OT - Who are you voting for?

User Forum Topic
Submitted by CAwireman on October 19, 2012 - 9:53am

The November elections will be upon us soon. For San Diego....

Elected offices:

1) President/Vice President of the United States

Gary Johnson/James P. Gray, Libertarian
Barack Obama/Joseph Biden, Democratic
Roseanne Barr/Cindy Sheehan, Peace and Freedom
Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan, Republican
Thomas Hoefling/Robert Ornelas, American Independent
Jill Stein/Cheri Honkala, Green

2) United States Senator

Elizabeth Emken, Republican
Dianne Feinstein, Democratic

3) United States Representative; District 49

Darrell Issa, Republican
Jerry Tetalman, Democratic

4) Superior Court Judge; County of San Diego; Office 25

Robert Amador
Jim Miller

State Propositions:

1) Proposition 30 Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding
Should the California Constitution be amended to (a) temporarily increase sales and personal income tax rates; (b) guarantee certain revenue transfers to local governments; and (c) eliminate state funding of certain mandates to local governments?

2) Proposition 31 State Budget. State and Local Government
Should the state constitution and law be amended to require government performance reviews and two-year budget cycles, to prohibit the Legislature from creating certain expenditures unless offsetting revenues or spending cuts are identified, and to make changes in certain responsibilities of local governament, the Legislature and the Governor?

3) Proposition 32 Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction. Contributions to Candidates
Should unions, corporations, government contractors and state and local government employers be prohibited from using payroll-deducted funds, or in some instances their own funds, for political expenditures?

4) Proposition 33 Auto Insurance Companies. Prices Based on Driver's History of Insurance Coverage
Should automobile insurance companies be permitted to offer a discount to drivers who have continuously maintained their insurance coverage, even if they change their insurance company?

5) Proposition 34 Death Penalty
Should the death penalty be repealed and replaced with life imprisonment without possibility of parole when someone is convicted of murder with specified special circumstances?

6) Proposition 35 Human Trafficking. Penalties
Should the definition of human trafficking be expanded, penalties for traffickers be increased, convicted sexual traffickers be required to register as sex offenders, and additional training for law enforcement officers be required?

7) Proposition 36 Three Strikes Law. Repeat Felony Offenders. Penalties
Should California law be amended to provide that a life sentence should not be imposed for a third felony conviction unless the third conviction is for a serious or violent felony?

8) Proposition 37 Genetically Engineered Foods. Labeling
Should labeling be required on foods containing genetically modified ingredients when such foods (whether raw or processed, plant or animal) are offered for sale to consumers in California?

9) Proposition 38 Tax to Fund Education and Early Childhood Programs
Should California's personal income tax rates be increased during 2013-24 to provide funds for public schools, early childhood education programs, and state debt payments?

10) Proposition 39 Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding
Should the California tax code be changed to require multistate firms to pay income taxes based on a percentage of their sales in California, with roughly half of the resulting tax increase to be used to fund clean/efficient energy projects for five years?

11) Proposition 40 Redistricting. State Senate Districts
Should the current state Senate districts be retained?

Local Prop/seats (our new locality...)

1) Proposition A Retention of Benefits Limitations -- City of Carlsbad (Majority Approval Required)
Shall Section 502 entitled "Retention of Benefits" of the Charter of Carlsbad, California be amended to include limiting increases in retirement benefits for miscellaneous employees without an amendment to this section?

2) Council Member; City of Carlsbad (2 Elected)

Keith Blackburn
Lorraine M. Wood

All other Ballot initiatives...

Measure B: Election of City of Chula Vista Council Members by District
Measure C: Cajon Valley Union School District bond proposition
Measure D: Dehesa School District bond proposition
Measure E: Chula Vista Elementary School District
Measure F: City of Coronado Hotel Tax
Measure G: Mountain Empire Unified School District bond proposition
Measure H: Del Mar Marijuana Dispensaries and Taxation
Measure J: City of Del Mar Village Specific Plan
Measure K: City of Encinitas Mayoral and City Council Elections
Measure L: City of Encinitas Two-Year Mayoral Term
Measure M: City of Encinitas Four-Year Mayoral Term
Measure N: City of Escondido Changes to General Plan
Measure P: City of Escondido Adoption of a City Charter
Measure Q: City of Lemon Grove Medical Marijuana Regulatory Ordinance
Measure R: Ramona Unified School District bond proposition
Measure S: City of Imperial Beach Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Act
Measure T: City of Lemon Grove Medical Marijuana Dispensary Authorization Ordinance
Measure U: City of Santee Hotel Tax
Measure V: Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District bond proposition
Measure W: City of Solana Beach Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
Measure Y: South Bay Union School District bond proposition
Proposition Z: San Diego Unified School District bonds
Proposition AA: San Dieguito Union School District bonds
Proposition BB: Bonsall Union Unification of School District
Proposition CC: Del Mar Union School District bonds
Proposition EE: MiraCosta Community College District bonds

(Did I miss any of interest to you...)

Submitted by bearishgurl on October 19, 2012 - 10:01am.

For starters, Johnson, Feinstein, Vargas and Miller (already voted).

Submitted by Blogstar on October 19, 2012 - 10:18am.

Already voted, Johnson...skipped the rest, except for local school board (not to be disclosed).
I voted on a few of the propositions. Death penalty and 3 strikes in favor of changing/ending them. There were a few others.

Most the others can go either way, or not even be on the ballot as far as I am concerned. They don't strike a chord either way...not that I put too much into studying them.

Submitted by Ren on October 19, 2012 - 10:21am.

My toughest decision was whether to vote for Johnson or not to vote for president at all. I decided to go with Johnson, in an attempt to get others to notice a third party, for the sake of future elections. Of course he doesn't stand a chance.

Emken as many times as I can, which unfortunately is only once. She won't win either. We'll have to eagerly await Feinstein's death of natural causes. I'm kidding, people. But wow, do I dislike that woman.

No on 30, yes on 32, no on 38.

Submitted by CAwireman on October 19, 2012 - 11:30am.

bearishgurl wrote:
For starters, Johnson, Feinstein, Vargas and Miller (already voted).

Wow, I had no idea the Johnson upset vote would be so strong...

Have been hearing about it on NPR today...

Submitted by CAwireman on October 19, 2012 - 11:31am.

Double

Submitted by scaredyclassic on October 19, 2012 - 6:24pm.

i voted for gary johnson absentee

Submitted by CAwireman on October 23, 2012 - 7:16am.

I voted absentee.

I'll update with more later on today.

But, struggled with the presidential vote, and went with Obama.

More - Yes on 30, no on 38
Yes on 31, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40

Submitted by enron_by_the_sea on October 21, 2012 - 4:27pm.

Federal: Obama,Feinstein,Scott Peters,
City:DeMaio,
county: Dave Johnson
SDUSD: Bill Ponder, vote against John lee Evans, non-vote for Barrera
Props: yes on 32,36
Non vote on 34
No on everything else

Submitted by edna_mode on October 21, 2012 - 5:15pm.

A primer video of why our "popular vote" system will devolve into a two party system over time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

Alternative voting system here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8H...

Submitted by zk on October 21, 2012 - 6:52pm.
Submitted by svelte on October 21, 2012 - 11:51pm.

Obama.

no on all props except 30 and 40.

wifey almost has me talked into yes on the 3 strikes one. we'll see. her point that drug infractions shouldn't count is valid. plus she's a very nice squeeze.

Submitted by Ren on October 22, 2012 - 9:56am.

LOL at an LA Times voter guide.

Submitted by Blogstar on October 22, 2012 - 10:11am.

svelte wrote:
Obama.

no on all props except 30 and 40.

wifey almost has me talked into yes on the 3 strikes one. we'll see. her point that drug infractions shouldn't count is valid. plus she's a very nice squeeze.

Many years ago I got invited to leave jury duty for saying that I didn't approve of three strikes for little stuff. Cool.

Submitted by CAwireman on October 22, 2012 - 12:01pm.

also.....

Feinstein and City of Carlsbad City Counsil, 2 openings, and 2 candidates. Like falling off a log for the two running....Wood & Blackburn...

Submitted by zk on October 22, 2012 - 1:30pm.

Ren wrote:
LOL at an LA Times voter guide.

Most major newspapers suggest no on 32.

Have you fallen for the "liberal media" myth, Ren?

Submitted by Ren on October 22, 2012 - 2:59pm.

zk wrote:
Ren wrote:
LOL at an LA Times voter guide.

Have you fallen for the "liberal media" myth, Ren?

Nope - In fact I usually roll my eyes when I hear it. But suggesting the LA Times doesn't lean left is like suggesting Fox News doesn't lean right.

Submitted by spdrun on October 22, 2012 - 3:19pm.

Many years ago I got invited to leave jury duty for saying that I didn't approve of three strikes for little stuff. Cool.

In a case like this, follow Paul Simon's advice and "lie, lie, lie." Then nullify if you feel the possible punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Submitted by poorgradstudent on October 22, 2012 - 5:16pm.

Obama/Feinstein/Davis
(Not sure on the others yet... will have to figure that out in the next two weeks)
30 - Yes
31 - No
32 - HELL NO
33 - EVEN BIGGER HELL NO
34 - Yes...?
35 - Yes? (need to research)
36 - Yes
37 - No, offsetting my wife's vote
38 - No
39 - Yes
40 - need to research

Submitted by poorgradstudent on October 22, 2012 - 5:17pm.

svelte wrote:
Obama.

no on all props except 30 and 40.

wifey almost has me talked into yes on the 3 strikes one. we'll see. her point that drug infractions shouldn't count is valid. plus she's a very nice squeeze.


The three strikes one will save the state and taxpayers money on prisons. That's also actually why I'm leaning yes on ending the death penalty; it's actually more expensive to put someone to death than to just lock them up for life.

Submitted by livinincali on October 23, 2012 - 6:48am.

poorgradstudent wrote:
svelte wrote:
Obama.

no on all props except 30 and 40.

wifey almost has me talked into yes on the 3 strikes one. we'll see. her point that drug infractions shouldn't count is valid. plus she's a very nice squeeze.


The three strikes one will save the state and taxpayers money on prisons. That's also actually why I'm leaning yes on ending the death penalty; it's actually more expensive to put someone to death than to just lock them up for life.

The cheapest thing would be to swiftly execute death row inmates, but that's currently not a choice in CA. When faced with the choice of expensive appeals while you're on death row until you actually die in prison vs. a cheaper life in prison without possibility of parole it seems like option 2 is the way to go. The result is the same and I don't think the deterrent factor matters too much when you're probably doing life in prison anyways. People who commit these type of acts know they're done if they get caught.

Submitted by livinincali on October 23, 2012 - 6:54am.

poorgradstudent wrote:

40 - need to research

40 is essentially a non event. It's a carry over from the republican party suing over the Citizen's drawn CA senate district maps. In essence the republican party lost their supreme court case and gave up the fight but the referendum remains on the ballot because they already turned in the signatures. Nobody is running a No on 40 campaign. The quickest way to resolve the issue is a Yes on 40 vote. If you vote no and the no votes win it will go back to the CA supreme court which is likely to uphold the maps as they are currently drawn. Of course that option takes time and money, and it's possible that supreme court comes up with some other funky ruling that would make things even worse.

Submitted by livinincali on October 23, 2012 - 7:19am.

This seems like a pretty good source of data on the various CA propositions. I like how it shows how much money has been spent on each side and who it came from.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Ca...

It's amazing that CA labor unions had more than 50 million to spend on fighting 32 and another 20+ million on supporting 30. If you want to see a comparable corporate interest prop look at 37 where big corps spent about 35 million.

The labor union coffers are going to be bare if they lose.

The other big spenders where individuals that had a pet project Molly Munger and Charles Munger have over 50 million on a pro 38, anti 30.

Submitted by CAwireman on October 23, 2012 - 8:51am.

In the debates last night, Obama was on the attack. Most polls give the debate to him, but cite his combative posture as a possible negative.

Romney was more cool/collected.

The election, despite current state/electoral polling, could go either way at this point.

Submitted by Ren on October 23, 2012 - 9:00am.

livinincali wrote:
This seems like a pretty good source of data on the various CA propositions. I like how it shows how much money has been spent on each side and who it came from.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Ca...

Great resource. I would encourage everyone in this thread to read every word of the For/Against arguments, including newspaper opinions - especially if you made your decisions based on KFI commercials ;-)

Quote:

The labor union coffers are going to be bare if they lose.

They probably won't, unfortunately for California.

Submitted by poorgradstudent on October 23, 2012 - 9:38am.

livinincali wrote:
The other big spenders where individuals that had a pet project Molly Munger and Charles Munger have over 50 million on a pro 38, anti 30.

Prop 39 is the very definition of a pet project. Thomas Steyer is almost completely responsible for the creation and funding of the proposition. Of course it's a little wonky and basically just fixes a loophole in the tax code that applies to corporations, so it's not getting the same attention as more controversial matters.

Submitted by CDMA ENG on October 23, 2012 - 4:52pm.

President: FLU
Governor: UCGal (yes I know I have to wait till '14)
Mayor: SDuuuude

And the richest man that I know personally said this to me when I turned 18.

"If there in... Vote them out... and if there is a woman on ballot vote for them because they'll steal less."

CE

But seriously I don't want to vote for either. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. :P

Submitted by CardiffBaseball on October 23, 2012 - 10:02pm.

In Cali I'd be voting Johnson all the way.

In Florida I am a bit spooked and will pull the Romney lever.

Submitted by svelte on October 24, 2012 - 6:00am.

Nobody has said Romney yet?

Weird.

Submitted by CAwireman on October 24, 2012 - 10:48am.

CDMA ENG wrote:
President: FLU
Governor: UCGal (yes I know I have to wait till '14)
Mayor: SDuuuude

And the richest man that I know personally said this to me when I turned 18.

"If there in... Vote them out... and if there is a woman on ballot vote for them because they'll steal less."

CE

But seriously I don't want to vote for either. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. :P

Pretty funny CE. Yeah, politics is dirty, end to end. And the less dirty the candidate, most often, the less the chances of him/her winning.

Not sure I agree with your wealthy friend. My wife steals, er/uh spends a lot!! LOL!!

Submitted by CA renter on October 25, 2012 - 12:17am.

livinincali wrote:
This seems like a pretty good source of data on the various CA propositions. I like how it shows how much money has been spent on each side and who it came from.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Ca...

It's amazing that CA labor unions had more than 50 million to spend on fighting 32 and another 20+ million on supporting 30. If you want to see a comparable corporate interest prop look at 37 where big corps spent about 35 million.

The labor union coffers are going to be bare if they lose.

The other big spenders where individuals that had a pet project Molly Munger and Charles Munger have over 50 million on a pro 38, anti 30.

Charles Munger (Jr.) is behind Prop 32, too.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/24/4935466...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.