What will your 2022 midterm ballot look like?

[jamestroll]

I voted Yes on most of the Colorado ballot measures. Voted yes on the affordable housing one but hope it doesn't cause unintended consequences. We shall see.

I am sure in a few years I will be in a new state anyway. I like moving around and seeing new experiences.

[Alben Barkley]

I think I might literally vote for the corpse of the original "Alben Barkley" over either of my choices in the House race. One is a pro-Russia tankie perennial candidate. The other is incumbent Republican Andy Barr. Disgusting.

Is there anything else to vote on besides Senate? Because your state elections are all odd yeared. I guess you're still voting for Charles Booker as I would even though he's a blatant grifter...anything else on the ballot?

We do have a "No Right to An Abortion" amendment which I will of course be voting against.

[bagelman]

I'm still not convinced that DeWine is the wrong choice. But other than him, heavily Democratic. I'll hold my nose for Tim Ryan even though he'll probably massively underpreform the polls and lose by 10+ because Ohio.

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

It'd be Lula for President and Fernando Haddad for Governor of São Paulo

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Federal
House, MN-5: undecided although I'm not voting Republican and there's no third party candidates on the ballot, so it's either reluctantly vote for Ilhan Omar (D) or write-in.

State (Partisan)
Governor/Lt Gov: Tim Walz/Peggy Flanagan (D)
Secretary of State: Steve Simon (D)
State Auditor: Julie Blaha (D)
Attorney General: Keith Ellison (D)
MN Senate, 62: undecided, same as House, either vote for Omar Fateh (D) who may be going to jail before the term ends or write-in.
MN House, 62A: Aisha Gomez (D)

Municipal (Nonpartisan)
County Sheriff: Dawanna Witt
County Attorney: Mary Moriarty
County Commissioner District 3: Marion Greene
Minneapolis School Board (elect 2): KerryJo Felder Lisa Skjefte

It looks like all judges are unopposed so another round of my amusing write-ins.

Ilhan definitely won my vote now with her latest takedown of tankies and other assorted trash.

[West_Midlander]

I voted early.

R for Senate, House, Supreme Court (2 seats), split 2-2 by party for Appeals Court, Democratic for State Senate, a local judgeship, board of commissioners, and sheriff (so a 6-6 split by party, unintentional balance). There were two candidates of which two would be elected for soil and water so I did two write-ins.

[Smash255]

Congress NY-3
Robert Zimmerman-D

Senate
Chuck Schumer- D

Governor/LT Governor
Kathy Hochul-D/Antonio Delgado-D

Attorney General
Letitia James-D

Comptroller
Tom DiNapoli-D

NY State Senate 8th District
John Alberts-D

NY Assembly- 17th District
Paul Kaminsky-D

[Schiff for Senate]

I've discussed this situation in the past - but my mother is more or less apolitical (aside from supporting Obama to the point of it being a running joke, and opposing Trump - basically being fairly liberal, except on woke issues - like she doesn't support nonsense like "neopronouns" and the like), and my father, though with greater political interest and more political awareness, has no interest in filling out his own ballot, either. So in June my mother allowed me to basically fill out her mail-in ballot for her - I obviously am not old enough to legally vote myself, but you can think of this as a proxy-vote or, for those who still cling to claims of "voter fraud," you can think of this as that if you really want to. In my defence, I was a very "educated voter" - probably moreso than 99% of the adults who voted, I thoroughly researched the candidates (by looking through every piece of campaign literature we received in the mail - and there was plenty - consulting the Green Party voter guide, since that's the party my parents are registered with [though that was more for reference and background info, and quite often I rejected the Green Party's 'recommended', 'preferred,' or endorsed candidate], looking online at candidate websites and coverage about the races) for all the contested races, and voted only after (such as State Assembly/Senate, and County Sheriff - I would've backed the incumbent, just assuming Alameda wouldn't pick somebody crazy as their sheriff, but that's exactly how Milwaukee County managed to get a far-right sheriff for a long time...so I did the research, and it turned out he wasn't all that good, so I voted for one of his opponents - and which of his two opponents, that too was decided only after further research). My profile lists who all I voted for in June, and I figure I should probably clear that up and post it here.

California Attorney General: Anne Marie Schubert (I)
Insurance Commissioner: Marc Levine (D)
Board of Equalization District 2: Peter Coe Verbica (R)
United States Senate (special): Alex Padilla (D)
United States Senate (regular): Alex Padilla (D)
District Attorney: Jimmie Wilson (D)
Sheriff/Coroner: Gregory Ahern Joann Walker
US Representative for California’s 14th Congressional District: Major Singh (I)
24th State Assembly District: Teresa Keng (D)
Alameda County Superintendent of Schools: Alysse Castro
10th State Senate District: Aisha Wahab (D)
State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Joseph Guy Campbell
State Controller: Steve Glazer (D)
Governor: Shawn Collins (R) Luis Javier Rodriguez (G)
Treasurer: Fiona Ma (D)
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber (D)
Lietuentant Governor: Mohammed Arif (Peace and Freedom)

(Did not list the races that were unopposed - filled out the whole ballot, of course, but no point in listing unopposed races with just one candidate.)

As for November, i.e., the general election on Nov. 8, just 9 days from now - my dad is out of town this weekend and "we" haven't done ballots yet. Only one more weekend till election day. Last time it was during summer vacation so I was able to spend multiple hours doing the search and voting, but now there's school stuff and whatnot (plus next weekend I'll be volunteering to help Afghan refugees in the Oakland area - which will take up much of the day - doing it both because I support Afghan refugees and because, well, I need 40 service hours to graduate high school anyway). So I'm genuinely unsure I'll be able to give it the necessary time for researching, which would be a shame. But we'll see. In any case, I'm proud of the time and energy I put into proxy-voting in June.

If I DO end up 'voting' this time, I'll record that vote in a separate post.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Governor: Christine Drazan(R)
Senator: WI: Gordon Smith(R)
US Representative: Chris Mann(R)
State Senator : John Veerback(R)
State Rep: John Woods(R)
Labor Commish(Non Partisan): Cheri Helt

Voted No on all 4 measures

[Aurelius]

I originally voted yes on the Indian gambling measure, but after doing more research I'm going to spoil my ballot at the polling place on e-day and vote no on all ballot measures.

California really needs a break from ballot measures for awhile.

[Vespucci]

Already voted absentee:

Delegate: Eleanor Holmes Norton (D)
Mayor: Muriel Bowser (D)
DC Council Chair: Phil Mendelson (D)
At-large Councilmember: Elissa Silverman (I), Kenyan McDuffie (I)
Attorney General: Brian Schwalb (D)
Shadow Representative: Oye Owolewa (D)

Initiative 82 (eliminating tipped minimum wage): Yes

For DC Council, there can be only one D nominee for two seats, so Silverman is an incumbent independent, and McDuffie is running as an independent after he got kicked off the primary ballot for AG (he's the incumbent Ward 5 Councilmember). Both are Democrats in all but name, so my ballot is essentially straight-ticket D.

[PSOL]

House: Ed Hershey (WC)

Ref: Yes

Rest blank

[Fuzzy Bear]

Straight Republican for all partisan races.

Voted to retain all judges up for retention.

Voted "No" on all ballot initiatives.

[Goldwater]

Governor: Gavin Newsom
Lt Governor: Eleni Kounalakis
Attorney General: Rob Bonta
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber
Controller: Malia Cohen
Treasurer: Jack M. Guerrero
Senator: Alex Padilla

Prop 1: AYE
Prop 26: AYE
Prop 27: AYE
Prop 28: AYE
Prop 29: NAY
Prop 30: AYE
Prop 31: NAY

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Only House elections here, and I'm in VA-03 which isn't remotely competitive. I probably won't bother this year actually.

Are you registered in Portsmouth?  They have City Council and School Board elections as well if you're interested.

Norfolk has city council and school board elections too, but they do it by wards, and my ward only has one candidate on the ballot for each position.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Only House elections here, and I'm in VA-03 which isn't remotely competitive. I probably won't bother this year actually.

Are you registered in Portsmouth?  They have City Council and School Board elections as well if you're interested.

Norfolk has city council and school board elections too, but they do it by wards, and my ward only has one candidate on the ballot for each position.

I haven't updated my registration, no. But I looked up my zip code and couldn't find anything besides that one House race. I'm sure it just didn't show up because all the neighboring cities have council elections going on, based on all the signs I've seen

And being honest, I don't follow municipal politics at all, nor do I have children in the school system. I'd probably be more willing to go through the trouble if I did and if there was more time.

[dead0man]

libertarian when it was an option.  No on all judges.  Mixed on several City of Omaha dodads.  We have a lot of weird sh**t we vote for here, like traffic engineer.  I did my homework as best I could.  Voted against one of those people that are a little too anti-CRT ifyouknowwhatImean and against another person that was a little too environazi for my liking.

The important election though (Congress), it was tough.  There was no libertarian running in NE-2 so I had to pick between a reasonablish Republican and a reasonablish Democrat.  I ended up going for Vargas (the Dem, first one in recent memory) over Bacon for abortion and make the wife happy reasons.  Bacon wasn't horrible on abortion (ban at 15 weeks, exceptions for the normal reasons), but I'd prefer it to be at 20 weeks if we're going to have one.  I'd have done a write in, but my penmanship is ass.

[Hope For A New Era]

Updated now that I have officially voted:

Federal

House (MO-6): Henry Martin (D)
Senate (MO): Trudy Busch Valentine (D)

State (Partisan)

State Auditor: Alan Green (D)
Galloway's departure marks the end of an era in Missouri. I anticipate total R dominance of the state government for at least a decade from now, probably more, unless some freak Roy Moore situation happens.

State Legislature
State Senate (District 34): Sarah Shorter (D) (but seriously, is this the best MDP could do in a potentially competitive district? Especially one that has an ancestrally Democratic city in it? It was even moved left in redistricting. This is ridiculous.)
State House (District 12): Jamie Johnson (D) (I've been drawn into a Biden +5 district )

County Offices (Partisan)
D (2 offices), blank (4 offices, unopposed Rs)

+ Yes on a county ballot question renewing a small sales tax for road infrastructure

Ballot Questions (We love these in Missouri)
Amendment 1 (weird state treasurer thing): No
Constitutional Convention Question: No
Amendment 3 (Marijuana Legalization): Yes
Amendment 4 (It has its own word salad name, I'm going to call it the Let The Legislature Take More Local Control From Kansas City, As If They Haven't Done That Enough Amendment): No
Amendment 5 (gives Missouri National Guard its own executive branch department, rather than being part of the Department of Public Safety): No

Judges

blank

[KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸]

Updated the OP post with a more detailed description of my ballot, specifically county offices, which are gonna be straight Democrat anyways, and for district judges, which I plan on voting for all except for Richard D. Stochl, who apparently doesn't have a good track record according to scoring from the Iowa Bar.

[HillGoose]

i went and early voted a few days ago

i didnt know what was like 80% of the stuff on the ballot

there were some wack ballot propositions/initiatives or whatever they are called that would give BIG GOV more power, like allowing the legislature to overturn the voters results and put all these restrictions on voting and campaign contributions

so i voted NO on giving BIG GOV any more power

i also voted for an incumbent for the first time ever (ewwww)

[Devout Centrist]

U.S. Senator: Mark "Engineer Edward" Kelly (D)
U.S. Representative: Greg "Johnny Five Aces" Stanton (D)

Governor: Kathleen "Katie" Hobbs (D)
Secretary of State: Adrian "Shephard" Fontes (D)
Attorney General: Kris "Every Kiss Begins with K" Mayes (D)
State Treasurer: Martin “Not Going to Win” Quezada (D)
Superintendent of Public Instruction: Kathy “Kilo” Hoffman (D)
State Mine Inspector: William “Bill” Pierce (D)
Corporation Commissioner: Lauren “Patrick” Kuby and Sandra “JFK III” Kennedy (D)

State Senator: Juan “The Body” Mendez (D)
State House: Athena “Owl House” Salman and Melody “River Song” Hernandez (D)
Phoenix City Council: Kellen "Harold" Wilson

Prop 128: NO
Prop 129: NO
Prop 130: NO
Prop 131: NO
Prop 132: NO
Prop 209: Yes
Prop 211: Yes
Prop 308: Yes
Prop 309: NO
Prop 310: Yes

Genuinely forget who I picked for the Central Arizona Conservation District. I voted not to retain all judges.

[Schiff for Senate]

I effectively have two votes this time, despite legally being allowed none. My mother is allowing me to fill in her entire mail-in ballot for her (in her case, if she was filling in the ballot herself, she'd vote D over R in pretty much all the D vs R races, and definitely vote for Prop 1, since she's very pro-choice - this much I know), while my father - a smidge more politically aware and interested, wants me to do all the research and then advise him how to vote (he says he'll probably agree with all my choices, but he wants to reserve the right to reject them, and do the filling-in part himself). As for the voting, I suspect the D vs D and non-partisan races will be much more interesting than the D vs R races.

Here we go. I am filling in my mother's ballot in real time as I write this post.


GOVERNOR: Gavin Newsom (D). Pretty much self-explanatory. Newsom's GE opponent is a conservative, typical Republican - Brian Dahle, State Senator from the 1st District (which more-or-less corresponds to the 1st congressional district, and is situated in northeast CA).

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Obviously less high-profile than the gubernatorial race. Figure I'll most likely vote Democratic, since this is another D vs R race, but it's always safest to research first. So here goes...Looking at Underwood Jones' (the GOP candidate's) website, she seems to be avoiding too many specific positions and clarifying her actual ideology too much...putting out meaningless centrist, reasonable pat phrases (e.g. "You deserve a government that actually does its job. California’s state and local governments should be efficient, transparent, and work to serve all residents" - that is the entirety of her 'position' on "Making Government Work", a few uncontroversial, generic, nonpartisan, meaningless, feel-good lines that anyone can trot out, without offering any specific ideas or policies to actually make it happen), likely in an attempt to win the votes of Democrats/independents (she'll need to do so if she wants a prayer of winning - she doesn't, but that's besides the point). Underwood Jones is an LA County native and notably, she's a black woman - still very rare, but increasingly less so, in the GOP. Looking at the California Voter Guide, which asked a handful of questions of her - nothing too shocking there, either. I'm not going to lie, at first glance, she doesn't seem crazy or massively unreasonable, but I'm not gullible - I'm not going to buy into fake moderate platitudes (all that does is get people like Glenn Youngkin). It's extremely unlikely that if Underwood Jones really was a moderate, reasonable Republican ("RINO"), she'd have made it into the top-two, quite honestly (we've seen how far people who take that route - such as Kevin Faulconer - get nowadays). So ultimately, going with Eleni Kounalakis (D), the generic D incumbent Lt. Gov.

SECRETARY OF STATE: Shirley Weber (D), our incumbent SoS. I'm not taking the risk of electing a GOPer to the Secretary of State position, in any state (not that Bernosky, the GOP candidate, is winning in CA anyway), not unless we've got 100% evidence they will respect the will of the voters (people like Raffensperger in GA). Bernosky's website admittedly doesn't paint him as a Big Lie believer or anything, but I hardly believe that it would - if he's even remotely serious about winning, he can't tie himself to the Big Lie: has to go the Youngkin route, which is what it appears he's doing. Not that I'm fooled - Weber's fine and she does her job effectively enough for me. Not taking the risk of voting R in an SoS election when the party has chosen folks like Mastriano (who gets to pick the PA SoS) and Finchem (the AZ SoS nominee).

CONTROLLER: Malia Cohen (D). The GOP candidate, Lanhee Chen, was one of Mitt Romney's policy advisors back in 2012 - so basically a regular, pre-Trump Republican, conservative at the core, while Cohen is an equally generic D (she currently sits on the state's Board of Equalization).

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER: The GOP candidate here, Robert Howell, is a self-described "Reagan Republican." Ordinarily, I might just vote Democratic...but here I'm much more leery about doing so. The Democratic nominee, incumbent Ricardo Lara, is corrupt, and it's all documented on this website (I might not give it quite as much credence, but it's got more than enough stories about Lara's scandals and corruption from nonpartisan or D-tilted newspapers - so this is by no means R hackery or fake news on their part: it's genuine, legitimate corruption by a Democrat). Surprisingly, Howell's website doesn't appear to be attacking Lara for his scandals - it's not being mentioned very much (I myself might not've noticed, but I remembered from my voting back in June that Lara was a shady character, and it's good that I did). Ultimately - this both allows me to see myself as more 'bipartisan' and 'reasonable', and willing to vote for the GOP when it makes sense to, and to reject corruption (be it by Democrats or Republicans) - going with Robert Howell (R). I suspect Lara wins reelection, since CA is heavily Democratic, and it doesn't seem like his scandals are being talked about that much or that the voters will be well-informed enough to find out about them (even if they did, it's possible enough would vote for Lara anyway to push him over the top). Probably underperforms the others, but I don't know. What I do know is that if this was my mother voting, she might automatically support the Democrat over the Republican, so I'm glad I'm filling in the vote here and was aware of Lara's secret scandals.

TREASURER: Fiona Ma (D). I will admit that GOP candidate Jack Guerrero's website did have some appeal, and he seemed more of an "intellectual conservative" than a MAGAn, but Ma (the Democratic candidate and incumbent) seems solid, so that's who I went with.

ATTORNEY GENERAL: In the 'primary,' there had been 5 candidates: two Republicans, a Democrat, an independent and a Green. The Democrat was incumbent Rob Bonta, who I feel like was a political pick (appointed by Newsom), not picked on the merits; the Green was a predictable progressive guy (who definitely had some solid one liners, such as this one:
"[he] proposes that the death penalty should be restricted to "incorrigible corporations who are legally deemed 'persons'""), the independent was the well-qualified and seemingly nonpartisan and commonsensical Ann Marie Schubert, and the GOPers were Nathan Hochman (actually quite well-respected and accredited and experienced) and Eric Early (very conservative, MAGA Republican). I didn't particularly like Bonta - as I said, I didn't consider him particularly great at his job, but I liked Schubert's website - she had a ton of meaningful endorsements from sheriffs/attorneys/DAs, and she had a very solid record as a DA. I voted for Schubert, but ultimately, it ended up being between Hochman and Bonta. If it had been between Early and Bonta, I'd go with Bonta. BUT Hochman's Wikipedia page is impressive - he is considered a genuinely experienced leading expert, and he's previously gotten support from GOPers AND liberal Democrats. And as I said - Bonta was appointed to the position despite not having much relevant experience IMO. Thus, I went with Nathan Hochman (R).

BOARD OF EQUALIZATION (DISTRICT 2): The incumbent Democrat, Malia Cohen, is running for controller. In June, my vote for Peter Coe Verbica was the only vote I cast for a Republican (it was, I admit, to some extent so I could feel like I wasn't a partisan hack). Verbica has advanced to the GE, along with Sally Lieber, the Democrat, who has the support of most Democratic/liberal politicians and organisations, going off campaign literature. I voted for Verbica last time also because he seemed to have decent experience (this is also why I voted for Hochman in the Nov. election - he had good, genuine experience). I suppose I'll go for him again, so Peter Coe Verbica (R).

US SENATE: True political wonks - which is what we are - will recognise that there are actually TWO races to be looked at here: one is the "special election" (the winner of which will hold the seat from right after the election, until January 3, 2023), and the other is the concurrent, regularly scheduled election (the winner of which will serve from January 3, 2023 to January 3, 2029). This is NOT to be confused, of course, with, say, the GA senate races in 2020/2021 - one was the regularly-scheduled election for the Class 2 Senate Seat (class 2 being up in 2020), the other had been a special election for the Class 3 Senate Seat (class 3 is up this year). In this case, both of them are for the same class 3 senate seat - only one is technically a regular election and the other is a special election. So, logically, the candidates are the same in both races, and one expects the final results to be very, very similar in both (you'd have to have some kind of disorder to vote for Padilla to serve till January 3, 2023, but for Meuser to serve from 2023-2029, or vice-versa: if you prefer Meuser, you vote for him for both races; you prefer Padilla, you vote for him for both). I'm voting, of course, for the Democrat, our incumbent senator, as appointed by Gov. Newsom, Alex Padilla (D).

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (CA-14): The new (2020s) CA-14 corresponds to the old (2010s) CA-15. I lived in CA-15 till I moved to Fremont a year ago, when I got moved to CA-17 (the only non-Hawaii CD to be majority-Asian, and one of just 4 CD's nationally represented by an Indian-American). However, we lived right along the borders of CA-15 and CA-17 (Fremont itself is split between the two districts), and redistricting shifted us back to Swalwell's seat (renumbered the 14th from the 15th). I like and respect John Dule, and I'm aware of his hate for Eric Swalwell, but he's still all right, and the opponent is some Republican. So I went with Eric Swalwell (D), not that it'll make a difference in a 70% Democratic district.

STATE SENATE (SD 10): This race is pretty interesting - it's one Democrat against another. Both are women. One is Lily Mei. Mei is the mayor of Fremont, where I currently reside. She's received the endorsements of a ton of local mayors in the area - Hayward's, San Jose's, Milpitas', Newark's, Union City's, Pleasanton's (used to live there till a year back), Daly City's, Santa Clara's, and Sunnyvale's. She's also endorsed by Ro Khanna, one of four Indian-Americans in Congress (and my representative until January 3 of next year, when I'll have Eric Swalwell again). Mei is a standard liberal Democrat. Her opponent is Aisha Wahab (Mayor Pro Tempore of Hayward - not sure what exactly the role is - though Hayward's mayor, Barbara Halliday, nonetheless has endorsed Mei), who seems to be slightly more left wing (the Green Party in their voter guide has said they 'prefer' Wahab over Mei - not that they can outright endorse Wahab, since she's from the "corporate", "problematic" Democratic Party, LOL). Wahab is armed with the endorsement of the state Democratic Party, most prominently - but she also has the support of Rob Bonta and Fiona Ma, State Sen. Bob Wieckowski (whose seat I believe these two are running for - he's retiring - I also just found out that he apparently tried to challenge Eric Swalwell for his seat in 2020, so perhaps Dule might like this guy), and Assemblyman Bill Quirk. The GE seems to be very negative - I've seen little positivity on either side (the pro-Wahab forces seem particularly vitriolic, which I'll get to in a minute: though much of the negative campaign mail here as the fine print "This advertisement was not authorised by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate) in the campaign literature...the pro-Mei forces have attacked Wahab for "having two-faces" (this ad was NOT authorized by Mei herself, apparently), questioning her support for women (by pointing out she supports a guy who said Bock Turner's sentence was fair - more on that in a minute - and that she was "allegedly" involved in a revenge porn scheme against a political opponent) and for the working class and homeless (by saying she's rich and that her time on the Hayward City Council was pro-landlord rather than pro-tenant...). They also seized upon one of the people Wahab has supported in the past rather than Wahab herself, finding him to be an easier target (apparently "You learn a lot about people by the company they keep...Here's a sample of his (and possibly [emphasis mine] Wahab's) SHOCKING views"). Which he is (click spoiler to view - I don't want this post to be quite as massively long, so if you want to just take the TLDR version that this guy has some interesting takes on rapists and abusers, you can do that):

Spoiler alert! Click Show to show the content.

Show

this guy, Sajid Khan, apparently is pretty anti-#MeToo and is pretty sympathetic to alleged and actual rapists: he "celebrated" when OJ "walk[ed] out of prison", supported Brock Turner's sentence, said the allegations against Kavanaugh shouldn't play a role in whether he gets confirmed or not (that his "qualifications...should be evaluated independent of his teenage crimes or conduct"), and best of all - when Ray Rice was charged with felony assault for knocking a woman out on an elevator, he dropped the gem that "I wish [Rice] didn't lose his job" because "we all have skeletons).

The pro-Wahab/anti-Mei groups are repeatedly slamming Mei for a scandal involving City Manager Mark Danaj, wherein he was arrested for "domestic batter and false imprisonment", but was apparently able to get a $313,000 payout thanks to Mei (he now faces charges of embezzlement and misuse of taxpayer dollars on things like food delivery). I'm not fully aware of the whole story (there's obviously added context) myself, but there's been a ton of anti-Mei campaign literature on this one.

I went with Aisha Wahab (D), because ultimately, both seem like flawed liberal women who will toe the party line in the State Senate (especially Mei, but Wahab too) - but Mei is the daughter of Chinese immigrants, and Wahab the daughter of Afghan refugees who apparently got killed after coming here. I find the latter background more appealing (a.) she's an orphan, b.) she's the daughter of literal refugees, c.) I consider Afghans to be semi-Indian).

STATE ASSEMBLY (AD 24): Alex Lee (D). I discussed this race in an entire thread in June - there was a semi-controversial freshman Democratic incumbent, Alex Lee, three other Democrats, and a token Republican in the running, and I'd been undecided on which Democrat to back before ultimately selecting Teresa Keng. This race was very interesting, and had the GE featured Lee vs another Democrat, the GE would have been much more interesting than it is now as well - as things were, Lee finished first and the sole, token Republican, Bob Brunton, came in second. So this race is very dull and absolutely, titanium Safe D now (in primary season, there was a ton of campaign literature surrounding this race - but since the GE is absolutely, totally Safe Lee, neither side has bothered with any campaigning).

JUDICIAL: There were a ton of judicial races. They were strictly nonpartisan, and for each judge, you had to literally vote "Yes" or "No." To be honest, I didn't really understand how that worked, I doubt they'd really actively campaign, they didn't have partisan affiliations to help out, and I have very little background knowledge - so I left each and every one of these 12 races totally blank. Maybe that makes me a bad civic citizen, but I don't care enough about these to put in the time and effort needed to research all of these people and positions.

STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION: I've actually seen ads in support of Tony K. Thurmond, the incumbent Democrat, online. In this case, he seems like a mainstream D and Lance Christensen (the GOP candidate) a MAGA Republican. Easy vote for Tony Thurmond (D).

DISTRICT ATTORNEY: This race is nonpartisan and I've seen stuff in support of both Pamela Price and Terry Wiley. Price seems more left-wing than Wiley. Wiley seems more anti-crime, Price more 'woke'. In District Attorney / crime races, given the kinds of people the left goes for (Chesa Boudin, who San Francisco literally recalled), I'm more inclined to be quote unquote right wing. So going for Terry Wiley.

FREMONT CITY COUNCIL (DISTRICT 4): The incumbent is Yang Shao and he's got a lot of local support. Apparently he's done a good job on the city council; I'm fine taking the word of The Mercury News when they say "He has clearly mastered the city's finances...in District 4, voters should reelect Yang Shao." This race is nonpartisan, but Shao (who seems more left-leaning - probably is - otherwise I highly doubt he'd be able to win in the first place) nonetheless does have the endorsement of 6 Sillicon Valley Mayors (Palo Alto's Patrick Burt, Cupertino's Darcy Paul, Milpitas' Rick Tran, Newark's Al Nagy, Santa Clara's Lisa Gillmor, Sunnyvale's Larry Klein). Going with Yang Shao.

AC TRANSIT DISTRICT DIRECTOR: I had no clue about this race till I researched. Joel Young is the three-term incumbent, but the progressive Alfred Twu has the endorsement of the CA Democratic Party. Now, Twu has the endorsement of 6 mayors, but Young has the endorsement of the Mercury News - it itself notes that it did not endorse him in 2014 or 2018 "because of his use a decade ago of confidential district information to help his law clients employed at other transit districts." It claims it is doing so now because he has rectified the error and because Twu, though he's got a good platform in theory, is inexperienced and can't really put all his promises into practice (in other words, they think he'd be all talk, no action, while they believe Young's record speaks for itself and is quite solid). The Berkeley Side took a more balanced view and differentiated between Twu and Young, which I believe will be most useful in me making an independent decision on who to favour (much moreso than subjective, biased commentary). Twu apparently dislikes the fact that the board shut down Line 80 in Berkeley, opining that none should have to be shut down. Twu opposed removing the mask mandates on the buses. To be more specific on who's endorsed Twu, here's what the newspaper stated: "Twu has received endorsements from AC Transit directors Jovanka Beckles and Jean Walsh (whose wards both include parts of Berkeley), BART director Rebecca Saltzman, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguín and Berkeley councilmembers Lori Droste, Sophie Hahn, Kate Harrison, Rashi Kesarwani, Rigel Robinson and Terry Taplin. He’s also been endorsed by Seamless Bay Area, Alameda County Democrats, Cal Berkeley Democrats and the East Bay Transit Riders Union." I am genuinely undecided and honestly, this race shouldn't matter to us because I don't think my family ever uses the local bus system. Ultimately, I made the decision to abstain.

BART DIRECTOR (DISTRICT 6): This race matters a lot more, since (now not nearly as much since her job is her working from home) my mother used to ride the BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit, in case you didn't know) twice every weekday (to and from work), and we still occasionally use it (when we're going to / returning from San Francisco, for instance, we often take the BART - we don't go there too frequently, but we do go there every now and then). The incumbent is Liz Ames, but Lance Nishihira has sent two pieces of campaign literature (compared with zero from Ames) and seems like a good guy. He also has the endorsement of the CA Democratic Party. Further researching, he also has the endorsement of the majority of BART directors and the entire Union City City Council. I will go with Lance Nishihira (D).

PROPOSITION 1: The abortion protection amendment which, according to my ballot, actually spends zero money. I probably support this, and I know my very pro-choice mother definitely would, so voting yes.

PROPOSITION 26: The Native American gambling proposition, this one's not nearly as controversial as Prop 27. Seems to be supported by the GOP, while the Democrats (and the Greens) are 'neutral.' It would apparently increase state revenue, and it seems all right. Voted yes.

PROPOSITION 27: Everyone opposes this one...When both the CAGOP and the CA Democrats can agree that something is bad in 2022, you know it must *really* be bad (though it's still best to double-check anyway: the parties, back before the independent commission, worked together to create a highly destructive bipartisan gerrymander - so yeah, they can come together and agree on some really bad things, and it's not a great idea to blindly go along when they are in agreement, either). It's apparently also anti-Native-American tribes (over 50 tribes oppose it). Apparently out-of-state groups would get 90% of profits. And it makes "every phone a gambling device." I see no good reason to support this - except 'being a contrarian' and 'going against the grain,' which isn't really a reason - and plenty to oppose it. No.

PROPOSITION 28: More funding for arts and music - no. Don't believe in wasting the state's money on nonsense like that.

[Not enough characters remaining - propositions 29 and 30 covered in next post.]

[Schiff for Senate]

PROPOSITION 29: The dialysis one. Yes, it's been voted down in both 2018 and 2020 quite comfortably. And we've seen the poignant ads about "My life is in danger if prop 29 passes" (kids in my science class were talking about it as well one time, when the teacher was discussing kidney dialysis tubing in class). It is opposed by conservatives, and the common claim here is that it closes down dialysis clinics with its stringent requirements. However, the state's Green and Democratic Parties support it, and actually looking at the text of the proposition - it just seems to be increasing accountability for these clinics. At the same time, it costs the state $$$ as well (per my ballot, which helpfully lists the 'fiscal impacts' of each of the propositions). And, dumb reasoning, I know, but if it's supported by the Democrats and nonetheless got comfortably rejected twice, there must be a reason (or maybe there isn't, and voters just fall for the pathos appeals made by the anti-Prop-29 groups, rather than making logical, rational, informed decisions?). I'm ultimately not too well aware of how dialysis care works anyway, but it seems to be working for the 80,000 who use it. And, as the anti-Prop 29 campaign literature notes, the newspapers are against it too. Voted no.

PROPOSITION 30: At first this seemed like an obvious yes vote. It puts into place pro-environment measures, to be sourced and paid for by the ultra-ultra-rich (not even the top 1%, but the top 0.2%!)It taxes only those making over $2 million a year (0.2% of taxpayers) - though some anti-Prop-30 campaign literature outrageously claims it raises taxes on every Californian (this sort of outright misinformation, I feel, should be looked into - they're not just misleading, they appear to be blatantly lying) - to fight climate change by making charging stations for EV's, investing in wildfire control, and making EV's more affordable. It's supported by the CA Democrats, and opposed by the CAGOP and other conservative groups, of course. This seemed like an obvious vote, of course. But then the Green Party Voter Guide through a wench into this seemingly straightforward calculus: when it'd seem obvious that they'd support this kind of thing - and they acknowledge this, as well as the proposition's pros - they take note of some hidden details, as well, that result in them advocating a no vote on 30. Lyft apparently spent $8,000,000,000 getting the signatures needed to get this prop on the ballot - and there are reasons for it, obviously. They are required to have 90% of their miles be in zero emission vehicles by 2030. The Green Party believes that in supporting ZEVs rather than public transit, Prop 30 "undercuts" and "undermines" public transit (and apparently, ZEVs are of low priority to them anyway). Although they made it all sound scandalous, though, it ultimately seems like much ado over nothing by the Green Party, and them just finding stupid reasons to oppose an obviously good amendment. So, regardless of what the CAGOP and California Green Party want, I'm going to go with the CA Democratic Party (surprise, surprise) and vote yes.

PROPOSITION 31: Cracks down on flavoured cigarettes. Absolute yes.

COUNTY AMENDMENT D: Some measure about rural lands I couldn't be bothered to really research; voted yes.

Thus completing my mother's ballot - a process that only took up 3 and a half hours of my time.

My father, however, demanded details and explanations about why he should vote in each race, ultimately voting for Sally Leiber over Peter Coe Verbica (because she's an "environmental advocate" as per the ballot description, and a woman), and for Allison Hayden over Eric Swalwell (because Hayden was a "special education teacher" and a woman).

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Prop 131: NO

Why?

[Del Tachi]

U.S. Senate:  John Kennedy (R) (inc.)
U.S. Representative:  Dan Lux (R)

LA Senate District 5, special election:  Royce Duplessis (D)
LA Public Service Commission, District 3:  Lambert Boissiere III (D) (inc.)
Appeals Court Judge, 4th Circuit:  Ánh "Joseph" Cao (R)