Quick Hits: Four Hours Left Edition
Kari Chisholm
Here's a few of the more interesting items on today's election. (But first: Have all your friends and family gotten their ballots in? Here's a list of drop boxes.)
- The O's Jeff Mapes is already calling it an historic election, no matter how it goes:
If the Yes side wins, it would be the first voter-approved income-tax increase since Oregon voters approved the income tax back in 1930 (and that was after they voted it in and then quickly repealed it in the 1920s).
If the No side wins, it will be a huge repudiation of the Democratic supermajority in the Legislature and an expensive failure for the public-employee unions that largely bankrolled the pro-tax campaign.
- In the Statesman-Journal, Carol McAlice Currie is upset how the OAJKT ads slam her hometown over and over:
None of the members of political machines such as Oregonians Against Job Killing Taxes, the group currently abusing Salem with a verbal shot, want to identify the persons, organizations or coalitions responsible for their anger (and their potential for obscene contributions). To do that would be to burn a bridge that might someday be useful.
So in an act of laziness, their ads simply slam Salem — and indict a whole community that many of its people care deeply about. ...
What's more offensive, though, might be the participation of local businesses who support the scapegoating. ... But why do businesses such as Keizer Sand & Gravel, Truitt Bros., and the Salem-Area Chamber of Commerce condone advertisements that condemn Salem?
Some might say this is a semantic argument, a disagreement about contextual meaning.
Not to many of the more than 150,000 people who live here.
- Over at Healthy Democracy Oregon, they're taking this opportunity to remind folks that they're promoting something called the Citizens' Initiative Review - essentially a two-dozen person randomly-selected jury of Oregonians who would review initiatives and provide a prominently-placed analysis in the voters' pamphlet.
And finally, there's a bit of a firestorm brewing on Twitter, where the anonymous coward calling himself "ThinkOregon" has been retweeting about Measures 66 and 67, but changing the words of supporters.
Here's an example of a "Vote Yes" tweet from the Oregon AARP that was rewritten by ThinkOregon to say "Vote No" (by way of a legit tweet by Jay Cosnett.)
This is the kind of childish stupidity that tends to crop up in late stages of campaigns.
Won't make a difference in the outcome - any more than stealing lawn signs does. Pathetic.
- Update: One more thing... a friend just passed along this funny comment from a local theatre/acting listserv -- where they've been discussing the Paula's Bake Shop controversy.
To be honest, I do not know which emotion should be stronger -- relief that those weren't Oregon actors and crew selling their souls to support the fear-mongering lies in the latest No on Measures 66 & 67 TV spot, or outrage that Oregon actors and crew weren't given the option -- as someone said, it appears that Oregonians Against Job-Killing Taxes are also Oregonians FOR Job-Killing Outsourcing.
Nice.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jan 26, '10
Here's my take from yesterday, after I dropped off my ballot. I linked to a couple of your posts to make my point. And here's my post from this morning.
Jan 26, '10
Kari,
After days of an individual retweeting my posts, but inserting their opinion and their links, I let my frustration and sleepless stupor override my better judgement. While I have screenshots too, I was simply wrong, it was sophomoric and all involved have my sincere apologies. As for the anonymity, I've seen enough colorful language and threatening barbs launched at folks prior to this issue that I comfortable with my decision.
T.O.
Jan 26, '10
Is it possible to block thinkoregon from Blue Oregon and hence from wasting our time?
Jan 26, '10
LOL @ the dueling bloggers.
I'm glad this election is coming to an end.
4:21 p.m.
Jan 26, '10
MultCo turnout as of 3 pm: 50.9% They'd processed about 22,000 ballots by that point today.
Jan 26, '10
You know, the first time I saw, "retweeting", it didn't seem like the best new feature. What's wrong with a link and a comment?
Jan 26, '10
Explain me this: if M66/67 led in the polls for the first week or so (of two weeks) with a lead of about 10 percentage points, when about half of all eventual voters cast their ballots, doesn't that mean that it would then have to trail during the second week by the same amount to lose?
Isn't the fact that has been just barely leading, or perhaps in a tie, mean that it's a lock to pass because the 10-point advantage was already locked in?
This seems obvious to me, so perhaps the real question should be, why isn't this being reported?
Jan 26, '10
verasoie: Presumably, the polls are all sampling the same base: Oregon voters. Early polls are asking people who haven't yet voted how they will or could vote. Later polls are asking people how they have or could vote.
Same people, different answer.
4:57 p.m.
Jan 26, '10
Like you say, Kari, the Twitter thing's a tempest in a teapot. "ThinkOregon" has been running a juvenile "campaign" from the beginning, and has racked up a grand total of 750 followers (some of which were proudly displaying "Vote Yes" avatars weeks ago). Yawn.
Just further proof that sloppy and unethical campaigning don't really get you all that far. (As distinct, of course, from unethical and carefully thought-out campaign strategies.)
Jan 26, '10
Christian,
That's the problem I have with it. You say that in the second sample, some of the people have already voted, but that is also true in the first sample too, and their votes would already be locked in.
Perhaps people have changed their mind by the time of the second poll to 50:50, but by that time, half have already voted 55:45.
Jan 26, '10
So you want to call him out and then block him from responding?
You guys are focusing on the wrong % when you look at all of Multnomah county. Yes, Multnomah county is low and not going to get near 60%, but there is a worse number for you.
Jan 26, '10
verasoie, yeah, the thought is that people's opinions are changing. According to the polls, the NO side won a fair bit of the undecided vote (who by definition have NOT voted) and the YES side hasn't kept pace.
10 point leads drop quickly, especially if they're only seen in one poll or by opposition/support polling.
The magic number I've heard is that it's difficult to beat a measure once it gets to the 50% yes mark. But the yes camp wasn't there even with their 10 point lead, so they didn't have it locked as the no camp could gather up undecideds and take the lead apart.
Does that make more sense?
Jan 26, '10
To see how the ballots trickle in, check this out from the Oregon Secretary of State: http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/jan262010/daily.pdf
Jan 26, '10
You make good points about the undecided voters not having voted, and that the Yes side was leading but not beyond 50%. In fact, it was leading 50-40, not 55-45 as I had said, although 50/40 does equal roughly 55-45 amongst ballots cast.
Jan 26, '10
ThinkOregon said:
I was simply wrong, it was sophomoric and all involved have my sincere apologies.
Is that supposed to BE your apology? Because otherwise I haven't received squat. I can't speak for @AARPOR or @mizd (the other two people who's tweets you changed from YES to NO), but for myself the only really appropriate forum would be on Twitter itself.
Oh, and as the otherwise unnamed "individual" I can only refer you to the lesson on How to Re-Tweet from Blue Oregon's own Kari Chisholm (and thanks Kari, Carla and so many others for jumping on this).
Jan 26, '10
jaycosnett (aka jaybeat on BO) ... I've posted my sincere apologies to everyone. It was wrong to get upset over your RT regime and I should have simply walked away from the keyboard when you drop the F-Bomb and "whacko" comments at me and others (screenshots of that too). Lack of sleep doesn't excuse me poor judgement.
Jan 26, '10
Think Oregon can express humility---can't be a total loss!
Jan 26, '10
Think Oregon re-tweeted using OEA's handle that I manage (@oregoneducation - plug, plug) but I ignored it. Glad to read the online apology.
Jan 26, '10
Why don't ThinkOregon and jaybeat whip out their tweets, determine whose is bigger and then STFU. Schoolyard pissing matches are hardly the actions of adults.
Jan 26, '10
You have to give the 'net and that nasty anonymity it brings credit for one thing. When was the last time the people vandalizing posters and signs turned up to the election watch party? That has to be better.
Jan 26, '10
Posted by: mp97303 | Jan 26, 2010 7:18:08 PM
Why don't ThinkOregon and jaybeat whip out their tweets, determine whose is bigger and then STFU. Schoolyard pissing matches are hardly the actions of adults.
Oh, you reminded me. Knew this would come in handy. "Ayyeya, BO tienes muy de cajones"! We can clearly see what the deal was with the O.
Jan 26, '10
Hey Z, not to be a noodge, but what's up with that daffy cricket site? Really? It's positively Pythonesque, kinda. Goodness.
Jan 26, '10
Good one, MP. Hehehehehe. Sheesh. Laughing here.
Jan 26, '10
Lockwood, looking at your web, did you ever notice that thing in Richard's ear actually looks like a desicated, black roach or beetle? Echhh. The guy is doing a great impression of Aqualung 24/7 these days.
Jan 26, '10
Exactly, how is this progress and what is this a victory for? There was an alternate plan that would have balanced the budget and only levied a minor temporary increase in taxes. It never got voted on!
Jan 26, '10
Speaking of the "COWARD" called ThinkOregon.......
I called Oregon Public Broadcasting's legal department back in mid-December because the icon "O" being used by ThinkOregon on his web page, at that time, looked similar to the "O" in the OPB logo on their web page. I told OPB legal that I was a concerned citizen and to please check his logo out. It was as if he was advertising his views as OPB's. They evidently did check it out. He has since changed his icon to what it looks like now with the word "THINK" running through the word OREGON. I'm curious as to what the OPB legal department said to him? Cease and desist perhaps? He tried to explain it away in a post to me in December.
Here is what he said in a response to me for calling him on it after I said I thought he was violating copyright infringement laws:
"chrisro ... aside from their O being blue, off-centered to the left and followed by a P and B in a multi-colored rectangle, what similarities do you see? While you failed that basic test, I am please to see you've learned a new word for the year: obfuscate............... And he continued his post ad nauseam with his so-called-logic on M's 66/67 that he has been posting here.
Now, who failed that test T.O.?
Jan 26, '10
Thank God the voters didn't fall for the propaganda.
Perhaps the D's should now propose lowering the rate (once the economy is back) in return for ending the insane kicker law and sending those funds into a rainy day account.
Jan 27, '10
UPO - that sounds like a decent idea. I personally don't have any recollection of receiving a noticeable bump from this alleged "kicker"... I've continued to be agog at how soon the "raise your kids right" credit ends while you are still doing just that, and how long after they've flown the coop the poor kids are forced to claim you as supporting them (that marvelous lie called the FAFSA forces him to say he's under my auspices when he has not been for going on two years)... I support your idea.
Jan 27, '10
Posted by: rw | Jan 26, 2010 9:40:45 PM
Hey Z, not to be a noodge, but what's up with that daffy cricket site? Really? It's positively Pythonesque, kinda. Goodness.
<h2>Well, cricket lends itself to that .</h2>