Bond Election: Post News About Results Here...
....have you heard any poll results from the bond elections? post them here!
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
....have you heard any poll results from the bond elections? post them here!
Archives
- 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
- 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
- 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
- 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
- 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
- 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
- 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
- 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
- 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
- 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
- 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
- 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
- 05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
- 06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
- 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
- 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
- 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
- 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
- 11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007
- 12/01/2007 - 01/01/2008
- 01/01/2008 - 02/01/2008
- 02/01/2008 - 03/01/2008
- 03/01/2008 - 04/01/2008
- 04/01/2008 - 05/01/2008
- 05/01/2008 - 06/01/2008
- 06/01/2008 - 07/01/2008
- 07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
- 08/01/2008 - 09/01/2008
- 09/01/2008 - 10/01/2008
- 10/01/2008 - 11/01/2008
- 11/01/2008 - 12/01/2008
- 12/01/2008 - 01/01/2009
- 01/01/2009 - 02/01/2009
- 02/01/2009 - 03/01/2009
- 03/01/2009 - 04/01/2009
- 04/01/2009 - 05/01/2009
- 05/01/2009 - 06/01/2009
- 06/01/2009 - 07/01/2009
- 07/01/2009 - 08/01/2009
- 08/01/2009 - 09/01/2009
- 09/01/2009 - 10/01/2009
- 10/01/2009 - 11/01/2009
- 11/01/2009 - 12/01/2009
- 12/01/2009 - 01/01/2010
- 01/01/2010 - 02/01/2010
- 02/01/2010 - 03/01/2010
- 03/01/2010 - 04/01/2010
- 04/01/2010 - 05/01/2010
- 05/01/2010 - 06/01/2010
- 06/01/2010 - 07/01/2010
- 07/01/2010 - 08/01/2010
- 08/01/2010 - 09/01/2010
- 09/01/2010 - 10/01/2010
- 10/01/2010 - 11/01/2010
- 11/01/2010 - 12/01/2010
- 12/01/2010 - 01/01/2011
- 01/01/2011 - 02/01/2011
- 02/01/2011 - 03/01/2011
- 03/01/2011 - 04/01/2011
- 04/01/2011 - 05/01/2011
- 05/01/2011 - 06/01/2011
- 06/01/2011 - 07/01/2011
- 07/01/2011 - 08/01/2011
- 08/01/2011 - 09/01/2011
- 09/01/2011 - 10/01/2011
- 10/01/2011 - 11/01/2011
- 11/01/2011 - 12/01/2011
- 12/01/2011 - 01/01/2012
- 01/01/2012 - 02/01/2012
- 02/01/2012 - 03/01/2012
- 03/01/2012 - 04/01/2012
- 04/01/2012 - 05/01/2012
- 05/01/2012 - 06/01/2012
- 06/01/2012 - 07/01/2012
- 07/01/2012 - 08/01/2012
- 08/01/2012 - 09/01/2012
- 09/01/2012 - 10/01/2012
- 10/01/2012 - 11/01/2012
- 11/01/2012 - 12/01/2012
- 12/01/2012 - 01/01/2013
- 01/01/2013 - 02/01/2013
- 02/01/2013 - 03/01/2013
- 03/01/2013 - 04/01/2013
- 04/01/2013 - 05/01/2013
- 05/01/2013 - 06/01/2013
- 06/01/2013 - 07/01/2013
Thank you for visiting
Arkansas Watch
75 Comments:
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
With 6 of 75 Counties Reporting on Question #1, it is 63% Against and 37% For.
No Results Yet for Question #2
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.
17 of 75 Counties reporting
Q1: Roughly 60% against/ 40% in favor of...
Q2: Nothing...
Referred Question No. 1 Against
57.78% For
42.22%
still nothing on #2, what is going on there?
That 58% against 42% for was with 33 of 75 counties reporting.
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!
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.
41 of 75 counties:
Q1: 63% against, 37% for
Q2: 51% against, 49% for
Wish we knew which counties were already in... I'm biting my nails here.
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%
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.
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?
Don't know, Mark. But I will be shocked if Q2 goes down in defeat...
Thanks for the link and the tracking. It is looking like tomorrow will be a good day.
Good Job, Debbie, Randy Minton, Peggy Jeffries, Betsy Hagan, Gunner DeLay, etc...
50 of 75 Counties:
Q1: 62.6% against, 37.4% for
Q2: 52.2% against, 47.8% for
qustion 2 goes down as well- my call
did Gunner come out against this?
Re: Q2 dying:
I'll be pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless.
Looks like the Democrat (Dobbins) is clobbering the Republican there in District 39...
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.
This just in: Democrats are calling for a re-count on Referred Question 2...
(only joking)
only 1,180 votes in all of Pulaski county?!
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!
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...
Curiously enough, the Arkansas Trucking Association (www.arkansastrucking.com) seems to be the primary opponent on Q1.
Don't mess with truckers!
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.
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?
you mean, on number 1?
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.
Looks like the whole state is getting rain tonight. Better be careful out there--the roads are treacherous! Ha ha!
(bad joke)
The Arkansas Republican Assembly goes on the winners list along with the truckers.
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".
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?
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.
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.
let me amend that, it was not the leftist media, they did a heroic job- it was the ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA.
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.
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.
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!
i guess i will go to bed then, since results have stopped coming in.
Goodnight! I hate going to bed when the margin is so close (Q2)!
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
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.
With 2218 of 2138 precints reporting:
Q1: 60.15% against, 39.85% for
Q2: 50.31% against, 49.69% for
"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.
Altus has been a good man on this and many other issues.
Danny Altus is a good man. I think he is worthy of even higher office.
What did Altus do? And Why is he not running for higher office/
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.
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.
The GOP does need a good Treasurer Candidate. Altus for Treasurer!
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.
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...
Who eles voted not to send the questions to the voters?
I believe Altus was the only Senator
By the way, it's Senator Altes (Dist 13, Ft Smith area), not Altus .
Is ALtes a lawyer? If so why does he not run for AG. Who eles might run for AG?
Don't think so, but he's on the Arkansas Legislative Council and the Litigation Reports Oversight Committee.
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")
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.
Anonymous@7:34, are you saying that opposing the bond at the legislative level was a bad thing?
I heard that Crittenden and Drew counties were a couple of the very few that approved RQ1.
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.
How did NWA vote. THey had the most ot gain in RQ1?
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...
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
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.
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.
Time for new commissioners? Just yesterday we were supposed to trust them with $m575 a year!
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.
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/.
Where did you find it? Interesting read Effexor+75+mg Online digital picture print Syntex gate openers
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home