The Huffington Post published its first Pollster for the presidential race today. That combines the results for all available current polls. It also, significantly, breaks things down by state. The results show that Clinton is the overwhelming favorite. For Trump to win he has to flip a number of states. But those are all states where the result is statistically insignificant. Meaning that even if nobody changes their mind between now an election day, Trump could still win just because the pollsters happened to call the wrong people.
Absentee voting period in California begins October 10th. I have not yet received the voters' pamphlet, but it augurs to be a very large one. I have received a single piece of campaign literature (for one of the propositions) that actually doesn't say anything about what it is! Just that some folks want me to vote for it.
Alan
P.S.: I kept a tally from the newspaper about who is funding the pro- and anti- campaigns for the various propositions; that sort of thing can be revealing.
One of the propositions on the California ballot this time is legalization of recreational marijuana. I'm inclined to vote against it; fixing the horribly bungled implementation of medical marijuana legalization ought to come first (and maybe last) as far as I am concerned. But the news that manufacturers of opioids like oxycodone, hydrocodone and fentanyl are pouring money into anti-marijuana campaigning because legalization (for whatever reason) reduces opioid abuse strikes me as a good reason to vote for legalization. Put me down for a bluenose if you will, but I also object to legalized gambling.
I hope you won't mind me urging you to vote YES on Prop. 62 (abolish the death penalty). We got rid of it here in Illinois when people realized that more people had exited death row by being proven innocent than by being executed.
Your reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, Alan. Seeing who opposes and supports a ballot question is more important to how you'll vote than the actual question itself...if you see what I mean.
We have a question that is getting heavy though not terribly informative advertising. It has something to do with public school funding. The pro ad I keep seeing claims that by funding charter schools, the initiative will increase funding f or all public schools. That doesn't make sense to me. And, since I do not approve of charter schools, the "vote Yes" ad tends to incline me to vote no.
Nor do I approve of legalized gambling. But the ballot questions were confusingly worded and I suspect I voted for while meaning to vote against. Nothing has happened with the project anyway, which is a bother. I had resigned myself to a casino here in Springfield and thought it might boost our economy. But, nothing has happened and nothing has happened, and by this point any impetus is long gone.
Bill Clinton's senseless derogation of "Obamacare" today, taken together with some of his other recent off-the-wall comments, do make me wonder if he might be in an early stage of senility.
Things such as the Tribune editorial a few weeks ago have almost convinced me that Obamacare is in fact broken and that single-payer is actually the only viable fix -- not that single-payer was exactly the fix the editorialists had in mind!
Poll Tracker trend lines, HRC & DT [Click]
ReplyDelete—Alan
The Huffington Post published its first Pollster for the presidential race today. That combines the results for all available current polls. It also, significantly, breaks things down by state. The results show that Clinton is the overwhelming favorite. For Trump to win he has to flip a number of states. But those are all states where the result is statistically insignificant. Meaning that even if nobody changes their mind between now an election day, Trump could still win just because the pollsters happened to call the wrong people.
DeleteAbsentee voting period in California begins October 10th. I have not yet received the voters' pamphlet, but it augurs to be a very large one. I have received a single piece of campaign literature (for one of the propositions) that actually doesn't say anything about what it is! Just that some folks want me to vote for it.
ReplyDeleteAlan
P.S.: I kept a tally from the newspaper about who is funding the pro- and anti- campaigns for the various propositions; that sort of thing can be revealing.
Assange: things that go slump without bite. . . .
ReplyDeleteGood for you, keeping track!
ReplyDeleteThat last post of mine was for Alan. LOL! Not related to Assange. ;-)
ReplyDeleteI meant what you know, listener.
Delete[grin]
--Alan
We decided to watch the VP Debate, thinking it couldn't be stranger than the last one.
DeleteIt was a Defensiveness Summit! I wished they'd turn off their mics!
Can we turn off the next four years of politics? Heh.
I've never felt so much like sitting home on Election Day.
It's a good thing I'm working at the polls!!
One of the propositions on the California ballot this time is legalization of recreational marijuana. I'm inclined to vote against it; fixing the horribly bungled implementation of medical marijuana legalization ought to come first (and maybe last) as far as I am concerned. But the news that manufacturers of opioids like oxycodone, hydrocodone and fentanyl are pouring money into anti-marijuana campaigning because legalization (for whatever reason) reduces opioid abuse strikes me as a good reason to vote for legalization. Put me down for a bluenose if you will, but I also object to legalized gambling.
ReplyDelete--Alan
I hope you won't mind me urging you to vote YES on Prop. 62 (abolish the death penalty). We got rid of it here in Illinois when people realized that more people had exited death row by being proven innocent than by being executed.
DeleteYour reasoning seems perfectly logical to me, Alan. Seeing who opposes and supports a ballot question is more important to how you'll vote than the actual question itself...if you see what I mean.
DeleteWe have a question that is getting heavy though not terribly informative advertising. It has something to do with public school funding. The pro ad I keep seeing claims that by funding charter schools, the initiative will increase funding f or all public schools. That doesn't make sense to me. And, since I do not approve of charter schools, the "vote Yes" ad tends to incline me to vote no.
Nor do I approve of legalized gambling. But the ballot questions were confusingly worded and I suspect I voted for while meaning to vote against. Nothing has happened with the project anyway, which is a bother. I had resigned myself to a casino here in Springfield and thought it might boost our economy. But, nothing has happened and nothing has happened, and by this point any impetus is long gone.
It seems from the initial reportage I read that the VP "debate" was an excellent choice not to watch.
ReplyDeleteAlan
Bill Clinton's senseless derogation of "Obamacare" today, taken together with some of his other recent off-the-wall comments, do make me wonder if he might be in an early stage of senility.
ReplyDelete--Alan
Maybe the news stories were misleading. [Click] But Bill should know how to say things in a clear enough way that misinterpretation is less likely.
Delete--Alan
Things such as the Tribune editorial a few weeks ago have almost convinced me that Obamacare is in fact broken and that single-payer is actually the only viable fix -- not that single-payer was exactly the fix the editorialists had in mind!
Delete