Utterly Unscientific Poll Concerning Ballot Questions!
By Suldog - 10/22/08 - 12:13 pm
Yes, Yes, Yes
12% (35 votes)
Yes, Yes, No
7% (19 votes)
Yes, No, Yes
2% (6 votes)
No, Yes, Yes
47% (136 votes)
Yes, No, No
2% (6 votes)
No, Yes, No
16% (46 votes)
No, No, Yes
6% (16 votes)
No, No, No
8% (23 votes)
Total votes: 287
Comments
Hmmm
Maybe.
This works much better
if you picture Madeline Kahn singing the choices like the gladiator scene in "History of the World Part 1".
No, Yes, Yes
Keep the income tax, decriminalize pot, and save dogs. That's what I'm talkin' about.
[edit: put this in the wrong place in the thread; I'm dumb, not high, I swear]
Same here
Although I could just as easily go No, Yes, No on election day. It'll depend on how many dog owners upset me on the way to my polling location. We (ab)use animals for all sorts of worse and better reasons. I'm not sure why we *need* to stop dog racing this year compared to any other year. Track racing isn't dogfighting or any other equally crazy animal sports. Dogs run. Seeing which one is fastest is hardly torture. We'll just have to see when it comes down to standing at the ballot box.
It actually does suck for the dogs
I live in Revere and see the conditions they keep the dogs in, and the trucks they drive them around in, and the general lack of care at Wonderland, and this is a no-brainer for me. These are not race horses; any dog that's not a winner is treated like expendable garbage. The city would be better served if they raze the track and build mixed use development there instead. That would replace the jobs lost when the track closes.
And the reason this came up this year is because the same question failed three years ago, and IIRC you have to wait that long to get back on the ballot.
I don't have a strong opinion either way. I want the track gone because it's an economic loser for Revere, and the site could do much more for the community, even as a different type of gambling venue. But I don't have a problem with racing per se, provided the dogs are treated well. They aren't.
Details
Jiminy Cricket.
For those who don't know yea from nay:
Yes on 1 lowers, then eliminates income tax
Yes on 2 "decriminalizes" possession of small amounts of marijuana
Yes on 3 outlaws greyhound racing
party pooper
jimbo, you took away the fun by 'splainin everything.
:-)
The Most Fun...
... comes from figuring out, via these totals, the actual vote totals that each question given separately would have earned!
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Yes, Yes & No
Repeal the Income Tax
Decriminalize Marijuana
Keep Dog Racing
think of the possibilities
I'm on the yes-yes-no plan. Think about it.
1) Keep $3600 bucks that would otherwise be wasted on state cops blocking state employees from doing road maintenance.
2) Spend $100 of that on some primo weed.
3) Head to the dogtracks with the remainder.
4) Profit!
No on Question 1
No, actually, it would cut FORTY PERCENT of the state's operating budget. You know, things like schools, roads, someone answering the phone when you call 911.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
IF QUESTION 1 PASSES THE WORLD WILL END!!!11!!
Please, can we put an end to the hysteria coming from the unions in this state? The fearmongering they are doing is amazing. It would impress Karl Rove!!!
The State will not collapse without an income tax. It will only cut 27% in state spending. Go read the state budget. The total amount of spending is $47.3 billion.
Riiiight
Way to quote the "Center for Small Government" budget nonsense. The state budget is $32 billion, not $47. $12.5 billion of the state's budget is untouchable due to the state Constitution and other obligations that can't be excised. That leaves about $19.5 billion that the loss of funds would have to come from. The total loss of the income tax would mean deleting 70% of the programs that aren't untouchable. The state can't take an income tax removal that would delete 70% of its mutable funding without compensating through sales and property tax increases. Don't kid yourself. The poor and middle classes in this state would be slammed if this were to go through.
Did you see what we just lost because Patrick removed about $1 billion in spending? You just want to hatchet another $14 billion and pretend like it wouldn't destroy this state's ability to do anything meaningful? Don't be a tool.
Here is the budget
Here is the state budget...
Read it yourself.
The cuts Cadillac made were only about 1% of total state spending.
Did you even TRY to read it?
First off, this is the FY07 budget. However, it took me all of 5 seconds to find this on the first page of the report:
Searching a bit more, on page 36 of the report, it lays out the summary of revenue and expenditure for FY07.
We had $29.1 billion in revenue, $29.4 billion in expenditures, and $3.2 billion to start the year. We nibbled into that and ended the fiscal year in June 2007 with $2.9 billion left over for FY08.
But, hey, why look at FY07 for your mystical $40+ billion number. Let's look at the FY06-FY08 budgets along with the projection for FY09 from the Mass.Gov website.
Hmm, $28 billion actually expended in FY08? Wow, so my $32 billion above was even being generous. Your $40+ billion is just looking stupid now.
How about instead of just linking to a budget you probably never even peeked into, next time you actually POINT to where you imagined this humongous budget the state evidently has and can somehow supposedly sustain even after deleting the income tax?
PAGE 320
Vote YES on Question 1
PAGE 320
If you include lottery spending it goes to 47.3 Billion...take it out its 44.9
This doesn't include spending by cities and towns around $22 billion
Page 320
Vote YES on Question 1
The figure you're looking for is $44.907 billion.
This is the most recent published total spending figure....from FY 2007.
The 47.3B figure is derived by observing the average increase in spending over the past 9 years and extrapolating this average increase out two years to 2009:
1.2B (2008) + 1.2B (2009) = 2.4.
44.9B + 2.4B = 47.3B.
This figure is the best possible estimate for FY09, given all available data.
More parroted nonsense...and a GAME!
More garbage from the "small government" policy thinktank.
You're quoting UNAUDITED 10 year projections in the SUPPLEMENTAL material that are used only by the Secretariat.
Try using the main body of the CSFR and thanks for playing.
Speaking of playing, go play the budget cuts game at boston.com. After you've trimmed all of the programs to compensate for the total lost income tax, be sure to save your budget and post the URL here for us all to see how much more savvy you are than Beacon Hill at both balancing the budget AND removing the income tax.
Otherwise, keep your "small government" claptrap to yourself.
hahaha
I like your style. hahaha ;)
I'm against 3 because it is too broad for my legal tastes, especially regarding a "prohibition"
217 vote summary
At 217 votes, these are the tallies.
Question 1:
Yes - 48
No - 169
Question 2:
Yes - 176
No - 41
Question 3:
Yes - 144
No - 73
So, keep the income tax, ticket for less than an ounce of pot, and stop greyhound racing. Of course, self-selection is what it is.
Compare to Davis Square LJ poll results
I posted a poll two weeks ago on Davis Square LJ, with results that you can read here. I provided "Undecided" as a poll choice, and quite a few people chose that option for Question 3.
Thanks, Ron
Comparing the two, the results aren't all that dissimilar. I think the important thing to consider with polls like these is the make-up of the demographic being reached.
We have the time to cruise sites such as this, which suggests a fairly decent job - or being unemployed :-)
We probably tend to know a bit more about the issues than a large segment of the voting populace. I say this because we care enough to read newspapers, on-line news sources, and other aids to understanding, during our free time, rather than flopping down on the couch and watching, say, "Wife Swap".
Just my own observation: The folks who comment here tend to lean towards a more liberal political view than the average. I'm not saying that's a good or a bad thing - just my observation. Your mileage may vary.
Does that add up to an expectation of the results shown here? Sure. Do these results accurately reflect the outcome in November? Probably so, but not by anywhere near as wide a margin. Again, just my two cents (currently devalued to about 1 and 1/4 cents.)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Sample of the actual ballot by email
For a sample of the actual ballot layout for your poll email election at sec.state.ma.us including the full weblink URL produced by clicking on "My General Election Ballot" after checking http://wheredoivotema.com
For example...
To: election at sec.state.ma.us
By email your.email at your.domain please send a sample ballot as it would appear at the poll...
Voting info link for this poll
http://...