Darting here and there on (mostly) election news…
>The Big ’Un. With less than a fortnight to go before the election, who would’ve bet that 180 days ago both Obama and Romney would be tied at 47 per cent each in the latest electoral poll? Nail biter is a apt descriptor.
>More than one million people registered to vote online. We'll know on November 2 how many of these were new and what the composition looks like. This could be a game changer in ballot measures and some races - if they turn out to vote.
>There’s an important deadline looming and if you ‘follow the money’ as one should to see who’s backing what and whom (who?), state campaigns had until midnight on the 26th to file reports covering contributions and expenditures between October 1-20.
>Speaking of following the money, anyone who doesn’t realize the ‘No on 32’ campaign is almost wholly funded by the unions just isn’t paying attention. Union contributions have pushed the ‘No on Prop. 32’ coinage well past the $61 million mark.
To be sure, there’s a sop in the measure to control business PACS but the real crux of Prop. 32 is eliminating the unions’ ability to deduct PAC contributions from worker pay checks without their consent and spend that money on candidates (or initiatives) that may or may not represent the views of the rank-and-file but who are pro-union (READ: Democrats).
You know there’s some heavy money involved when the bulk of what you hear between innings on the Giants’ game (be it radio or TV) are pro-32 and anti-32 ads. (They even run more times than those insurance ads with the gecko/happy piglet – no mean feat.)
>El puntal 30 no hace bien. Support for the Gov’s tax-hike initiative has dropped below 50 percent for the first time since its’ introduction. According to a Public Policy Institute of California poll, 48 percent of likely voters support Prop. 30; 44 percent oppose it; and eight percent are undecided. (The last group is probably composed of the same nimrods who want to ban the showing of “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown” and “A Charlie Brown Christmas” because of some sort of implied bullying... by the Peanuts gang You can’t make stuff like that up.)
So have the chainsaws at the ready because if Prop. 30 goes down in the proverbial flameola, it will trigger $5.4 billion in cuts to K-12 schools and community colleges, and an additional $250 million each to the UC and CalState University systems. Believe it or don’t, the electorate tend sto vote "no" on most initiatives - particularly those hiking taxes - so these measures have historically needed the support of well over 50 percent heading into an election to survive. (BTW: Prop. 38 has it worse; only 39% support.)
>Finally, most of those arrested in the Occupy Oakland protests were never charged. (No 'bleep' Sherlock.) You remember those Gandhi-like outpourings where they broke windows; started fights amongst themselves; looted stores; mugged people on the street; and, sexually harassed women in the Occupy village.
It’s reminiscent of the UC Davis protest which generated at least one ‘get rich quick scheme.’ To wit: go to any UC campus; stage a protest (your choice on the aggrieved/oppressed/underrepresented issue); willfully disregard two legal requests from law enforcement officials to disburse; harass law enforcement officials (mildly or openly); disobey a third legal request from law enforcement officials; harass some more; get pepper-sprayed for disobeying the law; earn $30,000. Not exactly ‘Kumbayah’ in approach but how else can you earn 30 G’s -and- get to waive “Hi Mom’ to the TV cameras?