Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Bond Election: Post News About Results Here...



....have you heard any poll results from the bond elections? post them here!

75 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Over at the Sec. of State's web page there are updated results.

http://www.arelections.org/index.php?ac:show:allcontests=1&elecid=109

6:00 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

With 6 of 75 Counties Reporting on Question #1, it is 63% Against and 37% For.

6:08 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

No Results Yet for Question #2

6:08 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you will click on the Question #2 it will give the results. At 8:38 15% reporting it was 53.38% against and 46.62% for question #2 There are still no results for the State rep seat.

6:40 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

17 of 75 Counties reporting

Q1: Roughly 60% against/ 40% in favor of...

Q2: Nothing...

6:40 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Referred Question No. 1 Against
57.78% For
42.22%

still nothing on #2, what is going on there?

6:58 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

That 58% against 42% for was with 33 of 75 counties reporting.

6:59 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Thank you anon 6:40. Good info.

Referred Question No. 2

Totals- 35 Counties Reporting

Against 15,755 51.02%
For 15,123 48.98%

This one will be close!

7:02 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Referred Question No. 1


Totals

Against 19,922 62.65%
For 11,877 37.35%


It is trending back against #1. It looks like #1 is going down.

7:03 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

41 of 75 counties:

Q1: 63% against, 37% for

Q2: 51% against, 49% for

7:15 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Wish we knew which counties were already in... I'm biting my nails here.

7:17 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

45 of 75 Counties Reporting


Referred Question No. 1 Against
62.48% For 37.52%
Referred Question No. 2 Against
51.37% For 48.63%

7:42 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

If I knew that Pulaski County had already reported, I'd call it right : Bond Question #2 Goes Down.

Since I DON'T know if Pulaski has reported, and the lack of 39 results indicate they have not, then I am not making a call on #2 yet.

7:45 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Referred Question No. 2 - Uncertified Track

Referred Question No. 2

Against 25,554 51.20%
For 24,355 48.80%


It appears that at least some of Pulaski has now reported in. It barely budged the numbers for the Education Bonds. The only other counties that could really swing it are Washington or Craighead. Anyone know if they have reported in?

7:54 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Don't know, Mark. But I will be shocked if Q2 goes down in defeat...

8:02 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link and the tracking. It is looking like tomorrow will be a good day.

8:05 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good Job, Debbie, Randy Minton, Peggy Jeffries, Betsy Hagan, Gunner DeLay, etc...

8:10 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

50 of 75 Counties:

Q1: 62.6% against, 37.4% for

Q2: 52.2% against, 47.8% for

8:12 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

qustion 2 goes down as well- my call

8:13 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

did Gunner come out against this?

8:16 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Re: Q2 dying:

I'll be pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless.

8:17 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Looks like the Democrat (Dobbins) is clobbering the Republican there in District 39...

8:18 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mark,

51 of 75 Counties Reporting
Referred Question No. 2
Against 50.47%
For 49.53%

Still too close to call. Hope you are right. But still too close to call.

8:22 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

This just in: Democrats are calling for a re-count on Referred Question 2...

(only joking)

8:30 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

only 1,180 votes in all of Pulaski county?!

8:40 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Well, I may have called it too early. Even though far more than half of the COUNTIES have reported in, only 39% of the BOXES have. A lot of small, rural boxes with few voters, and more likely to vote NO, report in earlier than the large boxes.

I guess I will go back to the edge of my seat!

8:58 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Who is the group "Arkansans Against Number 1" ? We should all send them a check for advertising against Referred Question 1. On the other hand, the CP were the only ones I saw who publicly opposed Q2...

9:04 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Curiously enough, the Arkansas Trucking Association (www.arkansastrucking.com) seems to be the primary opponent on Q1.

Don't mess with truckers!

9:18 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whoa,

The tiny Constitution Party was more in tune with the voters than the big dawg Republicans and Democrats who have all of the elected officials. That is newsworthy.

9:23 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If we did a winners/losers list on this, the truckers would have to be at or near the top. They were the first to come out against it, and they came out against as hard as anyone.

Who else is on the winners list?

9:26 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you mean, on number 1?

9:27 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see your point. Who are the winners for the bond elections as a whole. There is no need to limit discussion to question #1.

9:32 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Looks like the whole state is getting rain tonight. Better be careful out there--the roads are treacherous! Ha ha!

(bad joke)

9:32 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

The Arkansas Republican Assembly goes on the winners list along with the truckers.

9:32 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

The Constitution Party would have to go on the winner's list. For both 1 and 2. No one expected 2 to be this close, even if it winds up "winning".

9:35 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm going to let Jason know that I appreciate his people in the Constitution Party coming out against the both bonds. I think the highway bond was a no-brainer. I also appreciate Peggie Jeffries and the others who are looking into eliminating special elections for tax increases. But where was the opposition to the education bond?

9:37 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

The Eagle Forum, the American Familiy Association of Arkansas, they go on the list.

Debbie Pelley and Betsy Hagan go on the list. So does David Colbert.

Among Democrat Candidates, Halter, and as much as I think he is messed up he was right on #1, Drew Pritt goes on the winner's list.

Among Republicans, obviously Jim Holt goes on the list. Our "fringe candidate" just keeps winning whenever the people have a say in it. When it is just the insider tounge-waggers and media leftists he looks bad, but time after time he proves smarter than his critics.

9:38 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim Holt had considerable influence in defeating Question 1, especially in Republican vote rich Northwest Arkansas. I see no way that either Matayo or Banks, who are both nice enough fellows, will be able to make it into a runoff against Holt.

9:41 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

let me amend that, it was not the leftist media, they did a heroic job- it was the ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA.

9:50 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Banks and Matayo supporters, don't respond to the baiting. Jim Holt deserves some credit for this one and failure to recognise it will only serve to make you look stupid. Of course he was on the outside already and really had nothing to lose. Perhaps there is something to be said for that.

9:55 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Aren't you trying to bait Holt supporters by saying he had "nothing to lose"?

I assure you, Jim Holt took the position he did because he studied it very throughly and determined that it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I know why he did it, I was there.

10:02 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

I suppose the webmaster at ARElections went to bed. There hasn't been an update in hours. Either that, or they needed his help stuffing ballot boxes before the tally got too close to being entirely finished!

10:05 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

i guess i will go to bed then, since results have stopped coming in.

10:07 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Goodnight! I hate going to bed when the margin is so close (Q2)!

10:09 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Well, at just past midnight CST, with 53 of 75 counties reporting:

Q1: 61.7% against, 38.3% for

Q2: 50.1% against, 49.9% for

10:12 PM, December 13, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the contrary, Mark, actually I was making the point that being in a postion to decide something purely on it's merits rather than the consequences (to himself or his constituents) of taking the stand was worthy enough that something positive could be said for being in that position in the first place.

10:22 PM, December 13, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

With 2218 of 2138 precints reporting:

Q1: 60.15% against, 39.85% for

Q2: 50.31% against, 49.69% for

5:59 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I assure you, Jim Holt took the position he did because he studied it very throughly and determined that it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I know why he did it, I was there."

To Bad he voted to allow the election to go ahead. The real winner here Is DANNY ALTUS.

ALTUS for Lt Gov.

6:21 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Altus has been a good man on this and many other issues.

7:09 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Danny Altus is a good man. I think he is worthy of even higher office.

7:19 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What did Altus do? And Why is he not running for higher office/

7:24 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Your assertion that he had nothing to lose is false. If the bonds had passed and Holt was the only Republican state-wide candidate to come out against them he would have taken a PR beating and you have to know it.

The other two guys are talking about what "team players" they are. Jim gave them a perfect opening to point out how he was NOT a team player because he did not go along with this bad idea.

7:27 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Altus voted against sending question #1 to the ballot in the first place. I don't know why he is not running for higher office. Maybe he will next round.

7:29 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

The GOP does need a good Treasurer Candidate. Altus for Treasurer!

7:29 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

They don't really like Altus, because he's not a team player, either. When else have you heard these punks compliment anything he'd done? They're just praising him to avoid giving Holt his due.

But Altus truly is worthy of support.

7:30 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mark--the earlier post is with 2118 of 2130 precincts reporting and is therefore more accurate. The Arkansas Election Results site won't be caught up until sometime tomorrow...

7:31 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who eles voted not to send the questions to the voters?

7:34 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe Altus was the only Senator

7:39 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

By the way, it's Senator Altes (Dist 13, Ft Smith area), not Altus .

7:51 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is ALtes a lawyer? If so why does he not run for AG. Who eles might run for AG?

7:59 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Don't think so, but he's on the Arkansas Legislative Council and the Litigation Reports Oversight Committee.

7:59 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Altes sole "No" senate vote on highway bond, Sens. (Taylor and Wilkins "Excused")

Reps. Dangeau, Elliot, Hardy, D. Johnson, Ledbetter, Rainey were only "No" House votes on highway bond. (Reps. Glidewell and Goss voted "Present," and Reps. Bright, Chesterfield, Cook, Cooper, Max, Maxwell, Pickett, Roebuck, Mr. Speaker Willis as "Not Voting")

8:18 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

good catch anon.

I'll repost those results

Q2: 50.31% against, 49.69% for

The lastest I heard was that q2 was down by only 200 votes with the only two counties left being Saline and Grant. I expect those two counties to vote against it.

8:19 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Jason Sheppard said...

Anonymous@7:34, are you saying that opposing the bond at the legislative level was a bad thing?

8:49 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

I heard that Crittenden and Drew counties were a couple of the very few that approved RQ1.

9:01 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No I was just wandering how many opposed letting the people decide instead of politicians. The people of Arkansas deserve a say when a state goes into debit.

9:11 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How did NWA vote. THey had the most ot gain in RQ1?

9:12 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Jason Sheppard said...

Anonymous@9:11,
No I was just wandering how many opposed letting the people decide instead of politicians. The people of Arkansas deserve a say when a state goes into [debt].

That doesn't make sense. If the measure didn't make it to the ballot, the state wouldn't be going into debt...

9:36 AM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Not sure about support for Q1 in NWA, but is was defeated there, nonetheless. Found this on Q2 though:

University of Arkansas officials were surprised by negative returns in Washington County, home to the flagship university campus. Returns there were 52 percent against the proposal.

"I really thought we would have had a lot of support there," said Richard Hudson, vice chancellor for government and community relations. "The university has such as direct impact on that community, I would have expected a lot of support there."
Source: http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2005/12/14/news/regional/01azhigheredbond.txt

9:47 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It never hurts to have the peoples imput about the issues. If the RQs did not go to the people then they would of done something else to get money for the AHTD. The people have shown that they want to have a say in going to debt. RQ1 would of let the state be
in debt for years with no way the people could fix it. It never hurts to get the people's
opinions.

10:07 AM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The following quotes reveal how out to lunch the highway commission remains in their evaluation of the bond issue. Quotes from "Vote elicits interstate worry. State may return to road-money juggling" by Noel E. Oman ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE

“[Voters] obviously felt like a continuation of the work we have been doing was not necessary,” Prissy Hickerson of Texarkana chairman of the Arkansas Highway Commission said Tuesday.

Commentary: Obviously the highway commission misses the point of the defeat. They are blaming voters for not wanting good interstate highways. We have the classic elite v. ignorant masses syndrome being demonstrated.

“We may have to look at postponing non-interstate highway projects unless something else materializes,” Hickerson said.

Commentary: Excellent idea. How about looking into government pork? How about eliminating unnecessary special elections? By the way, the bonds were not for immediate use. What exactly will they postpone?

“The question remains how do we continue to take care of the highways we depend so much on. We’ll just have to see.” Dan Flowers, director of the Highway Department.

Commentary: It sounds like we need new commissioners who know how to issue debt without taking away voter rights. Better yet, we need commissioners who know how to propose plans that include pay as you go principles and improved efficiency in road repair.

12:00 PM, December 14, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Time for new commissioners? Just yesterday we were supposed to trust them with $m575 a year!

12:07 PM, December 14, 2005  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

Update:

RQ2 failed by 596 votes (1.92%) with 57,453 (50.26%)against, 56,857 (49.74%)for.

I couldn't find anything yet on how NW Arkansas voted on either bond.

8:20 AM, December 15, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How Can I DO IT

Im trying to find people that want to Change their Lives for the better. If your interested in self help book and anxiety and want to start living like your the richest person in the world visit us at http://goals.spiritualideas.com/.

11:43 PM, October 11, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where did you find it? Interesting read Effexor+75+mg Online digital picture print Syntex gate openers

5:37 PM, April 25, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home