According to this, we might as well not bother to vote -- but I will.
I hope these polls are more propaganda than reality, that's why we have to be cautious about whatever they may indicate.
Posted on 09/30/2005 4:10:47 PM PDT by calcowgirl
But you didn't answer my question, did you?
["Can you please provide support for this comment?" (that "Proposition 79 will pass")]
Do you actually read my posts?
Yes. I read all of them that you directed to me, and the others. Nowhere did you provide support for your contention that "Proposition 79 will pass".
I understand you other arguments, but that is not what I asked. Are you now retracting your contention?
The problem is the uncertainty.
As I said, if I knew that Prop 79 will fail for sure, than I would be happy to see 78 defeated as well. But there are so many people in CA wanting handouts, including the well off retired people, that I am very concerned about 79 passing. But voting against both with blindfolds, without considering the implication is very dangerous.
Let me repeat? Did you read my earlier post? You clearly didn't. In that one I said:
"I have seen some early polls, which said 79 had a lot of support. "
But you also might want to look at the probabilities. Just as you don't want 79 to pass, I could only presume that you would consider it a waste for 78 to pass if in fact the voters of California truly disapproved of it. And if 79 fails, and 78 passes by a small margin, it would be almost certain that it was imposed on them through blackmail, not approved by them through persuasion. Think not only of 78 itself, but also of the precedent and implications it would have in the future for stampeding voters into approving things that they're actually opposed to.
So like I said, look at the probabilities. What are the actual chances of 79 passing? Looking at the numbers you provided, it appears that the chances are quite small. The chances of 78 passing, if conservatives push through with this strategy, are considerably higher.
Well, those same polls also predict defeat for all of Arnold's other propositions, and I hope that won't be true.
As at other times, it will all depend on the turnout.
According to this, we might as well not bother to vote -- but I will.
I hope these polls are more propaganda than reality, that's why we have to be cautious about whatever they may indicate.
You first said: "As I said repeatedly, 79 will pass."
You now say: "I have seen some early polls, which said 79 had a lot of support. "
If that is all the support you have, I have what I need. Thank you.
OK, so why don't you start posting by the same standards you expect of me: please provide links and multiple substantiations for each one of your statements every time you make them.
As they say, what's sauce for the goose, it's sauce for the gander.
We're already two NO's on both #78 and #79.
The more precise question is "Tell me why the California Republican Party is actively promoting Prop 78?
In spite of the CAGOP's explanation (see reply #27) the motive appears to be that the present administration wants to institutionalize more oversight and control of the pharmaceutical industry.
Greater oversight and control, a fundamental necessity for government, has historically led to higher tax revenues, especially attractive to a cash starved state, with the added bonus of coercing larger political contributions from industry PACs to the CAGOP.
From my perspective black is still black, white is still white, the Pacific Ocean still contains sea water and a NO vote is still a vote of disapproval, regardless of who is sponsoring the scheme to expand the power of government or its taxing authority.
Perhaps because she already had after heleny had already provided you similar factual information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.