6 points
*

If there is interest we can add the Mississippi, Missouri, and Michigan election news here as well. They are state and local primary elections but I’ve not seen much interest by the community.

Edit: Looks like there isn’t.

permalink
report
reply
63 points

This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it. I get text messages from right-leaning groups though and these are the kinds of things they’re using to push this initiative:

“Radicals are targeting Ohio children. Leftist amendments to the Ohio constitution will allow children to undergo dangerous sex changes without parental consent, and allow men to dominate women’s sports. Protect your parental rights. Protect your children.“

It’s so ridiculously stupid and over-the-top, do Republicans actually believe this trash? It’s obviously about abortion, I’m surprised they don’t come out and just say it.

I voted ‘No’ on the measure, however, Brexit, of all things, did make me think about this a little more. I think Brexit was a universally stupid move for Britain and I can’t imagine something so incredibly important was left up to a slim ~51-49 vote result, when it should’ve been something more like 60-40, which could’ve prevented Brexit altogether.

Yet I’m doing the exact opposite in voting against Issue 1, which I should be in support of, since it would make it harder for potentially catastrophic initiatives from getting passed. I guess it’s painfully obvious what Republicans are trying to do here AND they’re sneaking it in during a low voter turnout special election, it’s literally the only thing on the ballot in my area. I’m contradicting myself because I don’t trust the motives of the people pushing it.

permalink
report
reply
32 points

Republicans count on people’s prejudice and watching propaganda so they don’t know it is about abortion choice. They want to say woke agenda to get them to vote against their interests.

Woke people are women, minorities, LGBTQ, and non Christians. They are against us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it.

This very thing inspired me, a person who currently works nights, to screw up my sleep schedule to vote against it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Same. This is the second time I’ve ever voted, and I’m 35.

I guess I have to thank the Republicans for becoming insane enough to make me feel like I can no longer afford not to vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Wouldn’t it be nice if you could just vote by mail at your leisure?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

The 60% threshold isn’t inherently bad, and I agree that an argument could be made for requiring at least 55% approval in order for a ballot initiative to pass. Here are my problems with the Ohio situation:

  • Issue 1 would make it harder to put initiatives on the ballot, period. The big hurdle is requiring a relatively large number of signatures from EVERY county in the state. This means that a single ruby-red county could single-handedly keep an issue off of the ballot

  • Ohio is so gerrymandered that ballot initiatives are about the only voice available to the population. The GOP has supermajorities in the state Senate and House, even though they only have about a 4% advantage in registered voters.

It’s absolutely critical to defeat Issue 1.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ohio is so gerrymandered that ballot initiatives are about the only voice available to the population. The GOP has supermajorities in the state Senate and House, even though they only have about a 4% advantage in registered voters.

Even more to the gerrymandering, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled the CURRENT gerrymandered districting is unconstitutional. GOP lead house and senate in the state simply ignored it and keeps the gerrymandering which keeps them in control of the state legislature.

Ohioians few remaining ways to make their voices heard is by referendum, which is what the GOP is trying to take away here from Ohio voters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Constitutions are fundamentally anti-democratic in intention.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Good analysis as usual from 538: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ohio-issue-1-abortion-ballot-measures/

For those who haven’t seen coverage yet, in brief: as usual republicans saw a defeat coming in a democratic election (the 50%+1 threshold November ballot initiative to enshrine reproductive rights into Ohio’s constitution), so they are attempting to change the rules in their favor (require constitutional amendments to get 60% of the vote, effectively allowing minority rule) in an early off-season ballot measure today.

Despite the early positive indications that this measure has an uphill battle, if you are in Ohio please vote.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Added your link.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
*

Is this the same referendum format requiring half the votes +1 to pass? The exact thing they’re trying to kill off?

EDIT: The measure should have to be supported by the same vote threshold to pass that it seeks to impose.

permalink
report
reply
31 points

The irony is even dumber since they already passed HB 458 which forbids such an election in August.

They broke their own rule, a rule that they themselves pushed through.

Don’t ever pretend that the GOP cares about rules or laws. They will literally do whatever they must to remain in power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Thank you for this. I live in Ohio and did not know this law existed. I have not heard it brought up in any discussion or news coverage (although I admit my decision was made early and have not spent much time listening to the ‘debates’). Did LaRose and company offer any reason as to why they think HB 458 does not apply in this case?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

[“As a course of action, normal course of doing business, yes, I do not believe in having elections in August as a normal way of holding elections,” he explained.

“But if the state legislature decides to hold an election in August, it’s not unusual,” said LaRose.] (https://www.npr.org/2023/08/08/1192550481/ohio-issue-1-ballot-special-election-abortion-constitutional-amendment)

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Sort of the ironic soft underbelly of small-d democratic institutions. You overthrow them by winning power democratically and keeping it by force, whereas if someone wants to take it back for democracy they have to then take it by force and keep it democratically, the harder proposition.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/2023/ohio-issue-1/

Votes received and percentages of total vote
Response Votes Pct.
Yes 111,710 28.4 %
No 281,694 71.6 %
An estimated 12.6 percent of votes have been counted.

As of 7:50 PM right now.

Edit 1: 7:53 PM
Yes 138,143 29.4 %
No 331,325 70.6 %

Edit 2: 7:55 PM
Yes 158,861 29.1 %
No 387,174 70.9 %

17.5% counted.

Edit 3: 8:04 PM
Yes 193,220 29.7 %
No 457,553 70.3 %

20.8% counted.

Edit 4: 8:19 PM

Yes 232,355 30.9 %
No 519,368 69.1 %

24.1% counted. Yeah I don’t see it passing.

Edit 5: 8:25 PM

Wasserman and Decision Desk already called it for No. Will see how big of a margin now, but it is clear the proposition failed.

Edit 6: 8:48 PM

Yes 376,012 37.1 %
No 638,696 62.9 %

32.5% counted.

Edit 7: 8:56 PM

Washington Post projects No winning.

Yes 429,617 38.1 %
No 697,980 61.9 %

36.9% counted.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Oh boy if it stays ~30 something to ~60, the legislators may regret this. Plus if it’s 60+, the proposition will have failed by the proportion they were proposing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I really hope the numbers stay at these levels. This issue needs to not only fail, it needs to be demolished with extreme prejudice. The goons who put this on the ballot need to see that they are absolutely on the wrong side of history.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 446K

    Comments