Legally and politically, it’s a perfectly legitimate move to ensure that every vote is counted, but Team Franken stepped into a PR nightmare by embellishing the news of their lawsuit with the high-pathos anecdotal case of an 84-year-old Beltrami County woman whose ballot was rejected because a stroke had altered her signature. (MnIndy’s Chris Steller has video of the campaign’s telling of the story.)

But then, Lopez writes, “Beltrami County Auditor Kay Mack… questioned the campaign’s account, saying her office hadn’t rejected any ballots because of mismatched signatures. Mack said there was one instance of an 87-year-old woman in an assisted living center whose ballot was rejected because it bore no signature or mark. The law, Mack said, is ‘very clear’ about not accepting such ballots.

“After being contacted by the Star Tribune with Mack’s account, Franken campaign spokesman Andy Barr said Thursday night that there may have been ’some confusion about our earlier field report,’ adding that the campaign is ’still digging into the facts.’ Barr said the issue does not affect the merits of their lawsuit.”

Strictly speaking, Barr is right. And since the election is likely to be decided in court ultimately, the collateral damage from embarrassments like these may prove to be minimal. But it’s hardly an encouraging sign that the Franken campaign is faltering in foreseeable, preventable ways in the court of public opinion, especially when the Coleman campaign is seizing every opportunity to cast public doubt on the whole process.

The Coleman campaign, while promising to “work together to get things done,” has dished most of the dirt, suggesting that normal bounces in the unofficial results are evidence of vote-tampering or worse. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty jumped in this week, saying that the question is whether “ballots from outside the process are going to be allowed in.”

I understand the freak-out factor for the Republican team when the net result of the “unofficial” changes has benefitted Franken, the Democrat. That will be sorted out in the recount. But having our top Republican officials suggest that state and local election officials are crooked is irresponsible and reminiscent of the battle in Miami-Dade, Palm Beach and Tallahassee in November and December 2000.

Ragsdale then goes on to compare Florida 2000 to Minnesota 2008.

“Their [the Coleman campaign's] goal is to win at any price. They’ve invested millions and millions of dollars. We consider this part of the normal political rhetoric…. We’re used to the political rhetoric being amped up. That’s part of their job — to win at any price.”

Though the last half of Ritchie’s statement augurs against reading “win at any price” as a goal Ritchie attributes only to the Coleman campaign, Politico notes that Coleman spokesman Cullen Sheehan was quick to demand an apology and to assert that Ritchie was not being objective:

“His accusation today that our campaign intends to win ‘at any price’ is offensive, demands an apology and simply underscores our concerns about his ability to act as an unbiased official in this recount. His statement is not reflective of the objective, non-partisan standards Minnesotans expect and deserve, and which Mr. Ritchie as Secretary of State is sworn to uphold. And we are concerned about the pattern we are seeing.”

UPDATE: Here’s the video from MSNBC. In context, it seems clear that Ritchie was not singling out the Coleman campaign for criticism; he was saying controversy and accusations are just part of a process like this. Here’s the lead-in and answer:

ANCHOR: For more now on the recount in Minnesota, let’s talk to Mark Ritchie, who’s the Minnesota Secretary of State…. I know that there is some scrutiny by the Republicans over this recount, because in part Norm Coleman led by 735 votes the morning after election night. Now he just leads by 206. There were some corrections made by local election boards. Do you understand why the Coleman campaign is now questioning the integrity of the vote counting?

RITCHIE: Oh, I think it’s normal campaign — uh, you know, their goal is to win at any price. They’ve invested millions and millions of dollars. So we consider this part of the normal political rhetoric….

Video’s after the jump. The Ritchie interview starts around the 1:40 mark.