The margin of Norm Coleman’s lead over Al Franken grew back a bit, to either 167 (per the SoS site, per the Minnesota Independent) or 180 (per the StarTribune).   This was not because Norm Coleman gained more ballots, but because he challenged more ballots — and challenged ballots aren’t counted, but instead taken off the table to be looked at later after the recount is done.   Since there are nearly 2,000 ballots that have challenged (1,982 per the Strib, 1,893 per the Mindy), that means that unless either candidate finds at least 1,500 ballots sitting around in his back pocket, the challenged ballots are what will decide this — and that won’t happen until at least the 26th, which is when the state canvassing board convenes to look at the challenged ballots.  (Lizard People rule!) 

Nate Silver points out that Minnesota’s recount law, which is otherwise admirable, doesn’t seem to provide disincentives for making frivolous challenges to ballots.  Therefore, all Norm Coleman has to do to make it look like he’s gaining votes is to issue frivolous challenges like crazy — which is what seems to be happening almost everywhere in the state except for Ramsey County, where both sides have some sort of agreement not to do this.  Franken, after a day of relative restraint, started ramping up his challenges as well, though Coleman still has made more of them.

Now, while all of this may seem rather silly and time-consuming, at least there are actual physical ballots to be recounted. Consider this from The Brad Blog: 

Here’s a look at a handful of some of those challenged ballots from Minnesota Public Radio, who has been posting some of them, and allowing readers to decide which way they should be adjudicated in a reader’s poll.

MPR also asked readers whether they thought "these ballots make the case for electronic voting?" We’re happy to note that, almost to a person, the response from readers was akin to: "Are you frickin’ kidding us?! Of course not!!!"

Naturally, The BRAD BLOG heartily concurs with those smart readers, and by way of emphasis points you to these disputed ballots from the still-undecided U.S. Senate race in Georgia, which will have a run-off on December 2nd:… … …

…Oh, wait, there are no such ballots posted for transparent debate by the public or anybody else, because none exist. They use 100% invisible, unverifiable, reviewable-by-no-one, faith-based electronic "ballots" cast on touch-screen Diebold machines across the entire state. So nobody is able to determine if even one of them was recorded accurately as per any voter’s intent.

That unfortunate fact has once gain re-opened still more debate about the 2002 U.S. Senate race there, where Saxby Chambliss was reported by Diebold to have defeated incumbent Sen. Max Cleland, despite pre-election polls showing he should have lost, and despite the company having installed uncertified software patches, secretly, just days before the election. Unlike this year’s MN race, the GA race in 2002, as well as the still-undecided 2008 race, will likely never be resolved to the public’s satisfaction.

 Indeed.