Election Questions

[Hometown]

I'm still getting back into the swing of things here in Tulsa and I was wondering if anyone would be kind enough to answer some questions about tomorrow's election?

I've never seen the "straight party voting" option before.  You mean you really just have to mark Democrat or Republican to cast a vote for each of your party's candidates in that category?

Are there any willing Democrats out there who can help with the Judicial Officers category?  Has the party issued any endorsements for Judicial Officers?

And how did the Democrats end up with a Rooster and Republicans got an Eagle?

Maybe there are other neophytes out there that would also like to post questions along with mine.

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

I'm still getting back into the swing of things here in Tulsa and I was wondering if anyone would be kind enough to answer some questions about tomorrow's election?

I've never seen the "straight party voting" option before.  You mean you really just have to mark Democrat or Republican to cast a vote for each of your party's candidates in that category?

Are there any willing Democrats out there who can help with the Judicial Officers category?  Has the party issued any endorsements for Judicial Officers?

And how did the Democrats end up with a Rooster and Republicans got an Eagle?

Maybe there are other neophytes out there that would also like to post questions along with mine.

Yes Hometown, if you want to vote for every Democrat candidate (or Republican), all you have to do is complete the one arrow for your party and you don't have to mark each individual candidate.  You can mark each one, and leave the "straight party" section blank if you wish.  I have never used the staight party option, but it has always been on OK ballots since I began voting in 1975.  The straight party option applies to partisan elections only; you still must mark judicial and initiative/referrendum questions separately.

The judicial retention races are non-partisan, I believe.  If they are not retained, then the governor or such must appoint a new judge.  I really haven't heard of or know of any big negative for not retaining all the judges, except for the recent rubarb where the woman was arrested for removing Keune (sp) signs.  The opponent in that instance is incumbent Judge Wall.  Most judicial votes are yes or no for retention.

[Hometown]

Thanks Steve.  That straight party option sure is convenient.  But it's hard to make an informed vote on the judges.  

I remember the first time I voted I cast a vote for George McGovern at that little library on 23rd Street near Sheridan.  If I remember correctly that was the first election where 18 year olds could vote.

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Thanks Steve.  That straight party option sure is convenient.  But it's hard to make an informed vote on the judges.  

I remember the first time I voted I cast a vote for George McGovern at that little library on 23rd Street near Sheridan.  If I remember correctly that was the first election where 18 year olds could vote.

It is hard to make an informed vote on judges; who has the time or inclination to follow every judge's career and decisions.  There is often much talk of making these judicial positions appointive rather than elected.  It is an issue that many other states have addressed.  But at least we have the option to vote a judge out if they have consistantly made stinker decisions, in the opinion of the voter.
The Nathan Hale library at 23rd/Sheridan is still there and is still used as a polling place.  I currently vote at Berean Baptist Church at 21st and Darlington, it sometimes changes.  The first major vote I remember casting was the 1976 Carter/Ford race.  I voted for Ford.

[Hometown]

Thank God for Betty Ford.

(That was my outreach to Republicans for the month.)