From TwinCities.com (click to see full picture)

In the midst of a step-by-step explanation of the remaining portions of the Franken-Coleman endgame, MinnPost’s Eric Black takes a little time to tell some folks (including a reporter from his former employer, the StarTribune) to chill out:

One thing you really should know, but it’s hard to learn because so much of the commentary seems to want to lead us to another conclusion: The likeliest outcome — no matter whether Team Coleman takes their case to the U.S. Supreme Court and/or tries to get a fresh start in federal district court — is that Franken will be seated in the Senate in roughly May or June.

Yes, it’s theoretically possible (although unlikely) that the argument will live on for many months (as you may know, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has said "years"). But even if the case lives on, Franken will, in all likelihood, already be seated in the Senate. Too many pieces, including this one from today’s Strib front page, suggest that Minnesota will remain a one-senator state as long as Coleman is appealing his case. That is unlikely, and if you read the Strib piece carefully, the same experts who say it is possible, say it is unlikely.

I just spoke to one of those election law experts, Guy-Uriel Charles, who said that the "significantly greater likelihood" is that Franken will get an election certificate soon after the Minnesota Supreme Court rules.

Meanwhile, the MNIndy’s Chris Steller notes that Kiplinger and USA Today have joined the National Review and other conservative and non-conservative media in calling for Norm to do the honorable thing and concede.  But of course he won’t.  Not when he’s in hock up to his eyeballs in legal fees he can’t possibly repay on his own. And Tim Pawlenty’s hinting that the Coleman camp’s going to beg the US Supreme Court — or at least Samuel Alito — for a stay to keep the Minnesota Supreme Court from issuing an election certificate, should Norm try to appeal the case to the Federal courts.   However, as Eric Black explains in his follow-up piece today, that’s not likely to work out the way Norm hopes it would: 

Third, and probably most likely (but still unlikely), if Coleman immediately files notice that he is appealing the MN Supreme Court decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, he could ask a single justice of the U.S. Supreme court to block the issuance of a certificate, to freeze the action until more justices could weigh in. This is the kind of stay sometimes used in emergencies, to block executions or prevent some other form of irreparable harm that will occur. A short-term stay like this is often only good for a matter of hours, unless it is soon supported by a majority of the court. Almost all of the commentary I have seen suggests that the High Court is unlikely to take this case. And if it is clear to them that they won’t be taking it, they will have no incentive to issue a stay.