goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 10:44:08 AM

Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 10:44:08 AM
 :excited:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 8manpick on November 06, 2012, 10:45:15 AM
 :bill: http://coachoftheyear.com/
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: CNS on November 06, 2012, 10:45:44 AM
Is this about who is the most pud still?  I mean, can we just declare one of these the Official Master Thread and declare Daris the winner already?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Trim on November 06, 2012, 10:47:51 AM
Fluoride.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Panjandrum on November 06, 2012, 10:51:35 AM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Unruly on November 06, 2012, 10:54:29 AM
 :thumbs:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 10:56:05 AM
Undecided voter here.

Can anybody tell me anything about the boat tax question on the ballot? Just how outrageous are boat taxes in Kansas, and would lowering them defund anything important? Would my taxes as a non-boat owner be affected if the boat tax gets lowered? tia.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 10:56:17 AM
haven't voted yet.  Jill Stein isn't on the ballot, so looks like Obama for me.

Other elections with two candidates:

Hawk
Phillips
Viar
Boyd
No on all Judges

Unopposed:
no vote on Hueselkamp
yes on vargo, king, regester
no vote on wilkerson

special issues:
NO vote on watercraft property exemption
YES on .5% Sales Tax
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 0.42 on November 06, 2012, 10:57:42 AM
I voted for my town to acquire 70 acres of additional parkland :dance:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: OK_Cat on November 06, 2012, 10:59:18 AM
i voted to keep a part of the oklahoma tax code that charges tax on logos, certificates, and other random stuff.  eff you, give us money.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 11:00:08 AM
Undecided voter here.

Can anybody tell me anything about the boat tax question on the ballot? Just how outrageous are boat taxes in Kansas, and would lowering them defund anything important? Would my taxes as a non-boat owner be affected if the boat tax gets lowered? tia.

YES vote allows lower taxes on boats.  A lot of people seem to think that this would actually increase revenue in Kansas as many people register their boats in other states, but I'm a little dubious.
NO vote means boats are taxed like all other property.

I don't have strong feelings either way, but I would prefer not to give boat owners a tax cut without overwhelming evidence that this increases revenue.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:01:33 AM
Undecided voter here.

Can anybody tell me anything about the boat tax question on the ballot? Just how outrageous are boat taxes in Kansas, and would lowering them defund anything important? Would my taxes as a non-boat owner be affected if the boat tax gets lowered? tia.

YES vote allows lower taxes on boats.  A lot of people seem to think that this would actually increase revenue in Kansas as many people register their boats in other states, but I'm a little dubious.
NO vote means boats are taxed like all other property.

I don't have strong feelings either way, but I would prefer not to give boat owners a tax cut without overwhelming evidence that this increases revenue.

Thanks. I had been leaning toward no.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: CNS on November 06, 2012, 11:03:24 AM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:05:08 AM
Undecided voter here.

Can anybody tell me anything about the boat tax question on the ballot? Just how outrageous are boat taxes in Kansas, and would lowering them defund anything important? Would my taxes as a non-boat owner be affected if the boat tax gets lowered? tia.

YES vote allows lower taxes on boats.  A lot of people seem to think that this would actually increase revenue in Kansas as many people register their boats in other states, but I'm a little dubious.
NO vote means boats are taxed like all other property.

I don't have strong feelings either way, but I would prefer not to give boat owners a tax cut without overwhelming evidence that this increases revenue.

Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:07:04 AM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Yeah, it's bullshit. They probably will not even have to pay taxes on the boats.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: CNS on November 06, 2012, 11:07:32 AM
Undecided voter here.

Can anybody tell me anything about the boat tax question on the ballot? Just how outrageous are boat taxes in Kansas, and would lowering them defund anything important? Would my taxes as a non-boat owner be affected if the boat tax gets lowered? tia.

YES vote allows lower taxes on boats.  A lot of people seem to think that this would actually increase revenue in Kansas as many people register their boats in other states, but I'm a little dubious.
NO vote means boats are taxed like all other property.

I don't have strong feelings either way, but I would prefer not to give boat owners a tax cut without overwhelming evidence that this increases revenue.

Paranoid side of me thinks that there is something else this bill that allows the gov to do something unrelated  and that they are using boats to get it through.  Otherwise, why pass something for boats.  I mean, who give a eff about boats in KS? 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 11:07:50 AM
write in vote for even higher taxes on votes for me
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: The1BigWillie on November 06, 2012, 11:09:22 AM
I voted for Pedro...

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft2.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcRmoFx74liUNS22No-NOd-XWjAoaxe61LAxS4vPy-n0ApK71Kcsk82j7HDnSA&hash=7b3c680905dc03fdf5133001f9690393c1f257fa)
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 06, 2012, 11:09:52 AM
since jill stein isnt on the ballot, i guess it will be gary johnson

no on the tax thing cause it just makes taxes even more complicated
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:10:33 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:13:37 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:14:46 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 11:16:10 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

Clearly someone has never enjoyed the beauty of an afternoon at one of Kansas' finest man-made lakes.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 11:18:06 AM
Fluoride.

hell yes, I also voted to keep boat owners paying like a million percent in property tax, eff boats




sorry boat owners :cry:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWican on November 06, 2012, 11:18:40 AM
Approximately 10,000 watercraft are registered in the surrounding states to Kansas residents to avoid the 30% property tax rule.  Watercraft includes boats, jet-skis, canoes, sailboats, etc. Drive around a marina or place that stores boats and see how many tags are Kansas.  I think it's pathetic that if I signed a waiver saying I operated the boat over 50% of the time in Oklahoma that I would save $1,500 bucks a year.     
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:19:29 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:22:09 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.

That's $750 per boat.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:24:42 AM
Approximately 10,000 watercraft are registered in the surrounding states to Kansas residents to avoid the 30% property tax rule.  Watercraft includes boats, jet-skis, canoes, sailboats, etc. Drive around a marina or place that stores boats and see how many tags are Kansas.  I think it's pathetic that if I signed a waiver saying I operated the boat over 50% of the time in Oklahoma that I would save $1,500 bucks a year.   

The real question is what is this money funding? We have serious water and reservoir issues in Kansas and I would like to think this tax is being put toward that. The tax would have to be lowered by $600 per boat to be as cheap as Oklahoma, and we would only be gaining 10,000 registrations by doing that. I fail to see how this could increase revenues.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:25:19 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.

That's $750 per boat.

Still eff that. (stupid math error)
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:26:28 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.

That's $750 per boat.

Still eff that. (stupid math error)

Why should non-boat owners subsidize boating recreation in Kansas? That sounds like socialism to me.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:28:26 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.

That's $750 per boat.

Still eff that. (stupid math error)

Why should non-boat owners subsidize boating recreation in Kansas? That sounds like socialism to me.

Because that's not were that tax money will go.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:29:00 AM
Seriously, how many taxable boats are there in the state of Kansas. If this was a coastal state I could understand. I am voting yes to help allow flexibility in the tax policy on boats.

about 85,000

so not that many, got it.

That accounts for $63.75 million.

In taxes per year? $750,000 per boat. eff that.

That's $750 per boat.

Still eff that. (stupid math error)

Why should non-boat owners subsidize boating recreation in Kansas? That sounds like socialism to me.

Because that's not were that tax money will go.

Where does it go, then?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 11:30:00 AM
I'm with stormnut, I don't think the 100% right wing KS govornment will use the tax money wisely.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 11:33:00 AM
Fluoride.

hell yes, I also voted to keep boat owners paying like a million percent in property tax, eff boats




sorry boat owners :cry:

Man, Wichita cracks me up sometimes.  Heard an anti-flouride commercial coming back up from Dallas this weekend.  Couldn't believe it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:33:27 AM
I'm with stormnut, I don't think the 100% right wing KS govornment will use the tax money wisely.

Maybe they will send it to Washington to pay off the national debt like they did all of the money they received to transition to Obamacare.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 11:36:04 AM
I'm with stormnut, I don't think the 100% right wing KS govornment will use the tax money wisely.

Maybe they will send it to Washington to pay off the national debt like they did all of the money they received to transition to Obamacare.

did that actually happen?  :sdeek:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Saulbadguy on November 06, 2012, 11:37:55 AM
Seems like people who buy boats are the most likely to go bankrupt. Causation or correllation?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 11:38:28 AM
Seems like people who buy boats are the most likely to go bankrupt. Causation or correllation?

also above ground pools
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 11:42:14 AM
I'm with stormnut, I don't think the 100% right wing KS govornment will use the tax money wisely.

Maybe they will send it to Washington to pay off the national debt like they did all of the money they received to transition to Obamacare.

did that actually happen?  :sdeek:

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/09/292201/kansas-brownback-accepts-then-returns-health-law-grant/?mobile=nc (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/09/292201/kansas-brownback-accepts-then-returns-health-law-grant/?mobile=nc)

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/print-edition/2012/09/28/brownback-doesnt-serve-kansans-with.html?page=all (http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/print-edition/2012/09/28/brownback-doesnt-serve-kansans-with.html?page=all)
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 11:42:47 AM
I'm with stormnut, I don't think the 100% right wing KS govornment will use the tax money wisely.

Agree. The gov (dem or Republic) has too much of my money already. Don't need any more. Even if I don't own a boat.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWican on November 06, 2012, 11:43:08 AM
Approximately 10,000 watercraft are registered in the surrounding states to Kansas residents to avoid the 30% property tax rule.  Watercraft includes boats, jet-skis, canoes, sailboats, etc. Drive around a marina or place that stores boats and see how many tags are Kansas.  I think it's pathetic that if I signed a waiver saying I operated the boat over 50% of the time in Oklahoma that I would save $1,500 bucks a year.   

The real question is what is this money funding? We have serious water and reservoir issues in Kansas and I would like to think this tax is being put toward that. The tax would have to be lowered by $600 per boat to be as cheap as Oklahoma, and we would only be gaining 10,000 registrations by doing that. I fail to see how this could increase revenues.

The money is treated as any other property tax and is lumped in and dispersed as such.  Where KDWPT is hanging their hat is that those 10,000 watercraft will be registered in Kansas and, therefore, are subject to KDWPT registration.  That would immediately recapture $32.50 each in registration fees, for $325,000 total.  That money is directly earmarked for KDWPT boating for things like dock upkeep, ramps, marina inspections, boat inspections, enforcing vessel operation, etc.

In addition to this argument, they believe that the lessening of the property taxes on boats will increase boat ownership, the valuation of the boats being purchased, and myriad of other things.   

The serious water and reservoir issues were never addressed and will never be solved by this property tax rule.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 11:44:16 AM
Fluoride.

hell yes, I also voted to keep boat owners paying like a million percent in property tax, eff boats




sorry boat owners :cry:

Man, Wichita cracks me up sometimes.  Heard an anti-flouride commercial coming back up from Dallas this weekend.  Couldn't believe it.

they want to give us poison :runaway: FWIW the people pouring cash into the anti-fluoride campaign are primarily from outside the state (Florida of course) however there are tens of thousands of morons who really think that the city wants to poison the water
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: star seed 7 on November 06, 2012, 11:44:33 AM
Anyone i know with a boat or above ground pool is an idiot and a republican.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Fedor on November 06, 2012, 11:45:42 AM
I think there are alot of canceling votes on the boat issue.  I voted yes on boats.  I did not do any research though so I was not sure if I was lowering or raising boat taxes.   :dunno:  Also I wanted to vote for fluoride but I am not allowed.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 11:48:06 AM
You guys are just puppets for Big Fluoride.  :flush:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 11:56:34 AM
Kansans can write-in Stein. :dunno:

http://www.jillstein.org/ballot
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 11:57:07 AM
I think there are alot of canceling votes on the boat issue.  I voted yes on boats.  I did not do any research though so I was not sure if I was lowering or raising boat taxes.   :dunno:  Also I wanted to vote for fluoride but I am not allowed.

a yes vote changes the constitution which would in theory give the state government power to lower taxes on boats.  When I become governor in 2038 I'm going to raise boat taxes to about 86%.  eff boats.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: TheHamburglar on November 06, 2012, 11:58:20 AM
i voted to keep a part of the oklahoma tax code that charges tax on logos, certificates, and other random stuff.  eff you, give us money.

How did you vote on allowing the Oklahoma Water Resources Board to issue bonds?   :ohno:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 11:59:25 AM
I voted for Jill Stein because we matched up on the quiz and her website didn't have any policies that really bothered me other than renegotiating free trade agreements. But pretty much everyone says they'll do that.

I voted for the State assembly guy that wasn't the one Oakland Mayor Jean Quan was campaigning for at my Bart station, so that made me feel good. All the other offices were either unopposed democrats or townies I didn't know anything about.

I also voted NO on the GMO labeling, yes on the Union payroll deduction thing, yes on repealing the death penalty, yes on amending three strikes, yes for Oakland zoo funding.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: OK_Cat on November 06, 2012, 12:00:59 PM
i voted to keep a part of the oklahoma tax code that charges tax on logos, certificates, and other random stuff.  eff you, give us money.

How did you vote on allowing the Oklahoma Water Resources Board to issue bonds?   :ohno:

i said no, eff you and figure out how to pay for your own crap.

i also said keep the dhs and eff mary fallin, she has to be apart of the pardon process
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sys on November 06, 2012, 12:01:36 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 12:02:06 PM
Kansans can write-in Stein. :dunno:

http://www.jillstein.org/ballot

crap forgot about writing her in.  Can we just focus on getting her to Washington as a rep or Senator on the Dem ticket?  Why waste a potentially great advocate being a martyr in the damn Green Party?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Panjandrum on November 06, 2012, 12:04:50 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Eh, but it may still cause people to pay more to smoke, which I'm happy about in a cruel sort of way.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 12:06:36 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

I voted no on the out-of-state business tax. forgot about that one.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 12:08:46 PM
Also can we talk about why that damn boat question was two full pages long, woof.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: nicname on November 06, 2012, 12:10:41 PM
Voting in Manhattan now:  Townies tell me what issues are important to you (local only) and I will vote for who give best argument.

ywia

Also, I already looked at KK's stuff so he is the early leader. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWican on November 06, 2012, 12:17:00 PM
Also can we talk about why that damn boat question was two full pages long, woof.

I thought since it was a constitutional amendment change, most of it was relisting the classes of exempt things from the original amendment (mostly agricultural related).
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Institutional Control on November 06, 2012, 12:19:17 PM
Conservatives here at work seem pretty confident that Romney will win.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Trim on November 06, 2012, 12:25:22 PM
I skipped about 2/3 of it. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 06, 2012, 12:27:06 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Eh, but it may still cause people to pay more to smoke, which I'm happy about in a cruel sort of way.

This is a tax on the poor, and I don't believe it will help education, yet it will take more money from a group of people (smokers) made up mostly of a lower income demographic. 

No. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 12:45:34 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 12:46:57 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.

yeah, I voted no on that hike. The school ads were hella misleading. (<-local term)
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: ben ji on November 06, 2012, 12:51:00 PM
Hey guyz, stopped by my parents house on my lunch break, dad was listening to rush and apparently the early polling is going good for the pubs?!?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 12:59:39 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.

yeah, I voted no on that hike. The school ads were hella misleading. (<-local term)

Was the union deduction issue just that people could voluntarily submit paperwork to have it deducted by payroll or are California districts closed shops?  As a right-to-work state I think the payroll deduction is a good counter-balance.  Unions will be completely irrelevant if they aren't.  It is mostly a small dedicated group that negotiates now with little to no input from the majority other than a pro-forma vote on the negotiated agreement, with massive disinterest.  If it goes away and people vote to dissolve the union, working conditions, salary, benefits will all be significantly worse.

Clarification:  my point about everything after right-to-work was about Kansas.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 01:11:15 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.

yeah, I voted no on that hike. The school ads were hella misleading. (<-local term)

Was the union deduction issue just that people could voluntarily submit paperwork to have it deducted by payroll or are California districts closed shops?  As a right-to-work state I think the payroll deduction is a good counter-balance.  Unions will be completely irrelevant if they aren't.  It is mostly a small dedicated group that negotiates now with little to no input from the majority other than a pro-forma vote on the negotiated agreement, with massive disinterest.  If it goes away and people vote to dissolve the union, working conditions, salary, benefits will all be significantly worse.

The prop allows union workers to opt in if they want automatic payroll deduction for the purpose of campaign contributions. Same for corporate employees. Basically allows all employees to contribute to anybody they wish or not at all. Pretty simple. Unions are freaking out because it could allow for a more balanced government in CA that is now basically owned a and run by the unions.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: DOOM_Catz on November 06, 2012, 01:15:18 PM
I'm pretty pro boats. I love going out and fishing or just riding around in circles in the middle of the lake. Also, as a person who cannot swim, I'm pretty pro well kept docks. Therefore, I voted to create an incentive to register and pay taxes on boats in Kansas. Lets get whatever we can out of these boat owners.

I'm also the son of a father who sold his boat once we moved to Kansas because a) the fishing here blows and b) the property tax on them was ridiculous.

All in all, I'm still pretty pissed that I looked like some kind of dummy at the polling booth because I spent forever reading what the hell the vote was for on this boat tax issue. I mean, SERIOUSLY, ZERO warning about this being on the ballot.

I voted yes.

Voting in Manhattan now:  Townies tell me what issues are important to you (local only) and I will vote for who give best argument.

ywia

Also, I already looked at KK's stuff so he is the early leader. 

I also voted yes on the 1/2 cent sales tax. Seems like I won't miss what I have already have been paying. Also, I want all the non-townies to pay for when they come into town on Friday and think they can just have the run of the my town.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Panjandrum on November 06, 2012, 01:43:27 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Eh, but it may still cause people to pay more to smoke, which I'm happy about in a cruel sort of way.

This is a tax on the poor, and I don't believe it will help education, yet it will take more money from a group of people (smokers) made up mostly of a lower income demographic. 

No.

The poor shouldn't be spending that much money on cigarettes.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 01:52:37 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fboingboing.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FVERTED.jpg&hash=747bc99c30733ba550a099024f8e806a05b7a53c)
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: slobber on November 06, 2012, 01:55:24 PM
I voted for A WINNER!
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Institutional Control on November 06, 2012, 02:01:49 PM
I live in Texas, my vote didn't matter.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 0.42 on November 06, 2012, 02:03:39 PM
I live in Texas, my vote didn't matter.

i voted primarily so i could cast a ballot for local issues and candidates.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 06, 2012, 02:12:12 PM
I voted for Republicans and Democrats.

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sys on November 06, 2012, 02:16:03 PM
Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children.

good, i don't have children, don't particularly like them.  do like paying for the govt we have (if we're going to have it).
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWmeister on November 06, 2012, 02:18:45 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fboingboing.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FVERTED.jpg&hash=747bc99c30733ba550a099024f8e806a05b7a53c)

You're better than that meme, SD
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sys on November 06, 2012, 02:21:02 PM
Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children.

good, i don't have children, don't particularly like them.  do like paying for the govt we have (if we're going to have it).

also, i like the gov.  i want him to be happy.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Fedor on November 06, 2012, 02:21:36 PM
I'm pretty pro boats. I love going out and fishing or just riding around in circles in the middle of the lake. Also, as a person who cannot swim, I'm pretty pro well kept docks. Therefore, I voted to create an incentive to register and pay taxes on boats in Kansas. Lets get whatever we can out of these boat owners.

I'm also the son of a father who sold his boat once we moved to Kansas because a) the fishing here blows and b) the property tax on them was ridiculous.

All in all, I'm still pretty pissed that I looked like some kind of dummy at the polling booth because I spent forever reading what the hell the vote was for on this boat tax issue. I mean, SERIOUSLY, ZERO warning about this being on the ballot.

I voted yes.

Voting in Manhattan now:  Townies tell me what issues are important to you (local only) and I will vote for who give best argument.

ywia

Also, I already looked at KK's stuff so he is the early leader. 

I also voted yes on the 1/2 cent sales tax. Seems like I won't miss what I have already have been paying. Also, I want all the non-townies to pay for when they come into town on Friday and think they can just have the run of the my town.
What is the revenue for the 0.5 cent sales tax used for? 
i loved the 1 cent sales tax in Sedgwick County that got us a sweet arena. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on November 06, 2012, 02:27:15 PM
I'm pretty pro boats. I love going out and fishing or just riding around in circles in the middle of the lake. Also, as a person who cannot swim, I'm pretty pro well kept docks. Therefore, I voted to create an incentive to register and pay taxes on boats in Kansas. Lets get whatever we can out of these boat owners.

I'm also the son of a father who sold his boat once we moved to Kansas because a) the fishing here blows and b) the property tax on them was ridiculous.

All in all, I'm still pretty pissed that I looked like some kind of dummy at the polling booth because I spent forever reading what the hell the vote was for on this boat tax issue. I mean, SERIOUSLY, ZERO warning about this being on the ballot.

I voted yes.

Voting in Manhattan now:  Townies tell me what issues are important to you (local only) and I will vote for who give best argument.

ywia

Also, I already looked at KK's stuff so he is the early leader. 

I also voted yes on the 1/2 cent sales tax. Seems like I won't miss what I have already have been paying. Also, I want all the non-townies to pay for when they come into town on Friday and think they can just have the run of the my town.
What is the revenue for the 0.5 cent sales tax used for? 
i loved the 1 cent sales tax in Sedgwick County that got us a sweet arena.


Roads and bridges in Riley County. It should pass in a landslide
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 06, 2012, 02:30:44 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Eh, but it may still cause people to pay more to smoke, which I'm happy about in a cruel sort of way.

This is a tax on the poor, and I don't believe it will help education, yet it will take more money from a group of people (smokers) made up mostly of a lower income demographic. 

No.

The poor shouldn't be spending that much money on cigarettes.

Smoking cigarettes has bad consequences anyway.  If people choose to do so they pay with their bodies.  Let the smokers be. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 02:34:13 PM
cartierfor3 is a winston guy imo
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Trim on November 06, 2012, 02:34:47 PM
So there's people in Ohio and Pennsylvania sitting around all day that are now going to go vote for _____ because they flew into a local airport for 20 minutes?

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 06, 2012, 02:36:59 PM
cartierfor3 is a winston guy imo

not yet, but thinking of starting
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 02:39:40 PM
So there's people in Ohio and Pennsylvania sitting around all day that are now going to go vote for _____ because they flew into a local airport for 20 minutes?

seems like as good a reason as any
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 8manpick on November 06, 2012, 02:41:47 PM
 :sdeek: :horrorsurprise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aNd5nQULy0s#!
Sorry if I luked it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: wetwillie on November 06, 2012, 02:52:43 PM
I voted for romney, but i think the chad may have been left hanging
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: p1k3 on November 06, 2012, 03:00:31 PM
I may or may not have voted
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 03:03:16 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 03:10:06 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

 :lol:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: p1k3 on November 06, 2012, 03:17:59 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 03:19:26 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: p1k3 on November 06, 2012, 03:20:50 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

of course I do
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 03:22:15 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

I plan on doing my fair share of complaining, too, p1k3.
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 03:22:25 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

of course I do

YOU'RE NOT ABOVE THE LAW!!!
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 03:23:00 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

I plan on doing my fair share of complaining, too, p1k3.

You better have voted!
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 03:25:37 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

I plan on doing my fair share of complaining, too, p1k3.

You better have voted!

Not yet, but I will after work.
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: "storm"nut on November 06, 2012, 03:27:12 PM
I voted. So I can rough ridin' complain when that rough ridin' socialist gets reelected.

I get to complain either way. Hedged my bet

No you don't. Shut the eff up.

I plan on doing my fair share of complaining, too, p1k3.

You better have voted!

Not yet, but I will after work.

Right to complain granted after your vote has been verified.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: treysolid on November 06, 2012, 03:28:20 PM
really on the ballot in the state of florida:

Quote
Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

my response: eff THAT crap.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 06, 2012, 03:30:25 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 03:32:02 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.

yeah, I voted no on that hike. The school ads were hella misleading. (<-local term)

Was the union deduction issue just that people could voluntarily submit paperwork to have it deducted by payroll or are California districts closed shops?  As a right-to-work state I think the payroll deduction is a good counter-balance.  Unions will be completely irrelevant if they aren't.  It is mostly a small dedicated group that negotiates now with little to no input from the majority other than a pro-forma vote on the negotiated agreement, with massive disinterest.  If it goes away and people vote to dissolve the union, working conditions, salary, benefits will all be significantly worse.

The prop allows union workers to opt in if they want automatic payroll deduction for the purpose of campaign contributions. Same for corporate employees. Basically allows all employees to contribute to anybody they wish or not at all. Pretty simple. Unions are freaking out because it could allow for a more balanced government in CA that is now basically owned a and run by the unions.

Yeah if it is expanding the right, that is fine.  I mean I think charities and interest groups should have free reign at tax time and on payrolls.  It is convenient and proven to increase donations.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 04:26:59 PM
:sdeek: :horrorsurprise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aNd5nQULy0s#!
Sorry if I luked it.

that's hilarious, that last dude was real drizzunk
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: williewest on November 06, 2012, 04:29:18 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance. 
Title: Re: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 8manpick on November 06, 2012, 04:32:06 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.
Didn't mhk do/try to do this recently?
Title: Re: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 0.42 on November 06, 2012, 04:32:29 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.
Didn't mhk do/try to do this recently?

Yes, pretty sure it passed :shakesfist:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 04:33:36 PM
johnson, not the incumbant dem senator, dem asian military guy us rep, various coinpick local 'pubs, yes on gov's tax hike, yes on 2 yr budget, yes on limiting union pol influence, yes on abolishing death penalty, yes on ammend 3 strikes, yes on gmo labels, no on the other tax hike, yes on tax out of state business, yes on local libraries funding.

can't recall the other ballot initiatives i either voted for or against, but i love them all.  love voting on stuff.

Gov's tax hike is a sham, none of the $6 billion will make it to children - it will go into an account labeled for education and right out the other end to the general fund, and if it doesn't pass, he won't cut any money to schools.

yeah, I voted no on that hike. The school ads were hella misleading. (<-local term)

Was the union deduction issue just that people could voluntarily submit paperwork to have it deducted by payroll or are California districts closed shops?  As a right-to-work state I think the payroll deduction is a good counter-balance.  Unions will be completely irrelevant if they aren't.  It is mostly a small dedicated group that negotiates now with little to no input from the majority other than a pro-forma vote on the negotiated agreement, with massive disinterest.  If it goes away and people vote to dissolve the union, working conditions, salary, benefits will all be significantly worse.

The prop allows union workers to opt in if they want automatic payroll deduction for the purpose of campaign contributions. Same for corporate employees. Basically allows all employees to contribute to anybody they wish or not at all. Pretty simple. Unions are freaking out because it could allow for a more balanced government in CA that is now basically owned a and run by the unions.

Yeah if it is expanding the right, that is fine.  I mean I think charities and interest groups should have free reign at tax time and on payrolls.  It is convenient and proven to increase donations.


Um, that's not what it's doing. It's saying dues collected via payroll deduction can't be used for political donation. There are other parts, too:

http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/prop-32-cheat-sheet-political-contributions-by-payroll.html
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 06, 2012, 04:41:50 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

They are just going to take the original $200M that went to schools, and use this new $200M for schools so that schools still receive nothing more than $200M, but every politician involved will get a new boat/

Eh, but it may still cause people to pay more to smoke, which I'm happy about in a cruel sort of way.

This is a tax on the poor, and I don't believe it will help education, yet it will take more money from a group of people (smokers) made up mostly of a lower income demographic. 

No.

The poor shouldn't be spending that much money on cigarettes.

Smoking cigarettes has bad consequences anyway.  If people choose to do so they pay with their bodies.  Let the smokers be. 

This is cancer loving at it's finest.
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 06, 2012, 04:44:18 PM
I'm voting for Dukakis
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Mr Bread on November 06, 2012, 04:50:36 PM
Nothing more 'merican than votin' on stuff we're ignorant about. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: CNS on November 06, 2012, 04:53:59 PM
Bread, you would have loved the folks around me in line at the poll today.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 04:58:30 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.
  :sdeek::shakesfist:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 06, 2012, 05:02:02 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.
  :sdeek::shakesfist:

I wonder if there were interesting unexpected consequences or just an unexpected amount of bigotry.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Johnny Wichita on November 06, 2012, 05:11:24 PM
No on Flouride (suck it MIR). 

Yes for boats.  Who gives a crap. 

I may or may not have voted for the Libertarian comedian that changed his name to Thomas Jefferson.  Great move on his part.  Big Thomas Jefferson fan here.  Have you been to Monticello?  It's breathtaking. 

JW's prediction is that Romney is going to win. 

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 05:37:10 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.

It's giving the right back to the individuals. Right now, money is literally stolen from union members and they don't have the choice of who they support, or if they even want to support anyone. I would think you would be in favor of individual rights.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sys on November 06, 2012, 06:01:16 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.

public sector unions are literally bankrupting ca cities, kk (not alone, but a big part of the reason).  these are not the weak, flabby little grain state unions you see around you.


i'm kinda sympathetic to the individual's right argument too.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Trim on November 06, 2012, 06:23:29 PM
No on Flouride (suck it MIR). 

It was the phone calls, right?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Johnny Wichita on November 06, 2012, 06:31:14 PM
No on Flouride (suck it MIR). 

It was the phone calls, right?

No.  I didn't get any. 

I've never had a cavity.  With NO fluoride.  Can you believe it?  But seriously, I assume this is mostly a poor person problem.  And if I can help be a part of something that causes them more pain and suffering, great.   
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: p1k3 on November 06, 2012, 06:40:15 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.

public sector unions are literally bankrupting ca cities, kk (not alone, but a big part of the reason).  these are not the weak, flabby little grain state unions you see around you.


i'm kinda sympathetic to the individual's right argument too.

and the private unions are killing all the grocery stores. What a lol fest that state is. Wal Mart is just like :dance:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Trim on November 06, 2012, 06:41:21 PM
No on Flouride (suck it MIR). 

It was the phone calls, right?

No.  I didn't get any. 

I've never had a cavity.  With NO fluoride.  Can you believe it?  But seriously, I assume this is mostly a poor person problem.  And if I can help be a part of something that causes them more pain and suffering, great.   

Can you go put that on facebook so that I can then post it in the hometown facebook posts thread?  T-Y.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Johnny Wichita on November 06, 2012, 06:47:56 PM

 :lol:  :lol:  <---  Trim and JW laughing are asses off at gross, poor people. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 06, 2012, 06:57:14 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.

public sector unions are literally bankrupting ca cities, kk (not alone, but a big part of the reason).  these are not the weak, flabby little grain state unions you see around you.


i'm kinda sympathetic to the individual's right argument too.

Some large cities are spending more than half their budgets on retirement benefits. There is a retired librarian here in San Diego pulling down 120K a year. We recently managed to vote for new employees getting 401K retirements, but the mayors race today will decide whether or not the current employee benefits will be reformed.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 07:24:16 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.

same for Hutchinson.  The ballot option in Hutchinson is exactly the opposite as it is in Salina.  n one of the cities a yes vote abolishes the gay rights ordinance a yes vote in the other city affirms its gay rights ordinance.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 06, 2012, 07:27:51 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.

coworker strolled in this morning, all proud because he voted "yes" so "they stop shoving gays down our throat".  i had fun mocking the crap out of him the rest of the day after i was done :lol: at him for being a dumbass and voting opposite of what he intended
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: wetwillie on November 06, 2012, 07:29:12 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.

coworker strolled in this morning, all proud because he voted "yes" so "they stop shoving gays down our throat".  i had fun mocking the crap out of him the rest of the day after i was done :lol: at him for being a dumbass and voting opposite of what he intended

He voted yes to repeal the ordinance which is what he intended
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 06, 2012, 07:30:50 PM
I'm pretty sure Salina has something on the ballot requesting permission to discriminate against gay people.

This is true.   FYI, the county passed ordinance to STOP discrimination based on sexual orientation, previously.  The vote today is for an ordinance that would repeal the existing ordinance.

coworker strolled in this morning, all proud because he voted "yes" so "they stop shoving gays down our throat".  i had fun mocking the crap out of him the rest of the day after i was done :lol: at him for being a dumbass and voting opposite of what he intended

He voted yes to repeal the ordinance which is what he intended

i meant "no" but am a dumbass (i even have a freaking yard sign, wow) - i started replying to MIR's post first :facepalm:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: kim carnes on November 06, 2012, 07:31:38 PM
todd akin is whipping ass
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: CNS on November 06, 2012, 07:32:27 PM
Kansas disgusts me often.  Civil rights regression.  As Kansas As You Think.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 06, 2012, 07:34:37 PM
I voted yes on taxing people who buy cigarettes to fund $200+ million in education.

Seemed like a win/win.

See, I voted against this but not because the fund is bad or smoking is good but because I want Missouri to be come some world cigarette vendor with the cheapest cigarettes in America.  Would be fascinating.

otherwise, I voted Romney because I saw a picture of Obama fistbumping a guy in a ku hat.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 08:01:45 PM
Re: micat

that sounds like a bad law.  If anything, should expand that right, not restrict it.

public sector unions are literally bankrupting ca cities, kk (not alone, but a big part of the reason).  these are not the weak, flabby little grain state unions you see around you.


i'm kinda sympathetic to the individual's right argument too.

Yeah, that's fair.  I'll defer to you.  In general (along with most issues) low-information blowhards spout off on issues they know nothing about, so I'll leave it to you guys to discuss.

I just know that in Kansas things that are going to be proposed in the House next session are:

-eliminate the ability of unions to use school hours, email, phones, copiers, materials, buildings to meet/talk/organize
-eliminate the ability of unions to use payroll deduction for dues from members

I get the frustrations of cities going bankrupt seeing public sector unions "double dipping" by taking taxpayer dollars, and throwing them back at politicians through payroll deductions for PAC money.  The problem is the same rhetoric you guys are using, is being used in Kansas.  Which is right-to-work.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 06, 2012, 08:10:12 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: SdK on November 06, 2012, 08:10:17 PM
I voted for ND and KSU.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 0.42 on November 06, 2012, 08:12:43 PM
How's everyone doing this evening?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: kim carnes on November 06, 2012, 08:13:12 PM
Obama has absolutely ran the economy into the ground, and yet people are still voting for him.  Its pretty amazing how dumb people are.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: p1k3 on November 06, 2012, 08:15:00 PM
How's everyone doing this evening?

best roast beef sandwich ever
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 08:15:02 PM
How's everyone doing this evening?

I'm doing great 42, you?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: 0.42 on November 06, 2012, 08:17:35 PM
How's everyone doing this evening?

I'm doing great 42, you?

I'm doing pretty well steve dave, thanks for asking.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 08:20:50 PM
Kansas disgusts me often.  Civil rights regression.  As Kansas As You Think.

This is short sighted and dumb, both cities had anti-discrimination ordinances on the books.  There are several liberal cities and states nationwide that don't.  Every time I see one of those bumper stickers that says "Kansas, as bigoted as you think" I want to pull them out of their car and beat their ass.
Title: Re: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 08:23:58 PM
Kansas disgusts me often.  Civil rights regression.  As Kansas As You Think.

This is short sighted and dumb, both cities had anti-discrimination ordinances on the books.  There are several liberal cities and states nationwide that don't.  Every time I see one of those bumper stickers that says "Kansas, as bigoted as you think" I want to pull them out of their car and beat their ass.

I agree those bumper stickers are pretty dumb and other cities don't have anti-discrimination laws...but goddam repealing an anti-discrimination law is rough ridin' awful.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 08:36:28 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Yeah, educational administration is a hell of a racket.  I hope I can get a toe in the door.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 06, 2012, 08:37:26 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Yeah, educational administration is a hell of a racket.  I hope I can get a toe in the door.

Sure, don't reform it, just pocket the cash right KK?

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 08:50:00 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Yeah, educational administration is a hell of a racket.  I hope I can get a toe in the door.

Sure, don't reform it, just pocket the cash right KK?

Are those mutually exclusive?  Hopefully I can be like Strom Thurmond/Robert Byrd and do some incredibly awful, but politically expedient things in my "youth" and then speak passionately later on reversing myself.  Best of both worlds, right?
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 06, 2012, 08:51:32 PM
Go get that money kk
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 06, 2012, 08:52:52 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Yeah, educational administration is a hell of a racket.  I hope I can get a toe in the door.

Sure, don't reform it, just pocket the cash right KK?

Are those mutually exclusive?  Hopefully I can be like Strom Thurmond/Robert Byrd and do some incredibly awful, but politically expedient things in my "youth" and then speak passionately later on reversing myself.  Best of both worlds, right?

So being a public school administrator is akin to being a major racist with an attempted mea culpa on the deathbed.  Thanks for the heads up KK.

Screw the kids, as long as I advance my career. 



Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 08:57:07 PM
Here 6 figured salaried school administrators retire with full benefits at 55, then come back as 6 figure "consultants" . . . 20 plus years of Liberal domination in the gubs mansion and legislature at work.

Meanwhile, $hit public schools, huge drop out rates, and floundering test scores etc. etc.   Solution:  Throw more money at it.

Yeah, educational administration is a hell of a racket.  I hope I can get a toe in the door.

Sure, don't reform it, just pocket the cash right KK?

Are those mutually exclusive?  Hopefully I can be like Strom Thurmond/Robert Byrd and do some incredibly awful, but politically expedient things in my "youth" and then speak passionately later on reversing myself.  Best of both worlds, right?

So being a public school administrator is akin to being a major racist with an attempted mea culpa on the deathbed.  Thanks for the heads up KK.

Screw the kids, as long as I advance my career.

I forgot, it is election night on the politics board and dax forgot that sarcasm exists.

In townie news:

Sydney Carlin/Tom Hawk are both at over 60% with 30% of the vote in.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 06, 2012, 08:57:56 PM
Apparently I struck a nerve with my sarcasm.

Sad KK . . . sad

Title: Re: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 09:02:18 PM
Kansas disgusts me often.  Civil rights regression.  As Kansas As You Think.

This is short sighted and dumb, both cities had anti-discrimination ordinances on the books.  There are several liberal cities and states nationwide that don't.  Every time I see one of those bumper stickers that says "Kansas, as bigoted as you think" I want to pull them out of their car and beat their ass.

I agree those bumper stickers are pretty dumb and other cities don't have anti-discrimination laws...but goddam repealing an anti-discrimination law is rough ridin' awful.

agreed
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Kat Kid on November 06, 2012, 09:04:21 PM
Apparently I struck a nerve with my sarcasm.

Sad KK . . . sad

Oh crap.  Counter-trolled with a sad . . . sad cherry on top.

 :embarrassed:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: OK_Cat on November 06, 2012, 09:12:16 PM
just saw where the d-bag in missouri got his ass beat   :thumbs:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Institutional Control on November 06, 2012, 09:14:28 PM
just saw where the d-bag in missouri got his ass beat   :thumbs:

Legitimately.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: OK_Cat on November 06, 2012, 09:15:03 PM
just saw where the d-bag in missouri got his ass beat   :thumbs:

Legitimately.

 :lol:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: SdK on November 06, 2012, 09:27:38 PM
Yeah the two rapey candidates got beat.  :D
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 06, 2012, 09:44:36 PM
Yeah the two rapey candidates got beat.  :D

thank god.

somehow common sense scores a couple wins
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: j-dub on November 06, 2012, 09:47:59 PM
voted no on the boat thing. seriously considered writing in bill snyds for pres. ended up just writing in ron paul for the hell of it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 09:58:04 PM
So its 10PM and the Sedgwick County election commissioner, Tabatha Lehman, has not released any numbers at all, none, zero.  She is rightly catching hell on Twitter from liberals, conservatives, and all media.  She is not only holding us up, but she's holding up the entire state up with the boat tax results.

To reiterate the largest county in the state hasn't reported a single ballot two hours after the polls have closed.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 06, 2012, 09:58:27 PM
I wrote in john currie for county clerk because there is no one running against the incumbent and I know personally that the incumbent is an bad person.

Maybe my vote made the difference and currie will quit his ad job to be county clerk.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 10:22:15 PM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 06, 2012, 11:31:31 PM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

Is this a Billy Walker/Dustin Dodd(?) reference? Because I made it one in my head and smiled.
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 06, 2012, 11:36:01 PM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

unreal.  what's the end game?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Panjandrum on November 06, 2012, 11:40:41 PM
I think I saw that the cigarette tax didn't go through in Missouri.  Weird.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 11:51:54 PM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

Is this a Billy Walker/Dustin Dodd(?) reference? Because I made it one in my head and smiled.

yep!  "Dow (Dustin) gotta go"
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2012, 11:55:56 PM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

unreal.  what's the end game?

she finally released some of the numbers at 11PM, 4 hours after the polls closed but just said that they were the advanced ballots & didn't release what percent of the vote it was.  Also worth noting that Sedgwick County uses electronic ballots, frankly there was no credible reason for the delay.  The evisceration of Tabitha Lehman will undoubtedly be the story of the election in Wichita.


Fluoride is getting hammered with the early numbers
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 07, 2012, 12:01:43 AM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

Is this a Billy Walker/Dustin Dodd(?) reference? Because I made it one in my head and smiled.

yep!  "Dow (Dustin) gotta go"

IIRC, he called him "Mr. Dow", which made it even better.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2012, 12:09:59 AM
So the presidential election has been decided but we still don't have a single vote released from Sedgwick County.  Lehman gotta go.

Is this a Billy Walker/Dustin Dodd(?) reference? Because I made it one in my head and smiled.

yep!  "Dow (Dustin) gotta go"

IIRC, he called him "Mr. Dow", which made it even better.

just last week I reread the article that pissed Bill off.  I'm guessing Bill was mad because he believes Dow fabricated some of that, if he did, he's lucky Bill didn't try to fight him.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 07, 2012, 12:13:45 AM
How long until I get the Obama speech, I am tired.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: OK_Cat on November 07, 2012, 12:16:18 AM
How long until I get the Obama speech, I am tired.

i know, it's past my bedtime.

you know he's backstage talking to jay-z on the phone right now laughing his ass off.  beyonce is probably in the background shouting something adorable and they're having a great rough ridin' time.  it's adorable, Hussein, but i'm tired.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2012, 12:43:49 AM
LOL at Wichitans against dental hygiene.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2012, 12:55:09 AM
LOL at Wichitans against dental hygiene.

:shakesfist: goddamn tea party causing the name of my city to be further trashed
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Saulbadguy on November 07, 2012, 10:28:38 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2012, 10:53:39 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

yeah, no crap. do they have to vote to add chlorine to the city pool?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2012, 10:55:31 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

yeah, no crap. do they have to vote to add chlorine to the city pool?

The tea party probably hasn't found out about that yet.
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 07, 2012, 10:56:53 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

yeah, no crap. do they have to vote to add chlorine to the city pool?

or to the drinking water for that matter
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWican on November 07, 2012, 11:01:56 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

Surprisingly, the people that I've talked to today that were against fluoridation voted no because of the cost ~$2.1 million initially, and $300k annually.  I could care less (I grew up on naturally fluoridated water), but supposedly fluoridated water kills your pets and is made from toxic remnants of fertilizer production discharged from 0bama factories. 
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2012, 11:05:14 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

Surprisingly, the people that I've talked to today that were against fluoridation voted no because of the cost ~$2.1 million initially, and $300k annually.  I could care less (I grew up on naturally fluoridated water), but supposedly fluoridated water kills your pets and is made from toxic remnants of fertilizer production discharged from 0bama factories.

seems reasonable?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2012, 11:11:18 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

Surprisingly, the people that I've talked to today that were against fluoridation voted no because of the cost ~$2.1 million initially, and $300k annually.  I could care less (I grew up on naturally fluoridated water), but supposedly fluoridated water kills your pets and is made from toxic remnants of fertilizer production discharged from 0bama factories.

How does that affect the water rates? I'm guessing it comes out to a few cents per thousand gallons.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 07, 2012, 11:11:35 AM
0bama

pffft
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: EMAWican on November 07, 2012, 11:15:27 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

Surprisingly, the people that I've talked to today that were against fluoridation voted no because of the cost ~$2.1 million initially, and $300k annually.  I could care less (I grew up on naturally fluoridated water), but supposedly fluoridated water kills your pets and is made from toxic remnants of fertilizer production discharged from 0bama factories.

How does that affect the water rates? I'm guessing it comes out to a few cents per thousand gallons.

If there's one thing that I've learned about Wichitownians and their water rates, it's that you don't eff with their water rates (see Equus Beds vs. Cheney Resey vs. drought).
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2012, 11:38:21 AM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

City council tried and were blocked by a couple of council members, the ballot provision was a compromise.  BTW this was the 4th time in the history of the city that a fluoride provision has failed.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Fedor on November 07, 2012, 12:01:35 PM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

City council tried and were blocked by a couple of council members, the ballot provision was a compromise.  BTW this was the 4th time in the history of the city that a fluoride provision has failed.
What is this Harvard study that showed that flouridation lowers iq's of children?  I heard about it on the radio last night.
 Note: I have not followed this shitstorm because I don't have a vote on the issue.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2012, 03:29:59 PM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

City council tried and were blocked by a couple of council members, the ballot provision was a compromise.  BTW this was the 4th time in the history of the city that a fluoride provision has failed.
What is this Harvard study that showed that flouridation lowers iq's of children?  I heard about it on the radio last night.
 Note: I have not followed this shitstorm because I don't have a vote on the issue.

dunno, sounds like bullshit
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2012, 03:34:28 PM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

City council tried and were blocked by a couple of council members, the ballot provision was a compromise.  BTW this was the 4th time in the history of the city that a fluoride provision has failed.
What is this Harvard study that showed that flouridation lowers iq's of children?  I heard about it on the radio last night.
 Note: I have not followed this shitstorm because I don't have a vote on the issue.

dunno, sounds like bullshit

yeah, my mom shoved so much flouride into my mouth growing up I basically drank it for thanksgiving feast... and I'm by far the smartest person on this board. DEBUNKED!
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Fedor on November 07, 2012, 04:37:44 PM
Why even put that up to vote? They should just add fluoride to the water.

City council tried and were blocked by a couple of council members, the ballot provision was a compromise.  BTW this was the 4th time in the history of the city that a fluoride provision has failed.
What is this Harvard study that showed that flouridation lowers iq's of children?  I heard about it on the radio last night.
 Note: I have not followed this shitstorm because I don't have a vote on the issue.

dunno, sounds like bullshit

yeah, my mom shoved so much flouride into my mouth growing up I basically drank it for thanksgiving feast... and I'm by far the smartest person on this board. DEBUNKED!
Perhaps you would have been the greatest genius of our time and due to flouride poisoning you have to settle for goEMAW IQ champ.

Here is an article and what do you know, it is bullshit (in the context of drinking water).
http://www.kansas.com/2012/09/11/2485561/harvard-scientists-data-on-fluoride.html
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2012, 04:44:25 PM
My mom used to put some kind of fluoride gel in this football mouthpiece thing and make me chomp on it. Interesting fact, I still have 2 baby teeth
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: bones129 on November 08, 2012, 01:26:53 AM
Write-in options are great. I wrote myself in for all offices. I am comfortable in my own skin.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 09, 2012, 10:05:04 PM
My mom used to put some kind of fluoride gel in this football mouthpiece thing and make me chomp on it. Interesting fact, I still have 2 baby teeth

wait a second.  how did this slide by.  I call BS. 
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 09, 2012, 11:01:58 PM
I know a dude with all his baby teeth.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Tobias on November 10, 2012, 02:16:50 AM
I know a dude with all his baby teeth.

yeah, a baby dude
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: kstatefreak42 on November 10, 2012, 11:40:51 AM
I know a dude with all his baby teeth.

yeah, a baby dude
oscar weber
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: jmlynch1 on November 10, 2012, 02:31:01 PM
lol
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: AzCat on November 11, 2012, 11:09:52 AM
For President of the United States: None of the Above.

Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 11, 2012, 11:35:17 AM
For President of the United States: None of the Above.

You voted for no one?  What a dumbshit.  You had like 6 choices + write in.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 13, 2012, 04:17:18 PM
I've been too occupied with football to even come to this board - but I'm just now reading back through it. 

You guys do realize that some people have sensitivities/allergies to fluoride and can affect them differently than others.  Just like lactose, gluten, etc. some people have trouble with fluoride.   Just because you're fine with fluoride doesn't mean everyone is.

If people are really concerned with dental hygiene for kids - why hasn't anyone looked at school lunches & diet? or if you're really concerned with subsidizing fluoride - make it available in supplement form for anyone that wants it.  People want it, they can take it; don't want it, don't take it.

:dunno:
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 13, 2012, 04:21:15 PM
I've been too occupied with football to even come to this board - but I'm just now reading back through it. 

You guys do realize that some people have sensitivities/allergies to fluoride and can affect them differently than others.  Just like lactose, gluten, etc. some people have trouble with fluoride.   Just because you're fine with fluoride doesn't mean everyone is.

If people are really concerned with dental hygiene for kids - why hasn't anyone looked at school lunches & diet? or if you're really concerned with subsidizing fluoride - make it available in supplement form for anyone that wants it.  People want it, they can take it; don't want it, don't take it.

:dunno:

Do these people just congregate to Wichita and cities in the south? Do they bottle water at home and then take it with them whenever they travel to other parts of the country to avoid fluoride poisoning? That must be rough. Motezuma's revenge lurks in the water to the south and Yankee Doodle's revenge lies to the north.

Also, school lunches and diet have undergone a major change this year. I don't have kids, but the people at work with kids are always bitching about the school not giving their kids enough carbs and protein and too much fruits and vegetables.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 13, 2012, 04:23:17 PM
Oh yeah:

Johnson
anyone else that had an (L) next to there name...   (It's okay to party line vote when you know that person won't win anyway)
Whole slew of "no vote"'s

and No on Boat tax - because the way I read it is it didn't necessarily mean they "would" lower taxes, but the "could"  and took it as a headline with a butt load of rider's to go along with it.  I don't own a boat - so whatev's

Don't live in wichita, so I couldn't vote on Fluoride, but I would have voted no - even though I actually have a bottle of fluoride in my bathroom that I put on my kids teeth.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 13, 2012, 04:31:16 PM
I've been too occupied with football to even come to this board - but I'm just now reading back through it. 

You guys do realize that some people have sensitivities/allergies to fluoride and can affect them differently than others.  Just like lactose, gluten, etc. some people have trouble with fluoride.   Just because you're fine with fluoride doesn't mean everyone is.

If people are really concerned with dental hygiene for kids - why hasn't anyone looked at school lunches & diet? or if you're really concerned with subsidizing fluoride - make it available in supplement form for anyone that wants it.  People want it, they can take it; don't want it, don't take it.

:dunno:

Do these people just congregate to Wichita and cities in the south? Do they bottle water at home and then take it with them whenever they travel to other parts of the country to avoid fluoride poisoning? That must be rough. Motezuma's revenge lurks in the water to the south and Yankee Doodle's revenge lies to the north.

Also, school lunches and diet have undergone a major change this year. I don't have kids, but the people at work with kids are always bitching about the school not giving their kids enough carbs and protein and too much fruits and vegetables.

I don't know anyone that has it - but I doubt it's as extreme as ciliac or anything like that.  Probably more in line with lactose intolerance.   I have a nephew that supposedly can't have anything with red dye in it - I used to think it was bullshit, but he borderlines ADD when he has anything with it so maybe there's something to it.  I don't know, but I can certainly buy into everyone being different with how their bodies react to different chemicals & such.

I personally think the fluoride thing is putting a band-aid on a gaping wound.  Fluoride isn't going to help kids with cavities nearly as much as if people would put down the Mt. Dew & eat an apple every now & then.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: puniraptor on November 13, 2012, 04:32:59 PM
Good strat, I always vote "no" on all the retaining judges ones.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 13, 2012, 04:36:17 PM
Good strat, I always vote "no" on all the retaining judges ones.

I do, too. Otherwise, how is a solid up and comer ever going to get a shot?
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: MakeItRain on November 13, 2012, 11:29:38 PM
I've been too occupied with football to even come to this board - but I'm just now reading back through it. 

You guys do realize that some people have sensitivities/allergies to fluoride and can affect them differently than others.  Just like lactose, gluten, etc. some people have trouble with fluoride.   Just because you're fine with fluoride doesn't mean everyone is.

If people are really concerned with dental hygiene for kids - why hasn't anyone looked at school lunches & diet? or if you're really concerned with subsidizing fluoride - make it available in supplement form for anyone that wants it.  People want it, they can take it; don't want it, don't take it.

:dunno:

Do these people just congregate to Wichita and cities in the south? Do they bottle water at home and then take it with them whenever they travel to other parts of the country to avoid fluoride poisoning? That must be rough. Motezuma's revenge lurks in the water to the south and Yankee Doodle's revenge lies to the north.

Also, school lunches and diet have undergone a major change this year. I don't have kids, but the people at work with kids are always bitching about the school not giving their kids enough carbs and protein and too much fruits and vegetables.

I don't know anyone that has it - but I doubt it's as extreme as ciliac or anything like that.  Probably more in line with lactose intolerance.   I have a nephew that supposedly can't have anything with red dye in it - I used to think it was bullshit, but he borderlines ADD when he has anything with it so maybe there's something to it.  I don't know, but I can certainly buy into everyone being different with how their bodies react to different chemicals & such.

I personally think the fluoride thing is putting a band-aid on a gaping wound.  Fluoride isn't going to help kids with cavities nearly as much as if people would put down the Mt. Dew & eat an apple every now & then.

Less than 1% of the population has a fluoride allergy.  Some fluoride is found in water anyway along with a million other things.  If your fluoride allergy is bad enough that fluoridation will effect you it is likely that you are already using distilled water as most water in this country is fluoridated.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 14, 2012, 09:12:47 AM
Less than 1% of the population has a fluoride allergy.  Some fluoride is found in water anyway along with a million other things.  If your fluoride allergy is bad enough that fluoridation will effect you it is likely that you are already using distilled water as most water in this country is fluoridated.

I can agree with that; I guess the point I'm trying to make is if general health is the catalyst in the debate, why is this such a hot button topic when it will likely have little effect on health.  People are quick to point out that tooth decay can be tied to heart disease and other serious illnesses.  Logic would imply the same things that cause tooth decay are the same things that cause heart disease.  Correlation does not imply causation and I’m not convinced otherwise.

And how many people with poor diets even drink water?  Seems like the people that want it, don’t need it.  The people that need it – likely won’t get much benefit from it.  There seems to be enough people opposed to it – why press the issue?

Bottom line, I’m oppose to it because I don’t think it does anything for people that actually care about themselves.  If people genuinely care about others - obesity is a bigger problem – tackle that and good oral hygiene will likely follow.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 14, 2012, 09:26:41 AM
Oh yeah, the argument that it is or isn’t medicating the public bothers me when the entire debate suggest that poor oral health is an epidemic that some people can’t overcome.  That’s just bull crap.  Suggesting people are not smart enough, not rich enough, or not white enough to take care of their teeth is arrogant and self gratifying.   In reality, there are no victims here – it is a supplement.  I would feel the same if people were talking about adding vitamin C to the water.  What good would it do?

That’s not a statement to anyone in general, just an observation I’ve made.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 14, 2012, 01:10:58 PM
So what happened, did Big Fluoride win again?
Title: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: HeinBallz on November 14, 2012, 02:22:09 PM
No - and half of Wichita is pretty butthurt over it.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 14, 2012, 03:40:15 PM
Good. no need to subsidize them any further.
Title: Re: Post In This Thread Who You Voted For!
Post by: michigancat on November 14, 2012, 03:42:12 PM
Good. no need to subsidize them any further.

yeah, keep the wichita economy subsidy free.