Monday, November 7th 2005
Don’t Forget to Vote
And remember to vote:
Proposition 73: Yes
Proposition 74: Yes
Proposition 75: Yes
Proposition 76: Yes
Proposition 77: Yes
Proposition 78: No
Proposition 79: No
Proposition 80: No
as per our handy voter guide.
Feel free to talk about your predictions, whine about the results, gloat, or discuss other election related topics.
Prediction: Everything loses.
Comment by Donald — 11/7/2005 @ 9:47 pm
Here’s some last minute polling info. I do think that these are somewhat skewed and don’t represent the decent possibility that there will be a low turnout. If only the Republican base shows, and I think this will happen, the results will mirror our recommendations. But this is just my optimistic prediction and I’ll gladly eat my words if I’m totally wrong.
Comment by patr — 11/7/2005 @ 10:04 pm
Prediction: smashT gets pwned! where’s your winning side now? hahah
If 77 loses I’m gonna lose all hope in in democracy. The comercials against it are actually the commericals to vote for it. But than again, what did I expect, people are generally dumb.
Comment by HB — 11/7/2005 @ 10:25 pm
77 is going down big it seems, as is the equivalent measure in Ohio. There, all the Democrats favor redistricting, and the people who ran the Swift Vote Veterans for truth ads are running the anti-redistricting ads. Curious how a change in state can completely reverse principles. It’s a shame.
Comment by Donald — 11/7/2005 @ 10:51 pm
I completely agree. More accurately, a change in the incumbent party.
Comment by patr — 11/7/2005 @ 11:04 pm
I haven’t been watching TV of late. What, exactly, do they argue against 77 that convinces folk?
Comment by Beetle — 11/7/2005 @ 11:52 pm
Anti-prop 77 ads consist of showing a picture of some old white men in judges’ robes with an ominous voiceover saying that prop 77 will give power to unelected (gasp) retired judges.
They also have an ad with the former people’s court tv show judge reading off a teleprompter saying that prop 77 gives too much power to old judges.
The pro-77 ads consist of Senator John McCain smiling and trying to be idealistic.
Comment by Anonymous — 11/8/2005 @ 1:32 am
Sadly, the people of California have been handed a chance to finally reform state government, through Arnold’s props, and from prop 75. They will all lose. The unions are too big, and the public buys the lies. For some reason unknown to me, the public still equates the Democratic/Union party with “the people” and “the little guy”, when nothing could be further from the truth. The Dem/Union Party is the party of big government, the nanny state, overregulation, overtaxation, etc. The Republicans want people to be independent, the keep their own money, and less government in our lives. California will make its choice today. I imagine we will have another ultra-liberal Democratic/Union governor soon. I have a few more years here, then I am leaving the state. I see no reason to stick around for the economic stagnation and high taxes that will follow.
Comment by Scott — 11/8/2005 @ 8:02 am
In the two anti-77 ads I’ve seen the voice says something like: “77 is a politicians power grab. districts will be drawn by judges handpicked by politicians. judges are unaccountable to the voters.” And the ad shows 3 old white guys mulling over some CA maps.
So the alternative is to have politicians do the districts themselves and be unaccountable since their re-elections are secure for the most part.
Sadly the anti-77 people are going to win by campaining on mistrust of politicians. LOL
Comment by HB — 11/8/2005 @ 10:40 am
Some anti-77 adds also seem to be implying that voting against 77 is a vote against gerrymandering.
Other anti-77 adds also complain that voters can’t approve the districts the judges draw until after they’ve been drawn. If 77 fails, the voters won’t be allowed to vote to approve of the districts at all.
If Schwarzeneggar was in a very bad situation to be re-elected, then Feinstein would have already declared her candidacy for governor.
Of course with the way the state’s demographics are going, more conservative regions are increasing in population, more liberal ones are losing population, Democratic advanatage amongst public of 15 points dropping to 10 in the last five years, we could have a Republican majority within ten years that is either allowed or not allowed to gerrymander based on proposition 77.
Comment by Michael C. Mikulis — 11/8/2005 @ 11:25 am
Some random hate mail addressed to me: “you are not a teacher- how can you endorse something you know nothing about? How about you and your family relying on your income and you have zero protection- not even fair labor laws- then you get a pissy ass boss that dislikes you and has the power to cut you off without reason. How fair is that? The good outnumber the bad thousands to one.”
Comment by patr — 11/8/2005 @ 4:20 pm
Wow. That sounds a lot like having a real job.
Comment by Beetle — 11/8/2005 @ 5:22 pm
Election returns. Play the refresh game.
Comment by patr — 11/8/2005 @ 8:42 pm
As I posted on Calstuff…
The big 4 not really counted yet:
Alameda
Santa Clara
Los Angeles
San Diego
San Diego will not be able to save this ship. Everything’s going. Everything.
Alameda’s at 3%, LA at 1%, Santa Clara at 30%. The only one up right now is Teacher Tenure, and that won’t last for long.
Comment by Donald — 11/8/2005 @ 10:15 pm
Well that was a massive waste of time and resources. I suppose advertising companies profit, at least.
Comment by Anonymous — 11/9/2005 @ 12:52 am
*Sigh*. Dash Alameda county… they are aso so different from everyone else that they swing the entire state in one direction. Thats just warped. I’m part of that teeny tiny sane block in Alameda! (Hey, my sanity has the most influence here, not in LA county…)
Comment by TigerhawkVok — 11/9/2005 @ 4:41 pm
This is my favorite map of the night. I’m registered in Alameda too, but my heart belongs to Orange County. At least one part of the state still has some sense left.
Comment by patr — 11/9/2005 @ 6:21 pm
The funny thing is hearing San Francisco folks try to explain which justices are “out of the mainstream.”
Comment by Beetle — 11/9/2005 @ 7:07 pm
Re: the Prop 80 map, I suspect that doesn’t have much to do with SF being so far left of Alameda and it’s neighbors, but rather SF residents are just more familiar with the subject. I remember when I came to visit Berkeley my senior year of high school, there was a huge anti-PG&E campaign going on in the city because of an SF ballot measure.
The maps I find interesting are 78 and 79. 3 counties voted yes on 79: SF, Alpine, and Imperial. And Imperial, probably as a result of underperforming schools, also has the dubious honor of being the only county to vote yes on 78. But what’s Alpine’s story? I honestly don’t know.
Comment by Donald — 11/10/2005 @ 8:40 am
Alpine’s story is just the tiny, tiny population. It takes a handfull of votes to tip them one way or the other, and on any given issue the sample is too small to be statistically significant. Ergo, every so often they’re dramatically out of step.
Comment by Stefano — 11/10/2005 @ 10:16 am
“The Dem/Union Party is the party of big government, the nanny state, overregulation, overtaxation, etc. The Republicans want people to be independent, the keep their own money, and less government in our lives.”
Has anyone pointed this out to the big-spending theocrats who have hijacked the Republican party?
Comment by Stefano — 11/10/2005 @ 10:20 am
They don’t listen.
Comment by patr — 11/10/2005 @ 12:14 pm
Politicians in power often become more willing to increase spending. Everyone jumps on them if they dare try to reign in spending, and they got applauded whenever they start a new program. Add to this the fact that they are trying to get re-elected, and one easy method to do that is by bringing pork back to their home district.
Comment by Michael C. Mikulis — 11/10/2005 @ 12:41 pm
On that note, everyone should read this article by John Stossel. Senator Coburn tried to pass a pork-cutting amendment, and the rest of Congress shot him down like they held the moral high ground.
Comment by patr — 11/10/2005 @ 12:47 pm
Right now, the Republicans in the House are trying to reduce spending increases by 50 billion (the Senate reduced it by 35 billion).
It looks like every Democrat in the House is going to vote against it, and the measure could easily fail since there are also 30 Republican moderates whom might vote against it.
Comment by Michael C. Mikulis — 11/10/2005 @ 12:58 pm