Got ballot today. Holy Mackerel, 21 pairs of candidates for President.
My county (Jefferson, Colorado) does a really good job of distributing a voter's guide wich goes into exquisite (and apparently fair-minded) discussion of the ballot isses.
My big long-term problem is how many issues are Colorado Constitution issues which should not be tinkered with every time some loudmouth raises a "personal" issue with it and gets enough petitioners to put his problem on the ballot.
IOW, it's too easy to change it. < humble opinion.
(This, even though I have my own personal issue with something in the Colorado Constitution.)
The biggest ballot problem I always have is with retention of Judges and Justices (again, regarding Colorado.)
I really have to parse out the discussions on each Judge to eke out snippets of information on the Judge's general stand on revisionism versus literalism.
Most of the time the recommendations by the legal/lawyer committees are to retain them. I can only recall one (there may be more I've forgot) where the judge was panned, but the remarks were that {he/she} is aware of the problems raised and is working on resolving them. So unless there's a clear indication (yeah, sure) that the Judge is one uh them damned "living document" buffoons, in all fairness, I have to vote to retain.
I have, now, at ~3AM MDT, filled in the rest of the little circles, and now have to go through the Judicial positions stuff. That's a bit of a project, consisting of 22 closely-printed pages of analyses.
ETA: I OKed all of the judicial reviews, but rwo only on the theory that after all, nobody's perfect.
One other judge would have got my OK even if he were a vampire or a zombie or a cannibal simply because he was an engineer and an Air Force pilot.
Terry, 230RN
