The whole point of free speech is not to make ideas exempt from criticism but to expose them to it.

Friday, October 29, 2010

No Polls, just predictions

Sanborn's predictions without much comment. By the way, I've voted. And my predictions do not necessarily reflect how I cast my vote.

Governor's Race: Daugaard will win decisively, but not by the margin predicted by the polls. Heidepriem's last-minute advertising will likely move a few, but not enough.

House Race: Herseth Sandlin loses by a wider margin than polls predict. She has never been loved by South Dakotans the way Johnson, Daschle and McGovern were at one time. She has made the same mistakes that Daschle and McGovern did insofar as she has become part of the Washington elite, much more quickly than either of them. She's been viewed as a carpetbagger from the beginning, and there aren't enough loyal Democrats to carry her back to Washington. Undecided voters will in the end swing to Noem. Some of Marking's supporters will enter the booth knowing he cannot win and will cast for Noem.

IM 12: The smoking ban. Smokers will not have the energy after dealing with the rest of the political season and will be too exhausted to complete their ballot. Smoking ban wins.

IM 13: I predict that many more people recognize the benefits of medical marijuana than polls suggest. It will be a surprise to pollsters, but I think South Dakotans do have compassion and this measure will barely squeak approval.

I've put them out there. What say you Forumpians? Will I be dining on Crow next Wednesday?

10 comments:

Bill Fleming said...

I've been wondering if you're going to poll the "Secret Ballot" and the "Cement Plant" ballot issues here, Mike. Cool that you are polling the others.

I don't think IM 13 is going to pass, and I think I know why. We can discuss it aster the dust settles.

I'm recommending a "NO" vote on the Secret ballot because it's a trap.

I need to understand the Cement Plant issue better. Any interest in a discussion of it here?

taco said...

I agree with all the predictions.

repete said...

I'll bet we have poor democrat turnout, so you're probably right on Mike.
But what might change if a lot of tokers show up to vote in this election?

Duffer said...

It's difficult to reconcile the KELO/Argus polling (62% against) on IM13 with the last election results on the issue. WTF?

It'd likely make sense to vote yes on the cement plant issue if it didn't have that phrase about eliminating the transfer for education. At least that's the way I read it.

Bill's right-on with the secret ballot being a trap. The national Chamber of Commerce is doing everything they can to trash worker rights. I understand they're also funding the anti-Prop 19 effort in California too. Not sure I understand that move, other than to undermine any effort of a natural political opponent.

I heard someone say a while back that Libertarians are really just Republicans that smoke pot.

We'll see.

Les said...

I think you're pretty close Mike.

As to the House I'm hearing a few GOP and more Dem's voting Marking. He may hit 10% depending on the darkness of the booth. What happens if South Dakotans view this similarly to Gov Rounds initial victory? Marking?

13 has a chance, but lots of misinformation being digested by the grandparents though.

Correct me if I'm wrong on the cement plant issue. The change would protect the fund from depletion while disconnecting it from education?
Does it matter where our ed funds come from if we make sure they are there to get the job done. Such as vid lottery being funded into education? Well maybe it is or maybe similar numbers to vid lott are but from another source if that matters. And maybe it should be the combination of the two funding ed. What do you think Bill?

Derek said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DDC said...

Can anyone explain to me how ensuring the right to a secret ballot is a "trap".

Bill Fleming said...

Okay, Les, I've studied the Cement plant thing better and I'm going to recommend a NO vote for several reasons:

1. Protection of the principle is not the priority (at least not mine), the funding of education is.

2. Given administrators who know what they're doing, there's no reason why that fund shouldn't be able to yield a good return while not depleting the fund. There was a while there when the market was down, but it's not now. The Dow Jones is at 11,118 right now. That fund has got to be making money, or the people who are doing the investing are incompetent, seems to me.

3. There might be a compromise law that continues to fund education while keeping the principle above a certain depletion threshold, but this is not that, as per Duffer's observation.

Les said...

Oh Lord, you would bet our students and their funding on a market that has already sucked up our securitized tobacco fund Flem?

It doesn't matter how good the admins are if the market doesn't perform to the requirements of disbursement.

This is killing the goose for the golden egg.

I hope your nest egg has a reproductive ability Bill.

Bill Fleming said...

Les, if they change the law so the earnings don't fund education, it doesn't make any difference whether you're talking about earnings or principal. Neither will go to education.

Nothing lasts forever, man. Sooner or later, if we want to educate our youth, somebody's going to have to pay for it, right?