California only had two statewide ballot measures on the June 5, 2012 ballot. The votes won’t all be counted until the first week in July. As this story shows, the measure to impose a new tax on cigarettes was trailing on election night by 63,000 votes, but at this point, it is only behind by 17,000 votes, with many votes still uncounted.
BAN = censorship = corruption = Lies
I type comments that are regularly blocked. To me that’s unfair, wasting my time and it’s consership.
The owner of this site says; “There’s no room”. WTF? No room???
The owner of this site is clearly biased against me and equal time for alternative points of view. His agenda is not for fairness, but to give his views an edge over others.
Ogle you should count your lucky stars he hasn’t banned you altogether like most sites have. Your senseless drivel gets very tiring.
I type comments that are regularly blocked.
Very unfortunate not all of them are blocked.
wasting my time
You waste everyone’s time with your psychotic rambling.
Ogle you should count your lucky stars he hasn’t banned you altogether like most sites have. Your senseless drivel gets very tiring.
Very true, and Ogle’s luck in this case is everyone else’s misfortune. His presence detracts greatly from this site.
@4 It’s senseless that I write the BAN is both censorious and biased towards pluralists?
@4 & 5 Your support for pluralists and support for the censorship of alternative positions such as pure proportional representation is noted.
@4 & 5 I may be a registered Libertarian at the moment, but I don’t buy all the biased crap from both the Libertarian Party and from this site favoring pluralism, single-winner districts, unfair election practices and IRV over the past 18 years since I’ve been a reader and sometimes a subscriber.
I’m looking to switch to independent of a small political party that represents my views. It’s obvious that Rs, Ds, Ls and Gs are on the same track with BAN to support IRV, single-winner district power grabs, unfair and biased elections winner-take-all and plurality elections in both single-winner and multi-winner districts.
I’m not for that, and the strategy to continue to support such activities is counter-productive.
The Constitution and American Independent Parties too. They have no idea how to create unity with votes cast as proof, and they’re on tract for another 18 years of losses, due to the lack of free speech and communication.
Most of these people would just assume hang up in your face rather than hear about how third parties and independents can work together in unity with votes cast as proof.
Not me, I enjoy working on unity and talking, and anyone can call me or email anytime, and I’ll explain how PR works.
But you’re not going to find the same attitude from any of those in charge of the parties I’ve mentioned here, or from BAN.
James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
(415) 686-1996
Constitution and American Independent Parties; They’re too busy suing each other! Run by control freak power mongering mean people!
I’m for ranked choice consensus voting, so people can find 100% agreement from the more alternatives the better.
In fact we at the USA Parliament operation are the ones who innovated and utilize ranked choice consensus voting.
Due to the advanced level of the USA Parliament’s structure, we’ve been able to attain such lofty heights of 100% between all participants.
100% agreement!
PR, could you please shut the fuck up!
Exactly!