A preview of Coleman's appeal to Minn. Supreme Court

The three-judge panel hasn't even provided a final decision, but Norm Coleman's team is already starting their PR stunt to build up support for their appeal they haven't even filed yet.

Norm Coleman attorney Ben Ginsberg has a post on Red State previewing all of their main points from the election contest that the judges didn't care about and will likely be the focus of their appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Do their arguments have any merit at the state Supreme Court? Ginsberg reviews their main points of the trial: Precincts used inconsistent standards when accepting ballots, the contest orders means some already accepted ballots are now not allowed but still counted, and the Secretary of State's voter registration system is screwed up.

An excerpt from Red State:

Does the law allow not counting one vote when others just like it were counted by other counties and cities? Should a person's vote count depending solely on where he or she lives? Should a contest court disallow votes based on counting rules it adopts but which no Minnesota county or city used on Election Day? Is it right to disallow a vote because the Minnesota Secretary of State's database wasn't up-to-date about whether the absentee voter or their witness were really registered?

Is Minnesota a state that seeks to disenfranchise voters, or to count all the legal votes?

That's why yesterday's three-judge contest court ruling is so wrong, and why we will appeal.