The morning after disillusion begins

As far as the RON amendments, I'd agree with Mark Adams at Dispassionate Liberalism that part of the problem was they did not follow the KISS theory.

Every election I do this to myself, by now I should know better but yet I hope that this time people will actually want the change they keep talking about. That they won't let big money and unethical people be rewarded for their behavior by being re-elected. Yes, I root for that underdog, the little guy who promises and probably would really make a difference if only given the chance. (Like Dave Schulz)

Here in Springfield township/Holland there wasn't much to get excited about. Heck most of those who ran had no opposition. Does that say that the township/city is doing great or that no one cares enough to even run...at times I wonder....

In Toledo, Bob McCloskey coming in second and Betty Shultz coming in fifth shows that no one cared that both people were really skirting the term limits and had some serious ethical issues. Mark Sobczak who made a suprising strong third, is new and maybe I'm being unfair but that doesn't excite me. He appears to be the same type of yes man and didn't seem to have any trouble being associated as on the same ticket as Bob. Karyn McConnell Hancock is the only one who had some ethics issues that wasn't re-elected. While I didn't feel she should have been re-elected realistically her behavior was alot less than both McCloskey and Shultz. So Karyn was the sacrifical lamb to at least have one "new" face on Toledo City Council.

Nationally, California did well and that is a good thing. I'm sure that was in part due to the hard work that Brew did. Yet in New Jersey? Yes, the Democrat won and granted I am not an expert on New Jersey but it appears ethics didn't matter to voters there either. Maybe it's because I'm not a Democrat or a Republican but I don't see how if you replace a Democrat with another Democrat that ends up being a blow against the Republican Party. To my way of thinking the only way it's a "blow" is if the party changes. Texas had 12,218,164 registered voters in 2002, with 80 percent of the precincts reporting, 1,410,046 voters (76% of those voting) decided that Gay Marriage was not acceptable. Goes to show you that sometimes a very small number of people can decide for the "silent" majority that didn't bother to vote.

Both Republicans and Democrats will spin these results both ways, that much is a given. That started last night and is still pretty apparent today.