Here's something you might be interested in.
Yesterday Los Angeles had the highest voter turnout in their history...San Francisco had the lowest turnout in any Presidential race.
If there is one thing I got out of 8 long years of college and $60,000 in loans, it's problem solving skills.
Why did so few people in San Diego, and the rest of California EXCEPT Los Angeles care so little about the results?
Los Angeles:
http://cbs2.com/local/voter.turnout.LA.2.857156.html
82% of Los Angeles voters cast ballots.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/29/politics/p155335D19.DTL&feed=rss.news
I will preface by saying that the biggest difference I see between San Diego, San Francisco, OC and Los Angeles (the big winner) is the voting machinery. I know in SD we use Premier (previously Diebold), very unreliable featured in HBO doc. Hacking Democracy. In SF they use Sequoia which Deborah Seiler coincidentally also worked for and has been in the news constantly for its unreliabilty and vulnerability to hacking. The other 2, I know little about, but am very curious.
It just doesnt make sense that an extremely political active city like SF would have a significantly lower turnout rate than Los Angeles.
San Francisco is a city that you would think would shatter records to vote against Prop 8 and for Obama.
Total Registration and Turnout
Registration 477,651
Total Ballots Cast 237,843 49.79 %
Election Day Reporting 191,962
Vote by Mail / Absentee Reporting 45,881
49% turn out for the city of San Francisco? Is this correct?
The city was braced for overwhelming record turnout. All polls showed Prop 8 losing.
Its the lowest Presidential turnout SF has ever had.
11/04/08
Registration 477,651
Turnout 237,843
Percetage 49.79 %
11/02/04 - 2004 November General Election Registration 486,937 Turnout 361,822 Percentage 74.31%
11/07/00 Registration 486,636 Turnout 324,031 Percentage 66.59%
Orange County: Turnout is anemically low: 35% as of 6pm
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Not_Over_Yet_But_OC_Voter_Turnout_Way_Down.html
So our beloved registrar here in San Diego, Deborah Seiler, predicted an astounding 80% turnout last night to vote in this election. And that was pretty consistent with registrars across the country.
www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/pdf/voterstats.pdf These are the up to date voter stats as of 10-28-08. So that is it-- No one could register after that.
We have 76,458 registered voters here in D3. We had 40,593 votes
Thats not close to 80%. That's 53% turnout and 40,000 are registered Democrat and only 13,000 are registered Republican. How did the Republicans run away with this? Stephen was the Democratic Party choice. And Todd Gloria was the Building Industry and Republican Jerry Sanders choice. (Maybe this is why he stayed in their hotel last night).
City Attorney race: An astounding 370, 836 people voted for city attorney. Surely that is 80%. I mean that race was a BIG deal. We have 654,817 registered voters citywide. Thats only 56% turnout.
District 1 D1: Total registered voters: 111,696. Total votes: 62409 . That is 55% voter turnout
District 7 D7: Total registered voters 77,066 Total votes: 44180 That's 57% voter turnout
Presidential:
Well how many registered voters are in SD County 1,488,157. This is as of 10-20-08
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror_102008.htm OK So surely everyone voted for President. Lets look at those numbers.
Total votes: 969,950 That is only 65%.
But that is county. Why does the county as a whole have a significantly higher voter turnout than the city.
Do you think 25% of people decided that Obama had won and decided not to vote at the last minute? I was glued to CNN and they did not begin announcing any state wins until about 6pm and they did not announce Obama had won until 8pm.
Additionally, following this logic, you would have seen a similar turnout along the West Coast. Oregon's turnout was 84%.
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_110408_oregon_presidential_election.17d4d933c.html
I'm just asking questions. I think we always need to ask lots of questions to protect our Democracy.
Oregon has one of the safest voting systems--because they are HAND COUNTED! Yes a state is still hand counting votes and it is by far the safest means possible.
I think these CA results at the very least call into question the use of voting and electronic scanning machines made w/ proprietary software, which can all be hacked. And most importantly which was created by Republican companies. All I want is to know that my vote really does count. I have not felt that why ever since California got all electronic. I personally think California should go back to the days of good 'ol fashion hand jobs.
Yesterday Los Angeles had the highest voter turnout in their history...San Francisco had the lowest turnout in any Presidential race.
If there is one thing I got out of 8 long years of college and $60,000 in loans, it's problem solving skills.
Why did so few people in San Diego, and the rest of California EXCEPT Los Angeles care so little about the results?
Los Angeles:
http://cbs2.com/local/voter.turnout.LA.2.857156.html
82% of Los Angeles voters cast ballots.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/29/politics/p155335D19.DTL&feed=rss.news
I will preface by saying that the biggest difference I see between San Diego, San Francisco, OC and Los Angeles (the big winner) is the voting machinery. I know in SD we use Premier (previously Diebold), very unreliable featured in HBO doc. Hacking Democracy. In SF they use Sequoia which Deborah Seiler coincidentally also worked for and has been in the news constantly for its unreliabilty and vulnerability to hacking. The other 2, I know little about, but am very curious.
It just doesnt make sense that an extremely political active city like SF would have a significantly lower turnout rate than Los Angeles.
San Francisco is a city that you would think would shatter records to vote against Prop 8 and for Obama.
Total Registration and Turnout
Registration 477,651
Total Ballots Cast 237,843 49.79 %
Election Day Reporting 191,962
Vote by Mail / Absentee Reporting 45,881
49% turn out for the city of San Francisco? Is this correct?
The city was braced for overwhelming record turnout. All polls showed Prop 8 losing.
Its the lowest Presidential turnout SF has ever had.
11/04/08
Registration 477,651
Turnout 237,843
Percetage 49.79 %
11/02/04 - 2004 November General Election Registration 486,937 Turnout 361,822 Percentage 74.31%
11/07/00 Registration 486,636 Turnout 324,031 Percentage 66.59%
Orange County: Turnout is anemically low: 35% as of 6pm
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Not_Over_Yet_But_OC_Voter_Turnout_Way_Down.html
So our beloved registrar here in San Diego, Deborah Seiler, predicted an astounding 80% turnout last night to vote in this election. And that was pretty consistent with registrars across the country.
www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/pdf/voterstats.pdf These are the up to date voter stats as of 10-28-08. So that is it-- No one could register after that.
We have 76,458 registered voters here in D3. We had 40,593 votes
Thats not close to 80%. That's 53% turnout and 40,000 are registered Democrat and only 13,000 are registered Republican. How did the Republicans run away with this? Stephen was the Democratic Party choice. And Todd Gloria was the Building Industry and Republican Jerry Sanders choice. (Maybe this is why he stayed in their hotel last night).
City Attorney race: An astounding 370, 836 people voted for city attorney. Surely that is 80%. I mean that race was a BIG deal. We have 654,817 registered voters citywide. Thats only 56% turnout.
District 1 D1: Total registered voters: 111,696. Total votes: 62409 . That is 55% voter turnout
District 7 D7: Total registered voters 77,066 Total votes: 44180 That's 57% voter turnout
Presidential:
Well how many registered voters are in SD County 1,488,157. This is as of 10-20-08
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror_102008.htm OK So surely everyone voted for President. Lets look at those numbers.
Total votes: 969,950 That is only 65%.
But that is county. Why does the county as a whole have a significantly higher voter turnout than the city.
Do you think 25% of people decided that Obama had won and decided not to vote at the last minute? I was glued to CNN and they did not begin announcing any state wins until about 6pm and they did not announce Obama had won until 8pm.
Additionally, following this logic, you would have seen a similar turnout along the West Coast. Oregon's turnout was 84%.
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_110408_oregon_presidential_election.17d4d933c.html
I'm just asking questions. I think we always need to ask lots of questions to protect our Democracy.
Oregon has one of the safest voting systems--because they are HAND COUNTED! Yes a state is still hand counting votes and it is by far the safest means possible.
I think these CA results at the very least call into question the use of voting and electronic scanning machines made w/ proprietary software, which can all be hacked. And most importantly which was created by Republican companies. All I want is to know that my vote really does count. I have not felt that why ever since California got all electronic. I personally think California should go back to the days of good 'ol fashion hand jobs.