Do you think the Democratic Party is stealing the Minnesota senatorial election for Al Franken? Whether it is or not, if he winds up winning now, it's going to look like he did.
Here's a hypothetical, which we'll call Hypothetical A:
1. The Party knows the votes are not there and intends to steal an election during the recount.
2. As the recount progresses, the public strongly suspects the election is being stolen.
3. The Party realizes that if the candidate wins, the public will think the election was stolen.
Question: Should the Party abandon the plan to steal the election?
My first thought was: Yes, because it will hurt the Party's reputation and leave the "elected" official under a cloud. But then I thought:
Consider Hypothetical B: There is no plan to steal the election, there is a recount, and the truth is there are enough votes that the Party's candidate has won. Of course, the Party would go through with the recount, and the candidate would accept his position, and the Party and the candidate would deal with the accusations and damage to their reputation as well as they could.
Now, if we accept that Hypothetical B is true, what does that say about Hypothetical A? The 2 scenarios look the same to the general public. The evil election stealers of Hypothetical A should continue and act just like the unfairly maligned characters in Hypothetical B.
AND: A poll: