Ohio get your sledge hammers out! You've been "diebolded" AGAIN!

[In Truth We Trust]

Props 2,3,4,5 all lose. WTF< I call Bullshit.

Paper ballots NOW!!!
Hand counts NOW!!!

[msongs]

1. don't you wish the national dems INC cared? nt

Msongs
www.msongs.com/chinamart.htm

[In Truth We Trust]

2. Evidently they don't- But we don't need to rely on someone else to play

savior; we must be the solution!

[Selteri]

3. I hate to say it, but most people I know voted against them.

Listening to the hype from the TV, Radio and News Paper making the length make them feel it was confusing or worded in ways they didn't like.

I voted es for them all and my voting station had a nice paper trail for the machine that you confirmed.

[asthmaticeog]

4. Calm the fuck down, please.

Those measures lost because they had an extremely well-funded and well-organized opposition. EVERY daily endorsed a "no" vote on most or all of those proposals. I live in Cuyahoga, and I didn;t even see any TV ads in favor of those measures, but plenty against. No assumption of chicanery is necessary to explain this loss, it was all PR.

Or, I suppose we *could* just keep blaming every loss on Diebold, it sure would be easier than working harder to find and fix the flaws in our party mechanism.

[In Truth We Trust]

5. As I understand it we have a dem sweep in Ohio and the nation yet

these referendum don't pass.

The electorate in Ohio have only a twenty percent favorable opinion of the repukes yet they vote for clearly repuke measures-I call bs.

I agree with you in that we should fight harder until we win. My objective-that which I would consider victory is paper ballots and hand counts. Nothing more and nothing less!

Sledgehammer time! I want my vote to count as cast. I'm tired of waiting for the powers that be to protect my constitutional right to one man one vote.

Digital devices corrupt the electoral process and usurp the integrity of the democratic process.

[asthmaticeog]

6. The Dem Party Chairman of Cuyahoga County endorsed a "no" vote on R.O.N.

It has shit to do with a Dem sweep when plenty of prominent Dems were coming out against it, too.

On edit: just for the record, I agree one hundred percent that we need paper ballots and transparency in elections. But crying "Diebold" at every loss when there are other reasonable explanations makes us look like FUCKING IDIOTS.

[femrap]

27. The Anti-RON PR campaign came off as being OPPOSED

to Taft. "Vote 'NO' to end the corruption."

Christian Fascists got automated phone calls saying that voting 'yes' meant they were supporting people who approved of abortion and gay marriage.

I hate living in a state with so many willfully ignorant people.

[Blue Diadem]

10. ahhhh.."the devil is in the details"

I have to agree the ads were abundant. I'm in the Toledo area and I think I vaguely remember one tv ad supporting them. However, as you can see by the subject line, the phrase I remember most is from the opposition ad that played over and over and over again.

Any positive endorsements came from our local Dem party.

There are still issues with those machines, whether it's the machines themselves or worker error..I don't know. Seems Toledo had an awful time counting the votes..claimed not enough workers, lost cards, etc. I'd heard reports of entire precints not having the machines up and running until late. People left to go to work..hopefully they returned to vote later.

Personally, I've never had to wait 45 minutes to cast a vote before, not even during the last presidential election. New machines certainly slowed down the ability to vote..even for those of us who live in a small rural towns.

[asthmaticeog]

11. I'm not disputing that the EVMs are fuX0rd.

They are, and that needs to be addressed, well, a couple of years ago now, it's an *urgent* issue. What I'm taking exception to is the crying of "Diebold!" whenever something doesn't go our way. Were there exit polls that sharply contradict the R.O.N. results? Is there any evidence at all of chicanery? No and no. There ARE, however, rational explanations for why these measures failed, and they're right in front of our noses, primary among them being we were massively out-campaigned.

BTW, R.O.N. failed in non-electronic precincts, too.

[Blue Diadem]

13. I agreed

We were out-campaigned. No where did I say that Diebold was responsible for the loss. I simply pointed out there were still continuing problems with them.

[asthmaticeog]

15. You're right - I'm sorry.

Guess I'm a little on edge today...

[Blue Diadem]

25. I understand

:pals:

[fredtaylor]

31. no kidding

[Kolesar]

7. It was those screens

In our living rooms that cost us. You know I'm talking about. The boob tube.

RON had a scatter shot PR campaign. Bits of commercials, bits of canvassing, a good amount of yard signs. What RON needed was to increase the number of messaging "contacts" to 6 for the message to sink in. We should have been calling and knocking at the same doors repeatedly. We needed a long period of promotion--not just a month.

We need an assessment of what went wrong so that we learn from it, too.

[cmd]

8. Diebold was not in our county

We used our punch card machines for the last time. The results were consistant will the rest of the state. There were too many long issues that people did not understand.

[Kukesa]

12. That's exactly correct, cmd.

The issues were too long and people didn't understand them. Besides, they were amendments to our state constitution and that makes people nervous.

CMD is correct.

[Connie_Corleone]

9. Most people had no idea what issues 2-5 were about.

None of the ads explained how issues 2-5 were supposed to reform Ohio voting.

Even though I knew what the issues were about, I didn't bother reading about the issues on my ballot. There was just too much to read, especially for issue 3. Can you imagine someone who doesn't pay attention to the issues going into the voting booth and seeing all that crap on their ballot?

And like the poster above, my county voted on paper ballots and the issues went down in blazing defeat here.

[Dark]

14. I could understand 3,4, and 5 failing. There were logical arguments

on both sides. But I can't understand why 2 failed.

[asthmaticeog]

16. Because they were sold - and opposed - as a package.

As go most of them, so go all of them. Most people just don't pay that much attention to the policy specifics.

[Dark]

19. There goes the 'educated voter' myth n/t

[MeDeMax]

17. a problem of bundling, on 2 that is n/t

[Schmajo]

18. People Just Vote "No"

That's just how it is. Look at Issue 1 - EVERYONE was in favor of it, Rs & Ds. The only ads I saw were in favor. There is no direct tax increase associated with it. ALL the newspapers endorsed it. But it only got 54%

It requires a huge effort to get the uninformed populace to vote 'yes' on anything. When you have long, complicated, convoluted issues, and a lot of 'vote No' advertising, we should not be surprised at the outcome we got.

[mosin]

20. People do just vote no...

but it's not necessarily a matter of being uninformed. I voted against all 5 issues.

Complex legislation does not belong in the state constitution. Period. Ohio's referendum system is screwed up. It makes it much easier to amend the constitution than to pass legislation by referendum, so naturally, every group tries to do it this way. That doesn't make it right.

Second, I am opposed to Taft's half-billion dollar "Third Frontier" give-away to high-tech corporations. Bundling it with the infrastructure funding to get it through was just wrong. There was plenty of time to bring up the infrastructure funding again if it failed this time.

As far as Issue 2 goes, it did motivate the legislators to pass no-fault absentee balloting themselves, just so they could say Issue 2 was unnecessary. It goes into effect next year.

[Kukesa]

21. Very interesting, mosin.

I agree that these issues do not belong in our state constitution, and I too am opposed to Taft's "Third Frontier" give away. The only reason I voted for Issue 1 is because John Glenn and Eric Fingerhut endorsed it -- two good men, in my opinion.

And I was unaware that no-fault absentee balloting goes into effect next year. How did I miss that? Duh.

Maybe thinks aren't so bad, after all. And maybe you should post your thoughts in a new thread.

:-)

[mosin]

28. Sub HB 234

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=126_HB_234

It didn't get a lot of news coverage--not nearly as much as I expected. It passed on almost entirely party line votes in the House and Senate (one House Dem voted for it), with the Dems complaining that it was a stunt to undermine Issue 2--which it was.

It's not a bad bill. Essentially the same no-fault language had widespread Democrat support last year, but the timing--three weeks before the election--was too much to take.

Basically, it keeps the current absentee ballot system, eliminates the need for a reason, and adds one additional bit of required information on the absentee ballot request form:

(E) One of the following:

(1) The elector's driver's license number;

(2) The last four digits of the elector's social security number;

(3) A copy of the elector's current and valid photo identification or a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector.

The new verification provision is flexible enough that I don't have a problem with it. I don't see that it poses much of an obstacle. Most people should be able to put down the last four digits of their SS number without having to have a driver's license or having to photocopy a utility bill.

I understand why many people endorsed Issue 1 despite their opposition to Shaft's "Third Frontier" give away. I just didn't see the down side to it failing. The infrastructure funding part really didn't need to be renewed this year. It could have been put back on the ballot next May or November with no problem.

[moontaurus]

26. California has a voter guide with DEBATES in it!

Yes, you said it. That's what I did with issue 5. I vote in Ohio, but live a good part of the year in Cali. To learn about the Ohio issues, I had to comb the internet for piecemeal newspaper editorials and the like. Of course I found the Reform Ohio Now website, and that helped, only because I was sympathetic. (I never did decide what I thought of issue 5 -- nobody was any help on that. Seems it served Taft and big business hugely, even though Dem's were pushing for it.)

In Cali, every voter receives a voter guide weeks in advance. You can also find them laying around, and also on the internet. The guide lays out not just the text of each issue (which in modern times is useless because the text is always so intentionally convoluted and misleading), but *opinions with rebuttals* by key proponents and opponents of each issue. THAT makes a difference. It offsets advertising.

In Cali, people were likewise put off by the issues, but not because they were in the dark. Why do I think that? Because voters had a foundation to understand that the initiatives were a sham, despite millions of dollars of advertising to the contrary. Voters made a point of showing up at the polls. (Sadly, however, I do think the coattails of outrage against Arnie's special interest election brought down two needed initiatives -- reigning in big energy, and mandating discounted prescription medication.) My girlfriend canvassed neighborhoods; it was clear people had a grasp of the Cali special election, and had strong informed opinions.

When people read DEBATES, people are not in the dark. Debates contain the analysis voters absolutely require. If political groups are on the ball, they are saavy about feeding the debates in the guide. The voter guide, with all the issues hopefully smartly debated in one place, reaches every voter. I cannot overstate the importance of this.

[pro_blue_guy]

22. My county uses the optical scan paper ballots; not the touch-screens.

[OzarkDem]

23. Bad political consultant

Whoever the fools were who conceived these issues hired one of the worst political consultants in history next to Bob Shrum.

Gerry Austin worked with Burges & Burges - they did a crummy job, but they walked away with a ton of money in consultimg fees.

This is the same crew that advises Jane Campbell - they didn't do her much good either.

Who was in charge of RON anyway?

[Kolesar]

24. This was supposed to be Dennis Eckart's big promotional project

Put Mr. Good looking former congressman out in front with all of his ideas.

Bob Shrum
Al Frum
David Frum
Tom Thumb

[mosin]

29. Bad political consultants

I agree that the planning was terrible.

They should have gone with two issues at most (probably Issues 2 and 4).

They should have made the issues shorter and written them in more typically constitutional terms. For example, instead of spelling out all the legislative details on absent voter balloting, draft it in terms of a right to vote in person or by mail at any time within 35 days of an election. Let the legislature set out the rules, and the courts enforce the right against legislative infringement. The redistricting issue would be more complicated, but you could still create a constitutional framework for an independent redistricting body without running several pages of text.

With only two issues, both with bipartisan appeal, Reform Ohio Now ads could have used specifics, rather than platitudes and anti-Taft rhetoric. I would like to see the anti's campaign against a "right to vote" amendment.

Instead, they got greedy. And we got nothing (except a no-fault absentee voting bill rushed through the legislature).

[woldnewton]

30. Or at least...

get out in the streets, Ohio.

Or get ready to next year. Having won local and state races (which are less likely to be rigged these days), the rest of the country will probably choose not to rock the boat, and you will have to wait until 2006 or perhaps even 2008 before the rest of the country will get off its ass and join you.