one of those big hooks that stages used to use to get bad performances off the stage after the ENTIRE audience had booed 'em off.

Awight Joe, it's time to fold up that bedbug infested pup tent and 'GIT ALONG NOW'. You're one of them crazies who just ain't politickin' material.

Is he still crying? What a freakin baby. You know you're a loser when you're the gop nominee in a red state like Alaska and lose to a write in candidate with a hard to spell name.

It is hilarious to watch.... at the very least Joe Miller should try to save some dignity, (although ya can't if you don't have any) and stop "beggin'" to be "made" the winner, as it just cannot be that he go his LYING ass whipped by a "write-in" candidate. LMAO!

Can't ya just see him standing on top of one of the highest buildings in Alaska, threatening to jump unless they stop the show and crown him senator - as the crown should/must be his.

I know I would be one of the ones looking up at him and that creepy beard, as he threatens to jump... I'll be ramping up the crowd to join in and sing.... jump Joe jump... jump Joe jump over and over again to call his bluff.

No body likes ya Joe.... embrace it.... and JUST GO AWAY!

Hahahahaha this is HILARIOUS news.

Hey Joe.... what did the 5 fingers of Alaska say to your face?

Answer: S-L-A-P!!! You're done Joe..... 'git' along now!!

Amusing Alaska spoke the 1st time to when it elected Joe as the Primary contender as well.

Murkowski just couldn't live with the thought of losing her job.

Sooner or later you will get away from career politicians and your state will be much better for it.

It's actually nice to see what the people want get ratified by the courts for a change.

Amusing Alaska spoke the 1st time to when it elected Joe as the Primary contender as well

Actually, it was just the Republicansthe first time.

See, there are more people around than just the Republicans and the Democrats. There are those of us who see the bullcrap on both sides.

Seems like Lisa's move was more about understanding that. She also understood the fact that she could, and apparently DID win the general election... the one in which ALL Alaskans vote.

Murkowski just couldn't live with the thought of losing her job.

Or maybe, just maybe, she is a lot smarter than your average Joe. I wonder what would have happened if McCain had picked Lisa instead of Sarah to run with him.

Maybe he could have his security goons handcuff the judge and "detain" him (*coughillegallycough*) in the hallway for a while.

Maybe he could win THAT way.

Miller last month said he'd stop fighting if the ballot math didn't work in his favor. But he has since insisted that his fight was a matter of principle to ensure the law is upheld and Alaskans got a fair election.

=====================================

And the tea baggers are different from our every day Dems and Rethuglicants how? Oh, yes, seems they are even more pathetic than our every day Dems and rethuglicants. It's always a matter of principles with them. It's only their principles that matter.

Dennis-816242

Amusing Alaska spoke the 1st time to when it elected Joe as the Primary contender as well

Actually, it was just the Republicansthe first time.

See, there are more people around than just the Republicans

==============================

Not in Alaska there aren't.

This election is not over! This was not a surprise decision be this judge!

Honesty has left politics, period!

NEXT court decision MAY end it!

If your too dumb to be able to correctly SPELL your candidates name, then you should not be allowed to have your vote count! Alaska Law should prevail on this!

Then you should lose your vote. "If you're too dumb" is the way you meant to spell that. I won't go into the other errors in your confusing babble.

Alaska law has prevailed.

Murkowski has won without ANY misspelled ballots.

Andrew S.-1655865

and "fellow sheep"

Alaska Law is yet to be determined! This "vote fraud case" may go all the way to the US Supreme Court!

I live in Alaska, and I am wondering, who gave the vote counters (and one paid off judge) the right to make the decision of invalid ballots intent.

Alaska law certainly did not.

This "decision" by this one judge, may effect future elections in Alaska.

This case needs a review.

Why have a legislature (and elections) if one judge can "overturn" what the voters elected leaders decide?

The reason America is in decline, and the fiscal situation it is in, is because of voters, who like sheep, do as told thru campaign "slogans" created by "special interest," who then "buy" politicians with their campaign donations (both parties)!

The US has not had decent political leadership in years, Bush was awful, Obama is worse! (Both Parties)

Do you think America is in declind because of good political leadership?

Voters keep electing the Murkowski's and Reids, proven "political crooks", who manipulate voters via "special interest monies" through campaign slogans.

Those "backers" of these "political crooks" obtain "political favors" from their "bought and paid for" politicians. (Alaska receiving the amount of Federal Funds from Ted Stephens "reign" is the perfect example - Murkowski is the same as Stephens, a political machine of "special interest")

If the voters can not figure out by now, "crooked politicians", bought and paid for by "special interest," are only looking out for "their own interest", it is too late for America.

You, are living the collapse of America.

Not one of our political leaders is addressing the "core issues" of what is wrong with America!

Want to Balance the Budget? CUT SPENDING, elect political leaders who will do so!

What have we learned in 2,064 years?

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance."

--- Cicero , 55 BC

Morons, I am surrrounded by Morons!!!!

might I remid everyone that even if all disputed ballots are dq'd miller still loses by over 2000 votes?

Andrew S - you may be surrounded by morons but your rant on politics in general gets off point and shows a lack of understanding of law.

Just because a legislative body passes a statute does not mean it is the final word to be followed to the letter. Courts exist, in part, to make sure goofy statutes are not unconstitutional or circumvent the will of the people. In this case, a minor misspelling of a name would never survive a Supreme Court challenge. And in this case, it does not matter as Murkowski had more uncontested ballots alone than total votes for Miller. Joe lost and there is zero doubt about that. Additional appeals are a waste of time and judicial resources. Case closed.

As for Miller, his actions are clearly "sour grapes". He will henceforth have "SORE LOSER" permanently associated with his being 'til death. Get use to it.

ABCDE-740242 & CynicL1

Points taken - when does "minor misspelling" become effective for a write in vote to be counted? When does the ability to challenge and have your opinion represented become not effective?

What if, like in this election, due process was not followed for the challenge to the vote totals? Is the vote count accurate?

There are reports, Miller was not allowed to have his side be present to verify the count. (the count was done by vote counters who obviously were biased for Murkowski)

Most are assuming, what the story lead has said about the vote totals, even if the contested ballots were tossed, is it?(it must be true, I read the story in the printed press logic?) is the "vote count" for Murkowski correct?

Alaska should watch out for those "2nd ammendment remedies" that teabaggers seem to refer to. Overthrow the gov't when you don't win your election. Sort of like with the 1917 Bolshevik revolution, eh, Comrade Joe?

MtMike- "There are reports, Miller was not allowed to have his side be present to verify the count. (the count was done by vote counters who obviously were biased for Murkowski)"

Miller's allegation and that it is disputed by others is found here: http://alaskadispatch.com/dispatches/politics/7664-alaskas-senate-race-miller-pushes-on-with-legal-fight?start=1

Here are the relevant parts: "Among the misrepresentations, according to McKeever, is Miller's allegation that he didn't have time to mobilize election observers in time for the hand count of write-in ballots in Juneau. But Alaska Republican Party Chairman Randy Ruedrich directly contradicts that representation in a signed affidavit accompanying Murkowski's filing.

Ruedrich, who says he had frequent contact with the Miller campaign and staffer Matt Johnson via phone, calls Miller's claims of unfairness and inability to prepare "false and self-serving."

On Nov. 5, two days after the count timeline was announced, Ruedrich said in his affidavit, "I was told by Mr. Johnson that (the Miller campaign was) ready for the hand count, they had made travel arrangements and had the necessary number of folks recruited to help with the hand count. No one told me that they were unable to recruit and train observers for that hand count." The count was to begin five days later on Nov. 10.

At Monday's hearing, Van Flein indicated that the Miller campaign did have some observers on the first day of the count, but not enough to cover every table. He claims it took a day or two to have everyone in place."

If this is all true, and it seems to be due to the affidavits and so on, Miller doesn't sound like he has a leg to stand on.

I live in Alaska, and I am wondering, who gave the vote counters (and one paid off judge) the right to make the decision of invalid ballots intent and to say those votes count.

Alaska Law is specific. (whether one agrees or not, or the law is "legal" or not, is another argument).

I have to give Joe Miller credit for one thing - he couldn't bring himself to lie when asked if Sarah Palin is qualified to be president. Up until that one, deer in the headlights pause, (and change of subject), I had written him off as a total pr!ck.

If your too dumb to be able to correctly SPELL your candidates name, then you should not be allowed to have your vote count! Alaska Law should prevail on this!

You don't know the difference between "you're" and "your". You should not be allowed to vote.

He's having man cramps. Will somebody give him some Midos.

Miller is being pushed by Gunmoll Palin, she has no shame. Since she shot a helpless animal hobbled and couldn't move, she should be hobbled and someone takes their shot at her. She has won the title, "Idiot of all idiots".

Yep, justice has prevailed. It's clear that a vote is allowed to mean whatever a vote counter says it means. The idea of determining a voter's intent is absurd. The intent can only be that the voter voted for who the voter voted for. Otherwise, the vote counter is allowed to interpret votes they way that favors the candidate they are supporting. I wonder if the court really means what it says. If the vote counters were in favor of Miller and disallowed all of the votes that that this current set of counters decided to allow, would the results be that Miller prevails?

If "Murcowski" is allowed to be interpreted as "Murkowski," then it follows that if someone is driving 75 in a 65 zone, then they should not be convicted of speeding if they interpreted the 65 to mean 75. After all, they are both only off by one character and what is written doesn't necessarily mean what is written. I guess Clinton was right after all, it does depend on what the definition of "is" is. Smith could be interpreted to mean Jones, after all it is clear that if there is only one popular name candidate, that must mean what was really meant. So, the door is open to fraud. But, no one could complain if they voted for Murcowski and it is interpreted as voting for Murcowski and not Murkowski. If one is not smart enough to clearly vote for who they intend to vote for, then why should it be assumed who they intended to vote for?

*yawn*

Logic Fail

This was Miller pushing with support from Palin. To see different is either image building or parroting image builders.

I think it self-righteous to proclaim it justice has prevailed, it's more like legal interpretation has prevailed. If the law says one thing and another is done, how can we say that we are a nation of laws? And if the law is wrong why isn't it changed to what is correct to eliminate such squabbles?

While I agree that Joe Miller's lame attempt to stall the inevitable comeback of Lisa Murkowski was pathetic it was not backed by the Tea Party. They distanced themselves from his retarded and silly antics starting when he clammed up about his past during his run for Senate. Sarah Palin had nothing to do with his campaign other than endorsing Joe Miller for Senate. Harassing her for hunting and shooting an animal is as pathetic as Joe Miller's attempt to block Murkowski's write in bid. I hunt and I watched what she did. I have done the same thing several times and to feed my family. Get over yourselves. This decision had nothing to do with neither the Tea Party or Sarah Palin, but Joe Miller and his pathetic antics. I am not saying I support the Tea Party or Sarah Palin, but I am tired of people complaining about things they have no business complaining about; like hunting or tieing issues together that have no business being tied together like Joe Miller vs. Lisa Murkowski in the Alaska State Court. I didn't see Sarah Palin's name anywhere in there. Get off of your high horses. Pathetic.

Just write any name in it doesn't matter how it is spelled unless both candidates have the same last name.

Then the Judges logic fails doesn't it.

As with most Judges they just can not seem to determine right from wrong without trying to interpret the reasoning of the law to begin with.

Well if they had meant it that way then it would have been in there. Back yard logic by a State Judge.

If the Judge had viewed the intent of a write in candidate then maybe it would have been a different view.

Of course over the last 5 years and Judges deeming its OK to steal your Soc No. and impersonating a Veteran with a Medal of Honor is not a crime its a wonder any of you have any rights left at all. Can't say Merry Christmas as it might offend someone, and wow I pledge Allegiance to the flag says God in it. Cant say it, doesn't say which God but still can't say it. @!$%#ing moronic to say the least

Me I am going to purposely impersonate a federal Judge because its OK I don't intend to hurt anyone, just see that things go the way I want them.

Screw the politicians and screw you so called Judges..

Lisa Murkowski won WITHOUT counting misspelled votes.

It seems that most Alaskans could actually spell her name correctly.

Oh c'mon, Murcowski = Murkowski is the same as Smith = Jones? Really? And she is still ahead even without counting the misspelled votes.

"Sarah Palin had nothing to do with his campaign other than endorsing Joe Miller for Senate."

Um, no, she campaigned for him, in person yet, not just with an endorsement. So, yeah, she had a LOT to do with his campaign.

i have never heard of a politician being ashamed of there self

So, the door is open to fraud. But, no one could complain if they voted for Murcowski and it is interpreted as voting for Murcowski and not Murkowski.

Write-in candidates had to be registered, and I am pretty sure no one named Murcowski was running. So, disenfranchize the voter due to a mispelling?

The truth is, even if all the Miller challenged votes are tossed out, she wins the election. Why is this an argument? With a name like Murkowski, it's not har to figure out what the voter really intended.

And how is a voter desenfranchized if they vote for Murcowski and it is not counted for Murcowski? The law is clear, you have to spell it correctly. There is a reason for this. Under the interpretation, the votes don't count based on the actual vote, the vote is then based on someone interpreting the ballots. If someone writes in Palan, is a dem counter required to count it for Palin? Where is the line drawn? The law actually draws a sharp line, you either write in the name as it is on the write-in list or you in the last name only, correctly. The point is that an election based on "interpretation" becomes one that is subject to fraud and dispute. Why is having a specific law that requires a certain thing that everyone is warned about ahead of time a bad thing?

Oh, actually there was another problem with the count that Miller brought up. The recount was set to start on a certain date and they started it ahead of time. He wasn't allowed the proper notice and time to have his people in place to observe the recount. In all likelihood, there are additional ballots that could also be contested, but he didn't know about. That's like being a party to a trial and being told that it starts on Thursday, then you find out on Wednesday that it started on Monday. No, problem, they can still present their case you say? Yeah right! Why is it that so many people don't like the law to mean what it says?

Jones, Smith, hey, what's the difference if there is only one "common" name to be written in. It's clear that the "intent" of the voter was to write in the "common" name, just got the wrong one. No big deal, the intent is clear!

Apparently, someone far more educated in the Law as it is applied in the State of Alaska, wholly disagrees with your flawed opinion. Imagine that!

This count is not over! Sheep, I am surrounded by brainwashed sheep - follow your fox leaders right to the slaughter house!

MtMike;

Sheep, really? You voted for a tea bagger, if anyones a follower it's you. Let me ask your opinion on the 10+ write in votes for Joe Miller. Shouldn't those votes be thrown out? If we're talking about voter intent here than these votes should be thrown out because if these people "intended" to vote for Miller than they would've just filled in the oval next to his name already printed on the ballot. Also, even if all of these write-in's were thrown out and Miller just happend to win he still would be the loser in the eyes of us Alaskans because whether our vote counted or not in the end, WE DID NOT VOTE FOR MILLER!

Read my other posts!

I am concerned about YOU sheep that BELIEVE what the press tells you to believe!

I did not vote for Miller. I AM concerned with the voting process!

"Our government wouldn't lie to us"! (again?)

Nor would the (bought and paid for) press report inaccurately! (again? - to promote and protect their "special interest"!)

SHEEP!

Seems to me like the path is clear. Pull back ALL of the challenged votes, seat Lisa as Senator, continue the court case to determine the correct count and to set precedent for future elections. THIS election has been decided.

How about term limits and a balamnced budget amendment. While your at it make sure that all voting systems across the USA are the same and that the benefits in office now are rescinded and match those of the working population and that benefits to those without a job are not extended for ever.

Just a few ideas before going back to work to pay taxes for people sponging off the working class.

Jerry, your "few ideas" seem curiously devoid of any comprehension of how our republic functions.

Or perhaps, like so many republicans, you want "States Rights" when they are convenient for getting your own way -- for example, teaching creationism in your local schools; controlling how and when liquor can be sold or consumed; etc. -- but not when they go against you?

(Though I don't believe the Fed is involved in this particular dispute in any fashion. It is the Alaska court system and election laws that are at issue in Murkowski v. Miller. But I won't let that fact get in the way if you don't.)

Actually, I'm with you on this one. If we had federal control of how elections are run in 2000, we would've had 8 years of Al Gore's Presidency, instead of the Florida debacle that gave us Duh-bya.

Let's hear it for a strong, centralized federal government !!!

Stop toying with these people. It's not a fair fight.

Said that back when Miller filed the lawsuit. Funny how Republicans despise "activist" judges while their winning but as soon as their losing they run to them clutching their robe skirts, screaming for "justice".

Lame is right..the Judge is lame..

Go home Joe, and stop wasting money. The people of Alaska spoke, and said they valued moderate leadership, freedom of religion, and their own civil and Constitutional rights.

I doubt McCain 'found' these people. Palin was foisted on him as a sop to the American taliban.

I lost all respect for McCain when he nominated the Caribou killing nitwit from Wasilla as his VP.

When McCain picked the Bimbo, I changed my mind about voting for him. I knew right then that he was past it. He listened to and accepted bad advice and helped to start a movement that has crystalized, in the Tea Party, the folks that are scared of the future and want to return to a past, and an America, that never really existed.

The Bimbo reminds me of the high school cheerleader/prom queen that gushes enthusiasm about everything everybody thinks is cool in order to gain popularity, but doesn't have a brain.

Miller's antics are just another example of politics as usual. Politicians have been disputing elections since the beginning of the Republic.

I forgot to add one other thing about the Bimbo. I would like to boink her. I know that's mysogynic of me, but I think she's a very attractive woman that is eminently boinkable.

I disagree

Murkowski = more federal dollars to Alaska.

Miller = less dollars for Alaska. Miller campaigned on not taking earmarks.

Trouble is that with the no earmarks policy adopted by the house republicans and many Senate Republicans, Murkowski may not get any earmarks anyhow.

I don't have a problem with earmarks. I have problem with hipocrits that hide behind lies and secretly begging for ear-marks and your know who your are. As for John "EL Loco" McCain, He need to take a trip back to Hanoi Hilton to find his soul. He has been reduces to a jester in the senate. What a corpse.

Miller campaigned on not taking earmarks.

In other words, he lied along with all of the other tea party candidates that made not taking earmarks an issue in their races.

Both are.

The are both sore losers.

Um... but Lisa won the election, so she's really not so sore, eh?

Not only that, they are wasting time, and tax payer money on a pointless legal fight, since Miller has already lost since Murkowski already has a 2,000+ ballot lead with the uncontested ballots. The only thing I can see this as being is a hissy fit by a sore loser who wants to drag this out as long as possible to prevent the winner from assuming their rightfully won position back in the senate. I have no love for republicans, but she won, contested or otherwise, let it go, Joe, let it go.

well, if they have conceded that all the "Murkowski, Lisa" write ins should be counted and should not have been contested, Lisa Murkowski must be at least 9,000 + votes ahead of Miller now.

Now to see if the correctly spelt "Lisa Murkowski" with a cursive L counts as well ... and as the judge stated, that restrictive "must be spelt correctly" was not included in the Alaskan election laws, hence phoenetically correct "Lisa Murkowsky" and "Lisa Murcowski", etc should also be thrown in for at least a 10,000 vote lead. All those without the oval filled in (~2,000) were never counted towards the total vote count ... if Joe gets them included as he aims at and shoots his own foot, she could win by almost 13,000 votes

Murkowski - 2, Miller (Palin) - 0

Round 3 coming up because neither Miller nor his "backers" know when they are beating a dead horse.

Round 3 coming up because neither Miller nor his "backers" know when they are beating a dead horse.

I wonder if he got O'Donnells memo regarding "beating". Isn't that masturbation?

Joe' Say it ain't so Joe. Say it ain't so!!!

I never believed irony was dead. How's this?

Sarah Palin quit a job she was elected to, Joe Miller won't quit a job he was not elected to.

Nice one.

Sarah Palin quit a job she was elected to, Joe Miller won't quit a job he was not elected to

Thommy...mind if I quote that one?

feel free!

Yea Wallybird BUT the Supreme Corp. set a precedent in proving that American Democracy is a hoax! with the scandalous decision of Bush v. Gore where Gore won the popular vote but Daddy Bush’s appointments to the Court anointed King George. So the individual voter really doesn't matter ONLY Corp. interests.

Yep!

In the case of a tie for the President of the USA the House of Representatives is suppose to decide.

It's interesting how the "will of the people" only counts when it's only for a CERTAIN PARTY...GOP!

'Fraid to break it to you - Dems win more of those decisions than Republicans.

scandalous decision of Bush v. Gore where Gore won the popular vote

Actually, the court would not have halted the recount if the Democrats would have been smart enough to try recounting the whole state, and by agreeing to set standards in advance. It was because they tried to cherry pick the counties, and because each county was using different standards that the SCOTUS had gounds to act upon.

A full recount done after the fact showed that Bush actually won Florida, but by only a few hundred votes.

In any case, W was redeemed when we re-elected him 4 years later, so it really doesn't matter. Well, that's my opinion, anyway.

Amen brother. I didn't vote for either of them ...dumb (Bush) or dumber (Gore), but it ticked me off when Gore tried to steal the election. The whole thing was a cluster, networks calling the election so people in the Panhandle (another time zone) don't bother to vote, trying to selectively recount in Democratic majority counties, then bitching because the Supreme Court had a conservative majority. If it hadn't then the other side would have had a bitch that would be equally as valid (if a liberal majority had prevailed).

And as others have noted, EVERY recount showed Bush was the winner. ALL, EVERY, EACH, TODOS.

Alone with his balls.

and his barbie doll

Thommy-you are so funny

It does not change the fact that she still has a lead in uncontested ballots. There is no poin in this process, other that Miller being a sore loser. It does not matter if it was a 2,000 vote lead or a 20,000 vote lead, Miller has lost the election, and is wasting tax payer money dragging this out.

So, if your name is Doe, you should have an advantage over someone whose name is Schwarzenegger? That seems like a very well thought out democratic principle.

If her name was written Moorcowsky on the ballot would we presume to know the intent of the voter?

Unless there's a Moorcowsky running, yah I'd say it's a 100% safe presumption. Voting shouldn't involve a spelling test. If there are two names that are similar and there is a 50/50 chance that a vote could be for either one, that's an obvious toss-out.

Anything else is just sour grapes. We can't embrace our own hopes so tightly that we throw out all sense of reason in an attempt to ignore reality.

are'nt you a little confused as it was little liar lisa who could'nt accept the fact that she lost the primary ? and said she would'nt challenge the will of the people ? ohhhh thats right, this kind of crap when the politician is a closet dem. big wealth redistributor. i guess i forgot my place as a poor white american citizen. i feel sorry for the alaskan people who lost thier integrity putting little liar lisa , the annoited alaskan princess, back in office. sorry alaskans better luck next time. at least you have one politician from up there who hurt herself to do what was best for her constituents and her state. go sarah

are'nt you a little confused as it was little liar lisa who could'nt accept the fact that she lost the primary ? and said she would'nt challenge the will of the people ?

It was the will of the people who are registered Republicans that gave the primary to Miller. It was the will of the majority of the people in the state of all parties that decided Miller wasn't who they wanted to represent them. You can spin it any way you like but the bottom line is, the people of Alaska voted for Murkowski.

So what if she lost the primary, she is not pointlessly wasting tax pay $$$ with this law suit, she used her own campaign money to wage a write in campaign that she lawfully won, contested ballots aside. You are trying to draw a parallel to two very different processes.

And I suppose it's a good thing that the write-in candidate wasn't an Alaskan of native descent, because then the "right" way to spell her or his name would have been with a native script. For example of Inuit writing see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Inuktitut.svg
Similar issues exist for transcribing Russian or Chinese, etc., names. We've even seen changes in transcription systems over the past few decades: Beijing used to be spelled Peking, etc. What would the Millerite spelling police demand in the following scenario: a community of recent Russian immigrants who became U.S. citizens want to stage a write-in effort for one of their own community members-- all voters could spell the candidate's name in the Cyrillic alphabet, but might transcribe the name into our Roman alphabet in different ways. Even Murkowski's name takes on different spellings in Polish, depending upon its grammatical role in a sentence: one can find Polish www articles with it spelled properly as Murkowskiego in certain contexts.
Bottom line is: spelling is unimportant unless there are two closely similar names running against each other; voicing one's democratic vote shouldn't include a spelling test, especially in the realm of spelling names. Even if one looks at Thomas Jefferson's hand-written drafts of the Declaration of Independence one finds the same word spelled differently in different places of the same document.

Any way you slice it, they clearly didn't mean Miller. He's like a bad rash that won't go away.

What's the beef? No matter how you slice it Murkowski wins. Whether you count the misspelled ballots or not.

Get over it. Miller lost, Miller loses, Miller is a loser who misappropriated time and govt resources on his govt job for personal use.

I was a govt worker and that's a big no no.

He lost and no matter how many appellate levels you take it, he will still lose. Miller is only dragging it out to spite his opponent and deprive Alaska of the clout she has when she loses seniority by not taking her seat on Jan 5. I guess if you're an Alaskan, you want to lose seniority? I'm from Virginia, we don't work it that way, but to each his own. :)

stfu.

Guess the test of judicial cowardice is, well, anybody who doesn't agree with you. Are you gonna take your football and run home to momma because IT'S MY FOOTBALL AND YOU GOTTA PLAY MY RULES!! WAHHHHH!

@PJ - did you read the part of the article that states that case law has set a precedent for accepting the misspelled name? Do you understand what that means? Typically, when a law is passed, if litigation is brought to determine what the law says then the case law prevails unless over turned by an appeal. Basic law 101 lesson for you. You're welcome.

STFU...

PJ

Yes, There's only two choices and that ain't an attempt to spell Miller!

What if her name was spelled Moorcowskee on the ballot?

Since Miller's name was on the ballot I don't think it would take a mental giant to figure out that that was supposed to be a write in vote for Murkowski. All Miller voters had to do was color in a bubble.

Look, if you are that concerned, then we should just toss out all the contested ballots, ok? Settled? Fine. Lisa won anyway. Also, just a reminder, the Democrats HAD a candidate, and they voted for the Democrat. So the people you are pissing off, the onces who RE-elected Murkowski? They are on YOUR side.

Another judicial coward sells out Alaska state law and the sanctity of the electoral process. We either have lawful elections or we don't. What if her name was spelled Moorcowskee on the ballot? Would we presume to know the intent of the voter?

But the election was lawful. It was overseen by the legal system at every turn, and the appeal was settled on the basis of Alaskan case law. It's not like the judge threw out established precedents. Just because something doesn't go your way doesn't mean that it was tainted.

As for your question, if the candidates are Miller and Murkowski, what do you suppose the intent would be? Or would you rather favor candidates with easily spelled names? That would be great for the sanctity of the electoral process.

Which one?

That's caribou blood....