“I took the unusual step of tracking down email addresses for both candidates and sent them a few questions are relevant issues. So far, neither has responded” - David you need to tell them you are chief political editor at the world famous The Racket News. They’ll jump all over themselves to answer.
I did get in touch with both after posting (even though I sent the emails a few days ago). Both responded on Facebook and one actually called me. We talked on the phone for quite a while.
"If there was no Electoral College, small states like Arizona, Ohio and Wisconsin would never see presidential candidates. Contenders would spend all their time in big, metropolitan states where the donors and big media markets are. As the system currently stands, candidates need the small states."
Just to quibble, but I think you're making a category error here. The Electoral College doesn't incentivize candidates to care about small states (how much time do Presidential candidates spend campaigning in Alaska or Vermont?), it incentivizes them to spend time, resources, and attention to closely-split states to add as many "50% + 1 vote" victories as they can to their existing slate of states that will reliably break their way. That's why much more money is poured into Ohio (the 7th MOST populist state in the Union) than Alaska and Vermont will ever see. (Arizona is the 14th most populous and Wisconsin checks in at #21.[1])
That's true, it does have to be a combination of being smaller and being winnable for them to really pay attention, but Nevada and New Mexico, two other recent battlegrounds, clock in at 31 and 37 on the list of populous states.
The analyses of propositions and initiatives appear to be factual. The candidate statements give their side of the issues, exactly as expected. I suppose your research would be to get the pros and cons for each candidate. The booklet would be useful but it sems to me that it would be costly.
I remain convinced that in-person voting is best and that election days should be holidays - except where accommodations for jobs such as military, utility workers and even David Thornton who might be required to fly a plane load of executives to an industry meeting that day.
:shrug: Permanent absentee since 2004. Works great.
How do you get information on candidates and propositions/measures for in-person voting? Is that information mailed weeks prior to the election, or not provided at all?
Make it a holiday first, and once shown to have a neutral or positive effect then restrict to in-person only with various exceptions. This would likely only apply to Federal elections, unless of course we're going to start mandating how states/counties run all elections...
Candidates file for a race well in advance. Sample ballots are published on-line and in newspapers. Research requires that voters care enough to make informed decisions. If they don't, no amount of mailed information will change that. Every mailbox is stuffed with campaign literature weeks or months in advance of early voting.
That seems less than ideal compared to a county-produced guide for as important a function as voting - especially to have the neutral technical details.
“I took the unusual step of tracking down email addresses for both candidates and sent them a few questions are relevant issues. So far, neither has responded” - David you need to tell them you are chief political editor at the world famous The Racket News. They’ll jump all over themselves to answer.
I did get in touch with both after posting (even though I sent the emails a few days ago). Both responded on Facebook and one actually called me. We talked on the phone for quite a while.
"If there was no Electoral College, small states like Arizona, Ohio and Wisconsin would never see presidential candidates. Contenders would spend all their time in big, metropolitan states where the donors and big media markets are. As the system currently stands, candidates need the small states."
Just to quibble, but I think you're making a category error here. The Electoral College doesn't incentivize candidates to care about small states (how much time do Presidential candidates spend campaigning in Alaska or Vermont?), it incentivizes them to spend time, resources, and attention to closely-split states to add as many "50% + 1 vote" victories as they can to their existing slate of states that will reliably break their way. That's why much more money is poured into Ohio (the 7th MOST populist state in the Union) than Alaska and Vermont will ever see. (Arizona is the 14th most populous and Wisconsin checks in at #21.[1])
[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/states
That's true, it does have to be a combination of being smaller and being winnable for them to really pay attention, but Nevada and New Mexico, two other recent battlegrounds, clock in at 31 and 37 on the list of populous states.
Well, I did my civic duty and filled out my at-home ballot for the June 7 California primary.
It's so much easier to have the time to compare with the voting booklet and do research on-line at the same time.
Interesting idea. I checked it out here.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_official_sample_ballots,_2020
The analyses of propositions and initiatives appear to be factual. The candidate statements give their side of the issues, exactly as expected. I suppose your research would be to get the pros and cons for each candidate. The booklet would be useful but it sems to me that it would be costly.
I remain convinced that in-person voting is best and that election days should be holidays - except where accommodations for jobs such as military, utility workers and even David Thornton who might be required to fly a plane load of executives to an industry meeting that day.
:shrug: Permanent absentee since 2004. Works great.
How do you get information on candidates and propositions/measures for in-person voting? Is that information mailed weeks prior to the election, or not provided at all?
Make it a holiday first, and once shown to have a neutral or positive effect then restrict to in-person only with various exceptions. This would likely only apply to Federal elections, unless of course we're going to start mandating how states/counties run all elections...
Candidates file for a race well in advance. Sample ballots are published on-line and in newspapers. Research requires that voters care enough to make informed decisions. If they don't, no amount of mailed information will change that. Every mailbox is stuffed with campaign literature weeks or months in advance of early voting.
That seems less than ideal compared to a county-produced guide for as important a function as voting - especially to have the neutral technical details.