Weighing in: 2006

[mr_thebrain]

Well, I was thinking about making this a poll, but the only way it would work is to have multiple polls and I don't want to have that many threads.

So, what way did you vote and why? Ok I know it's none of my business, and you don't really have to talk about it. For those that do though this is the place.

Personally I voted 100% democratic. It's not something I would normally do, and I certainly have never done it before. This time though, I just felt it was better to gain a better balance of democrats : republicans. Following that train of thought, I decided that if I couldn't decide between two candidates, then it would fall to the party. I was also pleased that all of the candidates i actually supported were in fact democrats. Again, I don't put much stock into party affiliation, usually.

For governor I chose Doyle. I don't like him, but he's a democrat and is at least slightly more in favor of stem cell research. Really, that was my main driving force this election. Stem cell research, the gay marriage thingy, and the death penalty were all things I felt I had to weigh in on.

Stem cell research is just too beneficial to ignore. I side with Michael J. Fox.

Gay marriage. What the hell, I have nothing against homosexuals getting married, and I don't see how it's right to put it in as an amendment? Are we really that homophobic as a nation? It seems to me, that if the church wants to keep it from happening, that's within their power. However, I can see no reason why it should be legally banned. Ever. Yeah, you know how I voted on that.

Death penalty. Personally I think it's morally wrong to kill someone as a punishment. Eye for an eye seems silly to me.

Anyway, the rest was all about party and the republican/democratic balance.

Feel free to discuss, disagree, agree, and/or share with us how you voted.

[anonshadow]

I'm in New York--I did not vote 100% Democrat, but pretty near.

I voted Dem on everything except state comptroller and the judges for the supreme court.

The Democrat incumbent (and winner) for state comptroller has done some things recently that have just absolutely soured me to him, but the Republican didn't have much experience and I didn't particularly like him, either. So I voted Green on that.

I didn't vote for the judges at all, because I knew nothing and didn't feel comfortable voting based on how pretty I thought their names were (which is likely what I would have done).

Otherwise--Democrat. I was especially pleased to vote for Clinton as senator, because I like her and I hated her opponent, who is terribly informed, inexperienced, and says a lot of STUPID s***. Like... apparently adult predators online who go after kids?

That doesn't deserve press coverage. It will take care of itself.

I didn't think about not voting Dem for anything other than state comptroller (where if I hadn't voted Green, I either wouldn't have voted or voted Republican). This was helped by the fact that I didn't love any of the Republican candidates, although Faso is all right.

I don't know what I would have done if I'd really liked any of the Republicans--probably looked at their voting records to see if they usually aligned themselves with their party when push came to shove. Because while I'm registered as independent, many of my ideals do fall along Democrat lines. I can compromise on some things; for example, I wouldn't feel terrible supporting a Republican I much prefered to a Democrat if they opposed gay marriage but were pro-civil unions. There are other things I can't compromise on, though--like abortion rights.

So any Republican I voted for, especially now, would have to have a history to think on his or her own and vote with Dems on things that really mattered to me.

[Slim]

I looked up all the canidates, and what their stand on for the issues was, and made my decicion based on that. I may be biased, since I'm republican, and I voted for almost all republicans. But even then, I didn't agree with all their issues. For example, Orrin Hatch is all about making a law against flag burning. Sure, I'm upset as anyone else when it happens, but I don't think they should make a law on that.

I did vote for one Democrat, though -- running for Utah state congress. My parents learned that the guy he was running against was in favor of cutting government jobs, and my dad works for the government. Someone who can ensure job security will always get my vote.

Also, I found it interesting -- the canidates for the federal government had webpages, whereas I learned next to nothing about those running for state government. Even those running for County commision at least bothered to put up a website! So, anyway, I will vote for people who will let us know where they stand. It's just considerate, not to mention nessisary if they expect people to vote for them!

[starlooker]

Today is the first day in a long time I haven't felt the urge to move to Canada. Proud to be an American. And all that good stuff.

[mr_thebrain]

glad to hear it. have some apple pie.

[eriador]

before the results, i was raring to go. now, i don't think so. it's a happy day.

[neo-dragon]

I thought this thread was going to ask how much people weigh. I'm tired of hearing about elections. I think I'll leave now.

[powerfulcheese04]

This election made me sad.

This is because the candidates I voted for did not win.

Perry won. Which means we'll probably be getting a 12 lane toll road all over the state-- built partially with taxpayer money by a Spanish company, and coal burning plants in my backyard (essentially.)

And Chet Edwards won. I know that people are happy about having Dems in office. But, seriously, he's a sleazy, lying bastard and I hate him.

[hive_king]

I voted almost a straight democratic ticket. However, I did vote for one Republican: Arnold Swachanegger. I think he's actually done alright as governer, especially at increasing trade and tourism. Plus, his rival, Phil Angelides, was one of the weakest canidates I've ever seen.

In california, we had 13 propositions on the ballot. I voted no on all the bonds except the levy repair and the housing bond. I also voted no on parental notification and a $2.50 a pack cigarette tax. I was sad, though, to see the clean elections act fail.

[Young Val]

a $2.50 a PACK tax on cigarettes?!?!


omigod.

[hive_king]

Yeah, you see why I voted against it. I'm not a smoker myself, and I think it's an awful habit, but come on. That's just too extreme.

[Hegemon]

I would have voted for the 2.50/pack tax on cigarettes. My only concern is that it should have been higher.

What is the parental notification thing? Also, what is the clean elections act?

[AnthonyByakko]

Parental notification is when parents are legally required to be notified before a minor attempts to get an abortion.

As for me, I ended up voting a straight Democrat ticket, against my 3rd party leanings, because of the importance of the election. Doyle, Kagen, Kohl and against the Marriage amendment. 3 out of 4 ain't bad I guess.

[anonshadow]

Not sure about clean elections act (being a not-Californian), but the parental notification law would have required parental notification for any minor seeking an abortion.

I also would have voted for the $2.50 cigarette tax.

[Young Val]

i'm a smoker, personally, so yeah, yeah, gross habit and all that.


but out of curiosity, why would you (those who said they would have, obviously) have voted to raise the tax per pack? is it simply because you don't smoke/don't like cigarettes?

is that really a decent reason to increase the tax by a third of what a pack currently costs?

i mean, the whole not being able to smoke in bars or eating establishment thing, i'm not going to fight you on that. i can live like that. that's fine. but why jack up the taxes SO much? to what end?

[AnthonyByakko]

There was no cigarette tax referendum here, but as a Capitalist, I would not have voted for it. If we've seen fit to keep cigarettes legal (despite being more dangerous and causing more health problems and deaths than, say, illegal products like marijuana) than what right does the government have to create absurd taxation? If it was a matter of money, then they would raise taxes on all products slightly, not on one specific product by 30%. So obviously this is about hindering smoking, for which taxation is neither the proper weapon nor even ethical.

[Claire]

There was a proposition for an 80 cent tax increase on ciggarettes here.
I voted for it. Less incentive for people to smoke, and more money for the state. Sounds great to me.

Didn't pass though.

[Hegemon]

I think that AB hit it right on the head when he said it is about hindering smoking. That is precisely why I would do it, and not being as principled as he, I don't particularly care what method is right or ethical.

Taxes on it going up forces people to smoke less.

Why do I personally care?

Because it disgusts me. Even if it is made illegal in restaurants, that does not stop it from happening on the streets that I walk down. It doesn't change the fact that I inevitably breath in a waft of smoke when I walk out of the law school, or that I can't seem to avoid it when waiting for a bus.

If the laws were changed so that the only place that people could smoke were in their homes, then although it would still mean occasionally inhaling some, but I wouldn't mind it so much. Until then I will be pretty open to any method of cutting it down.

[AnthonyByakko]

Well John, it's not like you need ethics in law school anyways.

[liquifiedrainbows]

Just thought I would say this here since my thread was locked.

The republicans got owned.

[hive_king]

I don't think it'd cut down, though. In California we already have signifigant punitive taxes on cigarettes, and as I see it, if anyone was going to stop smoking because of the price, they would have done it already. At this point all you're doing it punishing smokers even more. Plus, the tax has potential to severely hurt just about anyone who owns a convenience store or a gas station with a quick-mart. That adds up to alot of people damaged financially-smoker and nonsmoker- by this.

And liq? they got pwned, not owned.

[liquifiedrainbows]

You and your popular slang.

Pshh...

[eriador]

they were soundly pwn3d.

Oregon also voted down parental notification. I was pleased.

[Hegemon]

Out of curiousity, what states did pass the parental notification laws?

Although I disagree with requiring parents to be notified prior to abortions, but I might consider having them told after the fact.

[anonshadow]

No state passed the parental notification law. It was only up for consideration in California and Oregon, and both shot it down.

[mr_thebrain]

In an extraordinary joint statement, more than 200 Socialist members of the European Parliament hailed the American election results as "the beginning of the end of a six-year nightmare for the world."

That made me laugh.

Read the article. It's pretty good. Talks about the rest of the world's reactions to the midterm elections.

[Craig]

The Parental Notification law was very poorly written. Sure, I think that parents have a right to know (and if they ARE good parents either A. their child wouldn't have gotten pregnant so young or B. the child would tell their parents), but a letter in the mail? Please. Why not just hand abusive parents a bat to beat their children with.

Personally, I voted Democrat quite a bit, not 100% though. Judges and what not I didn't even pay attention to their side, but on the senators and representatives I definitly voted Democrat.

And thank you everyone else, the democrats had a great day.

Salaam