Steve Cooley !?!??? Say it ain't so!!!!
- Thread starter BiG H3rB Tr3E
- Start date
This is what I think and I'll give you an example of it from here in my home state. I don't agree with it for the following reason. If the candidate I vote for wins by 49% or 75%, they win. If they lose by the same margin they lose. Simple.
Unless 1 person wins above 50% the office for which all candidates are running for is still up for grabs. It's a way in which to have a redo until either a favored or unfavored candidate will have another chance. Correct?
Here the example from my state-
Joe Heck (R-NV)
128,703 Votes
Winner
48%
Dina Titus (D-NV)*
126,781 Votes
47%
Barry Michaels (I-NV)
6,444 Votes
2%
Joseph Silvestri (I-NV)
4,008 Votes
2%
Scott Narter (I-NV)
1,287 Votes
< 1%
Under the Bucklin system, we would have no winner since the winner won with less than 50%. Since it's a close race with the winner having only 48% we would have to pick, in order of preference who we would rather see hold the office and vote again. If the guy, in this case, Joe Heck(R) would not be the winner as he is now. Even if he is a sorry fuck as is Titus. We would take the top however so many candidates, who did in fact lose in the general election, and give them another chance to pull out a win.
Now I ask you, is that fair? Vote until you, not you personally, get the results you, want?
I know this, my view of it, may be rather simplistic to you and the ideology behind it is more complicated/involved than that but isn't this what it basically is? A redo until someone finally gets over 50%? Oops. twofers.
It should also be noted that the Bucklin system of voting is unconstitutional in all but a few states. Primarily because it is unfair to the winner of the race and subverts the original intent of the voters. It denies the voters of having their choice proceed on to the office to which they were elected and gives the other loosing candidate a chance in a runoff election where they now have more time to campaign and maybe win this time. Besides, in most runoffs, the voters don't turn out in the numbers they did on election day for a large number of reasons which could and would be very advantageous to either on the runoff ballot thereby cutting out the intent of the voters whose candidate won with the higher percentage albeit less than the 50% needed under this system of voting originally.
How many people will now be on the runoff ballot for your District Supervisor office? 2? More than 2 as the electorate is whittled down form 14?
My primary view-If my choice wins great. If my choice looses, so be it. But if I do win, is it really fair to basically throw out my vote and make me do it again hoping for the same results?
IMHO the only time there should be a runoff is in the event of a tie.
R
rick shaw
Resin it's a little more then that. http://www.thenation.com/blog/15550/we-need-majority-rules-elections
Access denied. The Nation huh. Consider the source. Like me directing you to Sean Hannity, which I despise.
Like I said, my explanation may be a bit simplistic for you but it sums it up to a lesser degree. What is the benefit of 1 person winning by 50% instead of a smaller margin? Do those that agree with Bucklin election laws feel they have some need to tell the rest of us that we aren't smart enough to expect/demand that our vote be counted as cast?
What is the benefit to a runoff to obtain 50% for a win if there was already a clear winner at a lower percentage regardless how many were running for the seat. Other than hoping for a different result I really don't see any. They all threw their hat into the ring but now they don't like the results?? Maybe it's just for the greater good eh?
Just trying to see your point of view. Instead I've been painted with the usual tactics of having some imaginary prejudice, being ignorant, a troll, and turbo posting, and still receiving no answer other than to go read about something that pretty much said what I posted.
Starting to think that if I vote for anyone other than a democrat that you'd consider it a wasted vote, which is what got us to where we are now. You're allowed an opinion and I can respect that, but opinions work both ways. Don't they?
At the risk of being berated further, and I really don't care, I'll just agree to disagree with you and call it a day. Enjoy your brand of koolaide bro.
Like I said, my explanation may be a bit simplistic for you but it sums it up to a lesser degree. What is the benefit of 1 person winning by 50% instead of a smaller margin? Do those that agree with Bucklin election laws feel they have some need to tell the rest of us that we aren't smart enough to expect/demand that our vote be counted as cast?
What is the benefit to a runoff to obtain 50% for a win if there was already a clear winner at a lower percentage regardless how many were running for the seat. Other than hoping for a different result I really don't see any. They all threw their hat into the ring but now they don't like the results?? Maybe it's just for the greater good eh?
Just trying to see your point of view. Instead I've been painted with the usual tactics of having some imaginary prejudice, being ignorant, a troll, and turbo posting, and still receiving no answer other than to go read about something that pretty much said what I posted.
Starting to think that if I vote for anyone other than a democrat that you'd consider it a wasted vote, which is what got us to where we are now. You're allowed an opinion and I can respect that, but opinions work both ways. Don't they?
At the risk of being berated further, and I really don't care, I'll just agree to disagree with you and call it a day. Enjoy your brand of koolaide bro.
They haven't called it yet but he went from being about 40k votes under to being 24k votes ahead and they're still counting the mail-in's. It's looking like he's going to win.
Not Cooley
It's strange how things work.
Within a weeks time it went from possible legalization to a failure and now Cooley's going to come in and start "cleaning house" as he says. If that's not bad enough in two years we may have a Republican President again and the raids on dispensories will start again.
To those of you that wished 19 would fail, as it did, I have one thing to say.
Be careful what you wish for. Sometimes your wishes come true..........
Within a weeks time it went from possible legalization to a failure and now Cooley's going to come in and start "cleaning house" as he says. If that's not bad enough in two years we may have a Republican President again and the raids on dispensories will start again.
To those of you that wished 19 would fail, as it did, I have one thing to say.
Be careful what you wish for. Sometimes your wishes come true..........
Just saw a post on Craigslist from a Norcal grower, basically said "attention SoCal buyers, Norcal growers are ALL raising their prices, there will be no more proifteering off the backs of hardworking Norcal growers so you can can have cheap weed. Everyone I know is doing the same thing."
I imagine if Cooley makes office, and dispensaries are mostly closed up, even more weed will hit the black market making prices climb even higher. This will result in more Canadian and Mexican weed being imported to try and fill the "cheap weed" demands of the uninformed.
Sigh, the cycle rolls on...
I imagine if Cooley makes office, and dispensaries are mostly closed up, even more weed will hit the black market making prices climb even higher. This will result in more Canadian and Mexican weed being imported to try and fill the "cheap weed" demands of the uninformed.
Sigh, the cycle rolls on...
Well, kamala isn't in the lead but she shortened the gap from 26k votes to 19k. At least it something.Maybe she still has a chance to beat Cooley...
sounds like a dream come true for you. wernt you the one who protested 19 and claimed it would just lower prices while not offering any legal protection?
pugnacious
Active member
You guys are living in last year. its been so saturated and overstocked here its not even funny. No ones piggy backing shit. The prices are the same in both regions now. majority of the D's have there own cultivation going on now. Its not like last year. Im not surprised at all that allot of growers and collectives are conflicting. Nothing from up north is really needed anymore.
Latest on the official state website has KH ahead by 9,000 with 100 % precincts reporting but doesn't mention mail in ballots at all.
Now it says that SC's ahead by 37,000 but that most of the mail in ballots - 400,000 - are from LA county which is heavily Democratic, and there's 230,000 from Orange County which is more Repub.
Some quick rough math - there's about 60:40 split in both counties re Dem/Rep. So 20% of the 170,000 ballot difference is about 35,000 extra votes for KH, leaving it about dead even!!! Wow. Lets see if my math is right.
More accurately, you could use turnout percentages
http://www.scpr.org/elections/
Now it says that SC's ahead by 37,000 but that most of the mail in ballots - 400,000 - are from LA county which is heavily Democratic, and there's 230,000 from Orange County which is more Repub.
Some quick rough math - there's about 60:40 split in both counties re Dem/Rep. So 20% of the 170,000 ballot difference is about 35,000 extra votes for KH, leaving it about dead even!!! Wow. Lets see if my math is right.
More accurately, you could use turnout percentages
http://www.scpr.org/elections/
CaptainTrips
Active member
Thats not the state site, thats a newspaper. Those are old results. SoS website seems to not be working at the moment. SC was up 20k or so last I looked.
OK more numbers:
And assuming all D's vote for KH and all R's vote for SC - which may not be true of course:
LA county has twice as many registered Dems as Reps and turnout was 43 %
http://www.sbsun.com/pointofview/ci_16544220
So of 400,000 ballots from LA county (assuming no pref bet D and R as to who mailed in ballots), there should be 133.333 more D votes.
There's 230,000 ballots from OC, 240,000 from San Diego and 80,000 from Riverside counties.
Orange County is more Rep - 44 % to 32 % with 20 % n/a, so lets say 4:3 with the rest evenly split so of 230,000, that gives R's 25,000 net votes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_County,_California
San Diego is a wash - 511,655 registered Republicans and 508,305 registered Democrat
http://www.10news.com/news/24848183/detail.html
Edit: Lets say Riverside is 60:40 Rep, that's 16,000 net votes for SC so KH should win by about 90,000 votes!!
Well, I ain't holding my breath. We'll see.
[/url]
And assuming all D's vote for KH and all R's vote for SC - which may not be true of course:
LA county has twice as many registered Dems as Reps and turnout was 43 %
http://www.sbsun.com/pointofview/ci_16544220
So of 400,000 ballots from LA county (assuming no pref bet D and R as to who mailed in ballots), there should be 133.333 more D votes.
There's 230,000 ballots from OC, 240,000 from San Diego and 80,000 from Riverside counties.
Orange County is more Rep - 44 % to 32 % with 20 % n/a, so lets say 4:3 with the rest evenly split so of 230,000, that gives R's 25,000 net votes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_County,_California
San Diego is a wash - 511,655 registered Republicans and 508,305 registered Democrat
http://www.10news.com/news/24848183/detail.html
Edit: Lets say Riverside is 60:40 Rep, that's 16,000 net votes for SC so KH should win by about 90,000 votes!!
Well, I ain't holding my breath. We'll see.
[/url]
Yeah you're right, but still we'll see how my math holds up down the line.
Election Update!!!
Election Update!!!
Kamala D. Harris (Dem) 3,886,014 45.8%
Steve Cooley (Rep) 3,895,569 45.9%
OHHHH YAH!!!! HARRIS CLOSING THE GAP!!! MAYBE ITS NOT OVER!
Election Update!!!
Kamala D. Harris (Dem) 3,886,014 45.8%
Steve Cooley (Rep) 3,895,569 45.9%
OHHHH YAH!!!! HARRIS CLOSING THE GAP!!! MAYBE ITS NOT OVER!
really hope that kamala wins this too....cooley called dispensaries and growers a "target rich environment" this asshole is going on a one man crusade like this is the fucking military or some shit.....we definately do not need staunch conservative wannabe cowboy assholes like cooley in charge of shit.
Update
Update
Kamala D. Harris (Dem) 3,928,805 45.8%
Steve Cooley (Rep) 3,940,205 45.9%
Update
Kamala D. Harris (Dem) 3,928,805 45.8%
Steve Cooley (Rep) 3,940,205 45.9%
