Carolyn Ruff and Owen Reynolds may not have much in common when it comes to politics, but they agree on one point: Whoever finally loses the U.S. Senate election trial should throw in the towel.
While she'd hate to see a defeat for Norm Coleman, "I don't think he should appeal, because I don't feel it will do any good," Ruff said, sitting in a coffee shop in Chaska, in Carver County, which handed the Republican his biggest margin in the November election. "I would hope that he has the good sense to just stop."
Outside a bookstore in St. Paul, ardent Democrat Reynolds said if the decision went against his candidate, Al Franken, "I'd say, 'You lost fair and square, you'll run again. ... Enough is enough.'"
As the candidates await a verdict from the three judges who oversaw the trial, expectations grow that the loser will appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. And that has stirred speculation over the effect a continued court battle would have on the reputations and political prospects of the candidates -- especially the one who comes up short.
"It's either win or oblivion," said Hamline University Prof. David Schultz. "Whoever loses is viewed as the obstructionist, the person who held up Minnesota seating a senator."
But Coleman has perhaps more to lose in the long term if he continues to wage an unsuccessful fight, said University of Minnesota political scientist Lawrence Jacobs.
"The longer he stays in and fights, it diminishes his chances of running for governor, which seems like a real possibility," Jacobs said. "In some people's eyes there's just irritation that this has gone on. That's not necessarily fair. Norm Coleman's decision to enter the [trial] is entirely legitimate and appropriate.
"But for independent voters and voters who don't follow things very closely, the recount and now the contested election has eroded his support."