Chicagoist: Since U Been Vote'n

sparky

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:12:50 -0600

Yeah, Stephen. Some people do not want a con-con. The original language that bunnybear posted was totally leading. You would think that they could have reprogrammed the electronic voting machines to have the proper language. But I have no idea how that is done or how long it takes. I voted on saturday in Ward 47. It took about an hour, but it was well worth it. And the electronic machine I used was dummy-proof: you review your ballot three times before submitting. Now whether it will be counted is another story.... Don't forget to thank the election volunteers! :)

bunnybear

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:22:46 -0600

The inclusion of the part describing how 75% of voters rejected the 1988 call for a convention was deemed to be electioneering against a convention. Also, the statement that not voting on this equates to a "No" is false. Here is the text: NOTICE THE FAILURE TO VOTE ON THIS QUESTION IS THE EQUIVALENT OF A NEGATIVE VOTE. (THIS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A DIRECTION THAT YOUR VOTE IS REQUIRED TO BE CAST EITHER IN FAVOR OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSITION HEREIN CONTAINED.) Explanation of Proposed Call This proposal deals with a call for a state constitutional convention. The last such convention was held in 1969-70, and a new Constitution was adopted in 1970. The 1970 Illinois Constitution requires that the question of calling a convention be placed before the voters every 20 years. In 1988 the electors rejected the call for a constitutional convention, with 75% voting against calling a convention and 25% voting in favor of calling a convention. If you believe the 1970 Illinois Constitution needs to be revised through the convention process, vote “YES” on the question of calling a constitutional convention. If you believe that a constitutional convention is not necessary, or that changes can be accomplished through other means, vote “NO” on the calling of a constitutional convention.

Stephen

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:43:09 -0600

Took me about 15 minutes total to vote on Saturday morning (1st Ward, Goldblatt's Building, Chicago & Ashland). I only had 3 people ahead of me. The one confusing thing I encountered was the sheet they were handing out instructing voters to ignore some of the language in the constitutional convention question, and instead to consider some other information on that sheet of paper. Didn't make any sense to me.

ktr

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:19:11 -0600

it took me all of 20 minutes to vote when i went to 69 w. washington last tuesday. it was 8:45 when i went in, i was back on the street at 9:05. i didn't mind being a little late for work to fulfill a civic duty.

bunnybear

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:02:05 -0600

We waited for an hour, but that was Saturday, so I expected a wait. This was at the Independence Library on Irving. They said the lines on weekdays last week were less than one third of what we encountered. But at least it's out of the way now. And we didn't have to face the gauntlet of citizens that just happen to be hanging around outside with signs and buttons but aren't really electioneering, they're just really, really excited--usually about their Daley machine candidates.

electHIM

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:56:43 -0600

YO you know something will go down the night of the actual election!

prattfall

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:50:26 -0600

Be aware- lines are long. You probably won't be able to vote in the space of a lunchbreak. I waited an hour and a half last Tuesday at the 69 W. Washington office when I got in line at 2PM. On the other hand, they'll almost certainly be longer next Tuesday, so its probably worth the wait if you can get the time now.

Lotusmonger

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:49:23 -0600

I voted for a girl name Nikki.

jasmine

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:36:27 -0600

I didn't know Prince was making polling station signs. And that he's not the best speller.