Proof that the “elite, hollywood liberals” look down on their own constituents, even their own voters?

Even the observers and lawyers have been instructed by their respective campaigns to not talk to the media. But Minneapolis lawyer Bill Starr, who is volunteering for the Franken campaign, was willing to say a few words. He said he thinks Franken will prevail. His hunch is based on a theory he has.

“People who voted for Coleman are more likely to have taken the SAT in their lifetime,” he said. “They’ve filled in circles. Franken voters are probably not college-educated. They’re new voters and immigrants. They’ve been brought in by groups like ACORN, from the inner cities. They’re more likely to make mistakes. I’ve bounced this off of minority people, and they agree with me.”

Whoa.

As the good people over at HotAir point out, what “minority people” is he even talking about? Being Minnesota, where the largest minority is the Republican Party, I’ll just give him the benefit of the doubt…

What’s even better is that, assuming his ignorance – err, insight – to be correct, it can actually cut both ways. This is exactly what’s so obtuse about recounts. Take it from me, I’m from Miami. Divining the intent of the voter from a ballot so botched a machine can’t make it out is a tricky process at best. All it leads to is “impartial” ballot counters arguing over what the meaning of a right-leaning but slightly squiggly line means. For example, this apparently isn’t a vote for Coleman:

For all the hacks that think that Bush v Gore was decided wrongly, it’ll be interesting to see how the Minnesota recount plays out. If I were a betting man (I’m flying to Vegas this afternoon, fyi), I’d bet that any (re)count that plays to Coleman’s favor will be challenged no matter the method; and should Franken come out on top, and a court case similar to BvG resolve it, you’ll hear the liberals singing Hosanna.

I’ll end with this gem from BvG:

“The right to vote is protected by more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.”