[conspire] Ballot Analysis and the 7/8 Clause

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Paul Zander (paulz at ieee.org):

>  Thank you Rick for your efforts.  

Glad to help.  We're smarter together.

> I looked at RM's references.  On almost every issue the SMCdems and
> SMCreps had the opposite view.  The one exception was 24, regarding
> consumer privacy, they both recommend no.  Meanwhile, Rick is voting
> yes.  Hum, how might Rick know more about computers and privacy than
> our political "experts"?  I'm voting yes.

Honestly, I'd have had much less clue about Prop. 24, the online data
privacy measure, if I hadn't read Pete Stahl's explanation, and _he_ 
says he'd not have had much clue without a meticulous series of articles
by LA Times reporter Michael Hiltzik, detailing the history of this 
complex ballot measure and where all the bodies are buried.

Which IMO underlies my point about what I'm trying to do with the page: 
We're smarter if we pool the observations of credible commenters, and
see what each of them, pro and con, have to say.  I started the page
because I felt that we can do better than the dead-tree Official Voter
Information Guide and County Sample Ballot & Official Voter Information
Pamphlet -- because we have the World-Wide Web, so let's friggin' use it
properly.

My qualifier, _credible_ commenters, acknowledges one of the obstacles:
There's a lot of crazy, incompetent, and/or propagandistic and dishonest
junk out there, _especially_ just before Election Day, and I'll be the
first to acknowledge that I pick and choose what's worth even calling
attention to.

You'll have perhaps noted that in recent edits I moved the "S.M.C.
Democrats endorsed" and "S.M.C. Republicans endorsed" items (and their
Santa Clara County counterparts for Prop. RR) down to the bottom of the
block of endoursements.  That's because, on reflection, I felt they
don't give voters much information, and yet are still of interest.