Authorizes tax exemption for property of partially disabled veterans received as donations
Makes changes to home equity loan provision of constitution
Provides for how long an appointed officer may serve after his or her term expires
Requires a court to provide notice to the attorney general of a challenge to a statute
Defines professional sports team in charitable raffles
Authorizes property tax exemption for surviving spouses of first responders killed in line of duty
Authorizes financial institutions to offer prizes to promote savings
Yes, Yes, No, No, Yes, Yes, Yes.
No on 3:
Proposition 3 would make an exception to the requirement that appointed officials serve until their successors are qualified. As of 2017, appointed officials can remain in office past the expiration of their terms until their successors are appointed and qualified. This is referred to as the holdover provision and, according to the Texas Senate Research Center, was designed to prevent vacancies.[2]
Proposition 3 would exempt unsalaried officials appointed by the governor with consent of the Senate from the holdover provision. In other words, these officials would not continue to serve in office past the expiration even if no successor had been appointed. These officials would continue to serve after their terms expire until the last day of the regular legislative session that begins after the terms end. If a new official is not appointed by the end of the session, then the office would become vacant.
No on 4:
Proposition 4 would authorize the Texas State Legislature to require courts to inform the state attorney general of a legal challenge to the constitutionality of a state law. The measure would also allow the legislature to require a waiting period of not more than 45 days after a judge notifies the attorney general before the judge can rule a state law unconstitutional.
And the Gubernatorial election in VA is I believe in one week. Everyone in Virginia should vote for Northam. Even if Gillispie has been a reasonable defensible guy in the past, he's clearly running on Trumpism now, which (especially in the current political environment) ought to be disqualifying.
The only thing on our ballot this time around is a bond measure for the local community college. It replaces an existing bond so it doesn't result in a tax increase. I voted YES
With only one item it took about 2 minutes to vote. I dropped off my ballot last week.
Last edited by Exodor on Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Our ballot is mostly all municipal stuff (for the city of Broomfield), like mayor and city council, not statewide.
But the biggest issue is Amendment 301, which looks to "amend the charter of the City and County of Broomfield so that health and safety are the first priority being considered regarding oil and gas development." It's basically all about fracking - we have oil & gas companies that are ready to develop large-scale drilling sites (30+ wells) practically in people's backyards.
The language of the ballot question mirrors that of a lawsuit decision that has already been won, so it's not exactly new and unexpected; but the oil and gas companies are threatening to sue the city if the amendment passes. So there are hundreds of thousands of dollars of outside money being pumped into the "No on 301" campaign, mostly TV ads. I'm voting yes on it, although I'm not convinced at this point that it will pass.
Also the Boston mayoral election is coming up soon. I need to read up on the candidates, but I'm inclined to support the incumbent mayor (Marty Walsh) since I've heard mostly good things about him and he seems like a good guy.
El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:54 am
And the Gubernatorial election in VA is I believe in one week. Everyone in Virginia should vote for Northam. Even if Gillispie has been a reasonable defensible guy in the past, he's clearly running on Trumpism now, which (especially in the current political environment) ought to be disqualifying.
As I've said in other threads, there's a good chance Gillespie wins this election, even with his shift towards Trumpism.
Which is a shame, because the whole reason I voted for him in the Republican primary is because he was running against a clear Trump supporter in Corey Stewart, and was not really tied to Trump or his policies in any way. That's clearly not the case now.
El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:54 am
And the Gubernatorial election in VA is I believe in one week. Everyone in Virginia should vote for Northam. Even if Gillispie has been a reasonable defensible guy in the past, he's clearly running on Trumpism now, which (especially in the current political environment) ought to be disqualifying.
My wife has been a lifelong moderate Republican and has been registered to vote in NY since she doesn't want to be called up for jury duty here in VA. She's completely against Trump because he's a moron. This is the first year that she decided to register to vote in VA because she's convinced that her vote is needed here to stop more morons. We're both voting Northam.
It's despicable that Gillespie is using Santurary Cities as a dog whistle because a) VA has never had a sanctuary city and b) as a brown skinned citizen I personally think "removing santuary cities" is code for "removing brown people".
El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:54 am
And the Gubernatorial election in VA is I believe in one week. Everyone in Virginia should vote for Northam. Even if Gillispie has been a reasonable defensible guy in the past, he's clearly running on Trumpism now, which (especially in the current political environment) ought to be disqualifying.
As I've said in other threads, there's a good chance Gillespie wins this election, even with his shift towards Trumpism.
Which is a shame, because the whole reason I voted for him in the Republican primary is because he was running against a clear Trump supporter in Corey Stewart, and was not really tied to Trump or his policies in any way. That's clearly not the case now.
What do you mean by "good chance"? My understanding is that the race is close enough to be worrysome, but that the polling average is somewhere around a mid-single digit Northam lead (with polls showing anywhere from a Gillispie lead to Northam +14). At least (I assume) democratic voters won't take this one for granted.
And at least Virginia doesn't have an electoral college.
raydude wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:23 am
It's despicable that Gillespie is using Santurary Cities as a dog whistle because a) VA has never had a sanctuary city and b) as a brown skinned citizen I personally think "removing santuary cities" is code for "removing brown people".
That's absolutely it.
Trump's anti-Latino rhetoric has been overshadowed by his winking support for white supremacy more generally, but everything he says about sanctuary cities (and especially the accusation that they protect gangs) is just more "Mexicans are rapists."
El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:54 am
And the Gubernatorial election in VA is I believe in one week. Everyone in Virginia should vote for Northam. Even if Gillispie has been a reasonable defensible guy in the past, he's clearly running on Trumpism now, which (especially in the current political environment) ought to be disqualifying.
As I've said in other threads, there's a good chance Gillespie wins this election, even with his shift towards Trumpism.
Which is a shame, because the whole reason I voted for him in the Republican primary is because he was running against a clear Trump supporter in Corey Stewart, and was not really tied to Trump or his policies in any way. That's clearly not the case now.
What do you mean by "good chance"? My understanding is that the race is close enough to be worrysome, but that the polling average is somewhere around a mid-single digit Northam lead (with polls showing anywhere from a Gillispie lead to Northam +14). At least (I assume) democratic voters won't take this one for granted.
And at least Virginia doesn't have an electoral college.
I mean a good chance because a) Gillespie almost upset Warner for Senate in 2014 in a result that was far closer than the pre election voting said it would be, and b) this is an off year, which means low turnout, which favors Republicans.
There are large swaths of the state for whom Gillespie's message will win the day, and where Northam's message really stands no chance. It's still a risky gambit for Democrats to rely just on Northern Virginia, Richmond, and parts of Hampton Roads to win a statewide election.
No one should be surprised if Gillespie wins. I'm not voting for him (I would have if he hadn't tracked so far to the Trump side), but if he wins it won't be any real shock.
I voted this morning. On the section of the ballot for NYC mayor, alongside the Republican, Democrat, and the usual minor party lines, there were entries for the "Stop de Blasio" party (running the Republican candidate) and the "Dump The Mayor" party (running professional blowhard Bo Dietl).
Apparently it's pretty easy to form a political party and get on the ballot in New York.
Nothing particularly exciting in Philadelphia, although the Dem nominee for DA (Larry Krasner) is somewhat controversial.
He's a civil rights attorney with no proprietorial experience who ran as an uber-progressive, and he will probably experience pretty severe growing pains in the DA role. I preferred someone else in the primary, but I wish him good luck.
AWS260 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:14 am
I voted this morning. On the section of the ballot for NYC mayor, alongside the Republican, Democrat, and the usual minor party lines, there were entries for the "Stop de Blasio" party (running the Republican candidate) and the "Dump The Mayor" party (running professional blowhard Bo Dietl).
Apparently it's pretty easy to form a political party and get on the ballot in New York.
The "Stop de Blasio" party nominated the same person as the Republican Party? How does that work? So (not that this is going to happen, but hypothetically - say the vote total was (1) Democratic Candidate Bill de Blasio - 5,000 votes; (2) Republican Candidate John Smith - 4,000 votes; (3) Stop de Blasio Party candidate John Smith - 2,000 votes
What's the outcome? Does De Blasio win because the democratic party candidate got the most votes? Or does John Smith (don't know the actual candidate name) win because he got the most votes (split between two parties)?
The individual with the most votes in total, regardless of party line, wins. The Times explains:
Why all these separate parties? New York politicians endorse this antiquated system, called fusion voting, because they can pick up extra votes on the extra ballot lines. The mini-parties, which often push more extreme policies, mostly survive by nominating the same big-name candidates as the two big parties. That is especially true during elections for governor every four years, when state law requires a party to earn 50,000 votes in order to stay on future ballots. (The Women’s Equality Party squeaked by last year by earning 53,802 votes).
It's very weird, at least to a non-native New Yorker like me.
El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:42 am
What do you mean by "good chance"? My understanding is that the race is close enough to be worrysome, but that the polling average is somewhere around a mid-single digit Northam lead (with polls showing anywhere from a Gillispie lead to Northam +14). At least (I assume) democratic voters won't take this one for granted.
That will be interesting to see - Democrats seem to be turning out poorly in non-Presidential elections lately. I'd like to think all this nonsense will help reverse this trend. If not, then the storm clouds will probably get worse.
Oh - and mailed in my vote last week. I'm away for work (as usual). I'm pretty sure Murphy will win and I refuse to vote for Republicans so that was a non-factor. In particular I wanted to vote for my neighbor for school board. Otherwise I wouldn't have given two shits - NJ is dhoomed no matter who we choose. It just will change the form of the pre-dhoom chair moves.
Last edited by malchior on Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I don't think that I'll be emotionally able to follow the VA gubernatorial returns as they come in. Probably go offline between 7 pm - ~ 11 pm. Fortunately for me I have a lot of accounting standards to read and get up to speed on!
malchior wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:04 pmOh - and mailed in my vote last week. I'm away for work (as usual). I'm pretty sure Murphy will win and I refuse to vote for Republicans so that was a non-factor. In particular I wanted to vote for my neighbor for school board. Otherwise I wouldn't have given two shits - NJ is dhoomed no matter who we choose. It just will change the form of the pre-dhoom chair moves.
Yeah, it would seem Murphy has in in the bag, but that assumes registered Democrats actually go out and vote. I visited my polling station this morning and it was quite crowded - filled with lots of white-haired sour-faced folks that I can only assume are worried NJ will become a sanctuary state. Over the last few days I've heard some really gross ads on the radio for local Republican candidates. One candidate was calling for an NFL protest this weekend to demonstrate solidarity with Veterans. The others were whipping up immigrant and tax-increase fears. The tax increase one is high-fucking-larious to hear from Republicans given the crap sandwich our state representatives are supporting at a federal level. Vote for us locally because we want to lower your taxes while our federal representative counterparts work tirelessly to support the Cut Cut Cut plan. F them all.
If Murphy loses I'd be the first to support an amendment allowing for a one-time 3-year governorship to align us to the Presidential elections. It is flipping stupid that we are on this schedule to begin with.
VIRGINIANS GO TO THE polls today to vote on a number of statewide and legislative races.
But voters in one prominent swing county have received robocalls falsely telling them their polling place has changed.
Harry Wiggins, chairman of the Prince Williams County Democratic Committee, told The Intercept that voters started alerting him they received these calls last Friday.
“Some of those people were actually called multiple times,” Wiggins said. “They’re saying ‘your regular polling places has changed, you need to vote at a different polling place.'”
As of Tuesday, Wiggins said he had been alerted by 32 voters that they had received these robocalls.
Rob Williams, the chairman of the Prince Williams County Elections Board, confirmed to The Intercept that they have forwarded these complaints to the state — which has the power to investigate and prosecute election shenanigans.
He also said that the county was not responsible for these calls.
...
The campaign manager for former Maryland Governor Bob Ehrlich (R) was convicted for ordering an automated call that went out on election day in 2010 designed to suppress African American voters. The call, targeted at African American voters in areas known for Democratic turnout efforts, told recipients to “relax” because the Democrat had already won the election.
Also in 2010, voters in New Hampshire, Louisiana and Maine reported receiving similarly deceptive calls instructing them to vote online instead of in person. No states allow online voting.
Voted after work with little fanfare. Violated my “never again” policy towards Republicans on one line, which is a friend of mine running for town council. Voted against them in every other race.
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
Looking like a Democratic wave across the east coast.
EDIT: In the VA Gov race Northam (D) is running way ahead of Clinton's 2016 margin, and he's on track to win the largest Dem victory in the state since 1985. (This is especially notable since he ran what looked like a pretty lackluster campaign.)
Holman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:06 pm
Looking like a Democratic wave across the east coast.
EDIT: In the VA Gov race Northam (D) is running way ahead of Clinton's 2016 margin, and he's on track to win the largest Dem victory in the state since 1985. (This is especially notable since he ran what looked like a pretty lackluster campaign.)
To be fair, the Trumpistas are all planning to vote tomorrow, as per Don Jr's instructions.
"What? What?What?" -- The 14th Doctor
It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
Holman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:15 pm
Tomorrow's POTUS tweetstorm blaming his own party, Crooked Dems, and America will be sublime.
Incoming in 3...2...1...
I don't even...
What's he even talking about? Results show a bunch of House seats flipping against R incumbents, including this one where I have to believe the results aren't reported correctly:
Virginia House Of Delegates 27 90.9% reporting
VOTES PCT
Barnett (D) 396,900 96.9%
Robinson (R)* 12,865 3.1%
*incumbent
