Wow, wotta ballot !

[230RN]

Fifteen inches of light cardboard or heavy peper covered on one side, halfway covered on the other side with issues.

Over forty of them. Judicial appointments, amendments to the State constitution, building heights around the old now-empty hospital, parents' school choices, hunting predators like lynx and mountain lions and such....

Thankfully a very detailed and fair-minded 110 page booklet was provided explaining the pros and cons and impacts of each issue.  Took me over two hours to go over it in detail and I still have to go over the judicial appointments.

The best one can do with the judges is to compare the percentages of lawyers who think the judge meets the requirements.  Most of them are over "70%," whatever that means. I shall probably implement my rule of okaying them if I don't know anything about them.  I should have asked each of them by mail the definitions of "abridged" in the First Amendment and "infringed" in the Second Amendment but I would bet that any answers would be full of legal BS which don't answer the question without an actual case.

<wry grin>

Well, I guess I'll just vote "Retain in Office" for the 15 judges on the ballot and forgive myself for not digging deeper on that one.  My mother was the only one who ever thought I was perfect.

Whew. 

Terry, 230RN

[Ben]

I hate those county level positions. Idaho is severely lacking on the voter pamphlet side on pretty much everything, but for Federal and State people and issues, I can always find information with a little interwebz digging. With county positions, especially someone with a common name, it's nearly impossible to find anything. Half the time I just do eenie meenie miney moe.

[cordex]

I tend to not vote if there is no opposing candidate, and vote to remove judges whenever I don’t have better information.

The only race I wasn’t entirely sure about this year was school board, so I reached out to all the candidates. Pretty sure I know what I’m going to do there.

[MillCreek]

Washington state does an excellent voters pamphlet for the state level and county level positions.  I sat down yesterday and filled out the ballot.

[Brad Johnson]

We voted yesterday. Our ballots were blessedly brief, more so than the past few years. Modest wait. Overheard someone in line say they'd come on Monday (first day of early voting) and the line was more than 100 deep.

Brad

[zahc]

I follow the "vote to remove all judges" strategy too. Basically judges always get re-elected, usually with a 2/3 or so margin. So the logic is that bad judges never get voted out because people just voting yes with no information. I do my part by voting no for every single judge, so hopefully maybe the worst judge of the lot will actually get voted out. As far as I can tell it's still not enough because judges hardly ever get voted out anyway.

Other than that, pretty much you have to go talk to people. You can't believe what you see in the media and you can't believe what the politicians themselves say. There's a local guy with very slimy marketing materials that are basically opposite of what his revealed stances are, but he's just being dishonest to try to get votes. I could have easily fallen for it. Unless you manage to see a good debate, or talk to them personally at an event or something, you have no idea.

[HankB]

Here in TX, I early voted on 10/21, the first day. Good turnout. The ballot was easy to fill out - about 2/3 of the down ballot "choices" were judicial positions - like Judge of the Probate Court - with D's running unopposed. (I live in Travis County, just outside Austin, which is referred to as "Moscow on the Colorado.")

My philosophy when someone is running unopposed is to leave that spot blank - if they see that the unopposed candidates get significantly fewer votes than the total cast, MAYBE they'll realize the people in those positions aren't really supported. Or MAYBE the R's will see few votes for some of those positions and conclude they're vulnerable, and run someone against them next time.

Or maybe I'm just delusional by hoping good things might eventually happen in a D stronghold like Travis County, TX. 

[Ben]

I'm doing my early voting when I hit the city next Tuesday. My county has three sites set up, and mine is the Elk's Lodge, which is ginormous so there's never a wait.

At least usually. I've been hearing all kinds of news from around the country this year that early voting numbers are way up, with much bigger numbers than usual for Republicans, which I guess is unusual compared to normal. As much as I'm now in favor of "Make Election Day a holiday, and that's your day to vote.", I'm glad to see Rs fighting fire with fire on the early voting thing.

[grampster]

We've already voted and turned in our ballots at the township office.  I never vote for any non opposed candidates.  As for judges, the unspoken rule in the legal community around here is that no one is supposed to run against an incumbent judge.

[230RN]

We've already voted and turned in our ballots at the township office.  I never vote for any non opposed candidates.  As for judges, the unspoken rule in the legal community around here is that no one is supposed to run against an incumbent judge.

^ Interesting...  And thanks for that tidbit. (Reading between the lines, I can see how a lawyer running against a judge and losing might prejudice the winning judge against that lawyer's cases in future.  Yup.  Makes sense.)

But as of this AM, I still haven't filled in any blanks on the 15 Judges and on seeing some of the responses above, I called the local League of Women Voters in Jefferson County (which is easy to contact, I have found in the past*) and asked if leaving choices blank would invalidate my ballot.  Her answer was no, it would not invalidate the ballot.

Edited to add:  Your situation may vary, so do your own checking.

So I guess I don't have to feel guilty about choosing "Retain" or "Not Retain" on the judges.  I hope I can rely on SCOTUS' recent history, language, and tradition concept to keep our local judges in line with Constitutional issues instead of grilling them on "abridge" (as in 1A) and "infringe" (as in 2A).

With that cop-out assuaging my guilt, I will drop-box the ballot tomorrow with all fifteen judicial choices blank.  At least, as has been indirectly pointed out, I won't be encouraging any stinko pinko judges.

Terry, 230RN

* A real live human lady answered within three rings.  Exclamation point !!!!

[230RN]

Here in TX, I early voted on 10/21, the first day. Good turnout. The ballot was easy to fill out - about 2/3 of the down ballot "choices" were judicial positions - like Judge of the Probate Court - with D's running unopposed. (I live in Travis County, just outside Austin, which is referred to as "Moscow on the Colorado.")

My philosophy when someone is running unopposed is to leave that spot blank - if they see that the unopposed candidates get significantly fewer votes than the total cast, MAYBE they'll realize the people in those positions aren't really supported. Or MAYBE the R's will see few votes for some of those positions and conclude they're vulnerable, and run someone against them next time.

Or maybe I'm just delusional by hoping good things might eventually happen in a D stronghold like Travis County, TX. 

Maybe you is delusional and maybe you ain't, but that "vulnerability by the low vote count" is a fun thought to go to bed with.  Somebody please send that concept to the RNC, AKA "The Dumb Party,"

Financing an "unwinnable" campaign with a "call for volunteers" candidate just might turn out to be worth it.

Terry, 230RN

[Bogie]

So, how many of y'all were first-time early voters?
 
I'm hearing that the polling places here in the STL all have lines...

[JTHunter]

In this area, judges running for retention do NOT have "party affiliation" listed.  Co9nsidering the kind of "democrat stronghold" (stranglehold?) ILL-ANNOY is, I never vote for retention of any of them.

[230RN]

In this area, judges running for retention do NOT have "party affiliation" listed.  Co9nsidering the kind of "democrat stronghold" (stranglehold?) ILL-ANNOY is, I never vote for retention of any of them.

Of course they don't usually list Party affiliations.  Judges are supposed to be neutral in all respects. < Terry makes joke, ha-ha.

Terry, 230RN