Be a voter!|
I have just read up on the candidates and the issues and am soon heading to the polls. I encourage everyone who has an election in your area to vote today. It's important.
One of the things I have been surprised to enjoy so much is Washington's mail-in voting. They send out a thick pamphlet with every candidate's"vote for me because" schtick about a month in advance, then the official ballots arrive in plenty of time to read up more and eventually get it to the Post Office.
I do see the inherent danger - pushy spouses could influence the household's votes and such - but for a state with so much rural area this seems a fine solution.
It does sound nice!
I appreciated that the ohio secretary of state website provides both the "official argument for" and "official argument against" each issue on the ballot. Handy way to size them up, though one should also look at other references, I suppose.
|Date:||November 3rd, 2009 03:44 pm (UTC)|| |
Have voted. The first Minneapolis city election to use instant runoff voting.
11 Constitutional amendments on the ballot in Texas today, early voting has been extremely low.
|Date:||November 3rd, 2009 04:51 pm (UTC)|| |
City Commission, School Board, and mayoral elections in Royal Oak.
Also a ballot initiative to limit new liquor licenses. The proponents are equating more bars with higher crime, the opponents are pointing out that the employees of an established bar were circulating the petitions to get the measure on the ballot. I'm voting against it.
The city clerk is expecting low turnout. There's traditionally very little interest in local-only ballots, alas.
|Date:||November 3rd, 2009 04:53 pm (UTC)|| |
They're saying maybe as high as 35% here today. That may be optimistic. Seems kind of sad. Then again, considering how much time *I* spent figuring out how to vote, I'm not sure what throwing more people in the pot would actually accomplish (maybe they'd all spend more time than I did?).
I at least got to vote quite confidently against a ballot question.
|Date:||November 3rd, 2009 05:02 pm (UTC)|| |
I'll be surprised if we get more than 20% turnout locally.
I decided which candidates to vote for by reading the questionnaire answers in the local paper and eliminating the candidates who used rightwing buzzwords (e.g. "fiscal responsibility" = screw the schools and municipal employees).
um, yeah. no need to restrict the number of liquor licenses, in my opinion. On the other hand, I found myself voting against a constitutional amendment to allow for casinos in Ohio. A) I realized I'm actually against casinos. People gambling against each other? fine. People gambling with machines where the house always comes out ahead in the end? I'm agin it, even if the taxes do support good causes. There are positive, constructive things people could do with their time, that are social and not addictive.
B) that sort of thing really doesn't belong in the state constitution.
Locally we have a measure to allow for the purchase of liquor in the village on Sundays during the same hours as other days of the week. I voted for it. If there had been a measure to allow people to buy liquor 24-7, I'd have voted for that. I know enough people who work the swing shift to find it oddly solar-normative that we restrict the hours when people can purchase alcohol.
Edited at 2009-11-03 05:09 pm (UTC)
|Date:||November 3rd, 2009 05:42 pm (UTC)|| |
If that constitutional amendment is the one my sister told me about, you were entirely right to vote against it. It was written so as to give exclusive rights to one business, which is certainly not something that should be enshrined in the constitution.