Referendums

[cosine]

Is there some resource that will let you know what referendums will be on your state's ballots on Nov. 7th? I know WI is going to have a couple, but I'd like to find out ahead of time exactly what they are and what they are for. I've tried searching the 'Net, but since I rather suck at doing so I couldn't find any information I wanted.

[Perd Hapley]

Just watch the TV ads.  They'll tell you what to vote for.   

[cosine]

Just watch the TV ads.  They'll tell you what to vote for.   

Oh, you're a lot of help.

That's the problem, TV ads don't tell you anything. The only useful information I've learned from them is that there are going to be a couple of referendums on the ballot.

[The Rabbi]

State election board website?

And it is "referenda" not referendums.

We have a couple here, including defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and a city one requiring property tax hikes to be approved by the voters.

[Sindawe]

Of course there is.  Our "good friends" over at DemocraticUnderground.com have compiled such information on their Research forum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x776#WI

Using Google with the search term "Wisconsin 2006 election referendum" give back this as one of the results.

http://elections.state.wi.us/category.asp?linkcatid=1747&

I hear ya about searching the 'Net cosine.  Ya know the information is out there, the tricky part is phrasing the search correctly.  ( On Edit: and making sure the spelling is correct  DOH!)

[cosine]

http://elections.state.wi.us/category.asp?linkcatid=1747&

I hear ya about searching the 'Net cosine.  Ya know the information is out there, the tricky part is phrasing the search correctly.  ( On Edit: and making sure the spelling is correct  DOH!)

I just found that link. It had all the information I wanted. Thanks Rabbi and Sindawe. (Oh, and thanks for the grammar help too.  )

[roo_ster]

Google your local election board.

Grammar Nazi Alert! (Or Maybe Grammar Libertine?)
I would make the case for "referendums"  (though not for referen-dumbs).  Were we communicating in latin, referendums is obviously incorrect.  But, given that we are communicating in English, I make the case for using Americanized English grammar.  In our currently-agreed-upon language of commo, "referendums" is good-to-go.

Besides, most dictionaries list both referenda & referendums as the plural of referendum.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referenda

I would also make the case for using the English name for foreign cities & countries significant enough for us or the English to so name...and pronouncing the names of foreign places using standard English pronunciation rules.  Not even the grand poo-bah of Qatar pronounces his country's name "cutter" when he speaks English, he pronounces it "kuh-tar."

Last, folks with names that originate from tonal languages had best get over the fact that the rest of the world is going to mangle your name in your ears.

OK, I feel better, now.

[Desertdog]

In California everything that is on the ballot is printed in our voter pamplet.  It includes the wording of the propositions, pros and cons, and summeries of the candidates. 

I would think the other states would have something similar.

[The Rabbi]

You can make the case that

"I aint been studying that none" is correct English, or that "clips" is the correct term for those little boxes you stick in the bottom of pistols.
But it dont make it so.

[Ezekiel]

You can make the case that

"I aint been studying that none" is correct English, or that "clips" is the correct term for those little boxes you stick in the bottom of pistols.
But it dont make it so.

It is at least as correct as the absolute dismissal of ad hoc Latin dictate when contained within an English sentence.

In sum, the application of an overriding English-speaking majority to grammar contained within an English sentence appears to be the mantra.  I don't presume the vast portion of English speakers would agree with your personal argument of bastardized English grammar as an outstanding model for argument.

"Jfruser nailed it."

[Standing Wolf]

I would make the case for "referendums"  (though not for referen-dumbs).  Were we communicating in latin, referendums is obviously incorrect.  But, given that we are communicating in English, I make the case for using Americanized English grammar.  In our currently-agreed-upon language of commo, "referendums" is good-to-go.

The question isn't of grammar, but orthography.

Personally, I believe precedence counts more than convenience; then again, I don't write in sentence fragments, nor do I spatter hyphens hither, thither, and yon, nor did I throw away my college Latin dictionary.