<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Tuesday, November 05, 2002

Morning Musings-Here were my predictions as mailed to Ben D.-
Senate-Republican 53-Dem 46-Jeffords 1 House-GOP 229-Dem 205-Bernie Sanders 1 Governors GOP 26-Dem 24
I think the Senate pick might be one too optimistic, as the Republicans would have to get a net +4 to get there. That would mean that the Flyover Three (South Dakota, Minnesota and Missouri) all go Republican and that they go +1 elsewhere. I'm really smelling a +3, as I smell an upset in Georgia with Arkansas falling to the Democrats. They're going to the polls Feb. 4th in Israel, as the Likud-led coalition didn't hold up. Now the interesting fight will be that Bibi-Sharon Likud primary. The post-election Knesset should be a notch more hawkish than the current one. I'm gearing up to vote in a Florida general election for the first time. We're got more propositions than a [don't go there] on the ballot; with ten statewide proposals and eight county-wide ones. I think I'm voting for Amendments 1 (to clarify state death penalty law) Amendment 6 (to ban smoking in most public places-go ahead, cry "nanny state", I don't like smoke in my face) and Amendment 7 (to give property-tax relief for people who build "granny rooms" for their elderly parents or grandparents) and voting no on the rest. There are quite a few nasty ones to vote down. Amendment 9 is the class-size amendment that would mandate class sizes state-wide, while Amendment 8 would mandate the availability of "high-quality" pre-K classes for 4-year-olds. I don't like supermajorities, so #4 on two/thirds majorities to pass open-records exceptions goes, and I don't like micromanagement, so #10's bigger cages for pregnant pigs (a real high priority, dontya think?) goes down as well. The state GOP is plugging for Amendment 2, which would require a economic impact statement be done for future proposed amendments. It might make future debates on Amendment 9 a bit less toxic, as you can make low or high estimates of what it will cost. However, it's unclear who would be doing the impact statements; backers of the bill can always find a cock-eyed economist to give them the figures they want to here. I'm going on the "if you're not sure, vote no" rule on this one. The one I'm still not sure on how to vote is on the retention elections for judges. If I say "Lawton Chiles appointed them all; they all must be liberal slime," I start to sound like the inverse of Democrats of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I haven't had the time to look into the records of the individual judges, and I haven't see any ads blasting these guys. I've seen some commentary against Supreme Court Justice Lee Anstead, who was one of the guys who voted for a statewide recount. I'm inclined to give Jeb a chance to appoint someone else. On the partisan races-expect Jeb to coast to a 8-10 point win, something of a 54-45 margin. As I said yesterday, I smell blood up north-Karen Thurman may go down.

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?