Election Day Open Thread


Feel free to use this as an open thread to relate your election day experience: good, bad or ugly.

18 Comments so far

  1. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 10:07 am

    Oh, and I should probably mention that my voting experience this morning was hassle-free: no long lines, no confusion over registration, no problems with my ballot (my polling place used the “complete the arrow” ballots.)

  2. Fuzzy (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 10:29 am

    My voting place serves two precincts and the guy at the door seemed ready for a long day of helping people figure out which one they lived in, to the point that it took him a moment to grasp that I actually knew which precinct I’m in.

    Other than that, it took a long time to fill in all those “No”s on all those judges, and then boom, I done voted.

  3. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 10:34 am

    Thanks for your comment Fuzzy. So, do you make a point of voting “no” for all sitting judges, just the ones you have grievances against, or is this a point of principle, i.e., voting them out in the hopes of new blood? Just curious. For the record, I vote “yes” unless I have a good, specific reason to vote them out.

  4. Artemis (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:29 am

    Voting was mostly hassle-free at my precinct, too. I think the fill in the arrow ballot is better than the punch cards, for sure.

    I’m curious too, Fuzzy, are you one of those people who just always votes “no” on judicial retentions? I know people who do that, it seems from sheer frustration at the amount of retentions on each ballot. (That’s one of the reasons I posted all the bar association info on the judges so people could make more educated decisions.) I don’t personally believe in a blanket “no” for retentions because I work in the legal field, and I know that plenty of those judges should be retained as good arbiters of the law. If a judge is listed as unqualified by a bar association, though, it gives me pause and often makes me vote “no” for that judge.

  5. Mr. Smith (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:40 am

    I look at the IL and/or Chicago Bar Association websites and go with their recommendations on retaining judges.

    I had an easy time of it with voting today: no lines, no ID check, and my ballot: arrowed!

  6. Marty (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:44 am

    I had one stupid problem: I saw Pat Quinn’s name and before I knew it, I voted for Blago and Quinn. I like Quinn…So I got a new Ballot.

    As for Judges, I wish I could give out recommendations. However, that’s kinda like saying F U to the boss on friday, and walking in the office on monday.

    The only odd thing about my Polling Place, the Shalom Temple, was the five uniformed police officers and paddy wagon out front.

  7. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:44 am

    Artemis and Mr. Smith- thanks for your comments! Artemis, FWIW, I’m in your camp on the judgicial retention issue.

    Also, folks, I should mention that the good people at Chicagoist are going to be throwing back a couple of beers and watching the election returns at The Daily Bar tonight. I’ll be watching from the relative safety of a friend’s house, but if you are looking for a place to go to watch the returns and have a drink, head to the Daily Bar! (4560 N. Lincoln, Chicago
    Tel: (773) 561-6198)

  8. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:46 am

    Marty, they (the cops) must have known you were coming!

  9. Dave! (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:48 am

    My polling place serves two precincts as well, but the lines were clear and short. The poll workers were chipper and friendly. Of course, it was also only 8AM…

    I was in and out in no time. But I did vote on a paper ballot, only because there was a wait for the touch screens.

  10. Dave! (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:51 am

    Oh, regarding judges… I use the CBA and ISBA recommendations for who is “unqualified”. But considering *most* people just vote yes, if you had to go one way or the other, I think Fuzzy’s logic (sorry) of voting “No” on all of them would be a better way to go than just voting yes. A good judge not on the bench isn’t nearly as damaging as a bad one left in power.

  11. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 11:57 am

    Thanks for your comments, Dave. I’ll let Fuzzy speak for himself on the judges issue. If I am uninformed as to the relative merits of the candidates in a particular race, I do not vote in that race.

    Fuzzy, believe it or not but I’m not trying to pick a fight- just curious about voter psychology- I think all sorts of inetresting thought processes go into the final decision, once the ballot is in hand and you’re alone in the little booth; I’m just curious as to how you arrived at your decision.

  12. Dave! (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 12:27 pm

    Yeah, didn’t mean to imply I knew why Fuzzy voted all “no” just offering one possible reason. And I couldn’t resist the Fuzzy logic pun. I’m a bad, bad man. :)

  13. Fuzzy (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 1:12 pm

    I vote No on *all* the judges because I believe that *some* of the judges need to be un-retained. I know there’s no danger of a good judge actually getting removed (in fact, it is unfortunately very unlikely that even the terrible judges like Robert Kowalski (who received 10 out 10 “do not retain” recommendations from the surveyed bar associations) will be un-retained) so I vote no on everyone to send my little “you serve at the will of the people” reminder to those judges.

  14. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 1:20 pm

    Well, that’s one way of doing it I guess. Does that mean that you vote no even for judges that, according to your homework, are good judges?

  15. Fuzzy (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 1:42 pm

    Yes, I vote No for good judges. In all cases I’m looking at my vote in the context of the bigger picture, expected outcomes. etc — like I’ll toss a third-party candidate a vote in an election where my favored candidate is expected to have an easy win. Yes, I’m playing with “Prisoner’s Dilemma” dynamics here — if everyone voted the way I did, I’d lose. But there’s so much inertia in the political process (and most people vote their straight-forward intentions) I’m not worried about it.

  16. nikkos (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 1:45 pm

    I don’t really get your approach Fuzzy- why not simply vote in favor of “good” candidates and against “bad” candidates?

  17. Fuzzy (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 3:16 pm

    I vote the way I do because of the way the system is right now — there hasn’t been a judge removed since before 1990, even ones that all the bar associations and public interest groups agree are terrible. So I want to do my tiny, one vote in a million, part to inch those YES/NO columns a little towards the NO column to, hopefully, remind and voters and judges that it is *theoretically* possible to remove a bad judge.

  18. Fuzzy (unregistered) on November 7th, 2006 @ 3:17 pm

    (There’s an extra “and” in there — it should read “remind voters and judges”.)

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.