I'm going to vote!

vote early, vote often

I did already last week via mail vote and I voted NO to legalize Marijuana.
We have enough drunks already on the roads, no need to invite the junkies too!

I'll be voting today at lunch - I rarely miss a vote.

I voted at the Y today, and then worked out. Didn't wanna do it in reverse and offend the nice polling place ladies.

With that initiative on the ballot, I'll be interested to see how it impacts voter turnout in California. I could see it increasing a couple of percentage points.

They're already there. I don't know why you think that people who want marijuana have a hard time getting it as it is; they don't. I disagree with your position because the facts don't support the conclusion.

Voting yay!

Cycloptichorn

Oh I am sure that a lot of people will vote for the first time today, just for this prop. alone.

Cyclo,
you know it never will be legalized, despite of the voter outcome today -
the feds make sure of that!
I am aware that Marijuana is available to whoever is seeking it, but I am also
certain that the legal ramifications are a deterrent to many who otherwise
would smoke it if it was legal.

Next we can start sending people to jail for smoking tobacco. In a hundred years or so.

It's hard to make suggestions not knowing where you live thusly not knowing who your candidates are.

Do you have any local or state referendum votes as well?

Tobacco smokers already suffer enough. Later.... in the hospital.

Well I'm done. Just got back. There are alot of close races where I live so this will definately be interesting.

We did not have a legalizing pot question. We had questions about getting rid of certain current policies.

We had 4 state constitutional amendments on the ballot. I didn't get the details on them until I showed up at the polling place.

-- cut and paste --
Hunting and fishing | One ballot question is over whether South Carolina residents should have a constitutional right to hunt and fish. Legislators overwhelmingly voted to add the measure to this year's ballot, arguing that the amendment is needed in case gun control forces eventually try to restrict the sports.

** - comment - I voted no on this. I'm all for hunting and fishing and SC is very active in this area. Of course people have the right to hunt and fish. I don't share the paranoia about gun control. I don't see that this amendment is necessary.
**

Labor unions | Another proposed amendment asks voters to determine if a secret ballot is a fundamental individual right in deciding whether workers are represented by a labor union. The measure is an attempt to pre-empt stalled federal “card check” legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize through a signature drive. Republican lawmakers say that measure would strip workers of the right to vote for unionization by secret ballot. Democrats said employers and workers can request votes at any time during union-organizing attempts.

** comment - I'm generally pro union, but don't like the idea of getting one without a secret ballot. A secret ballot should be necessary. I voted yes on this one.
**
General reserve fund | One ballot question would increase the amount of money that state government must maintain in its general reserve or “rainy day” fund from 3 percent to 5 percent of the previous fiscal year's revenue.

Capital reserve fund | Another proposal would require that the first priority of the state's capital reserve fund would be to replenish that rainy day fund instead of offsetting midyear budget cuts at state agencies.

** There were two of these issues. I voted no on both. This sounds to me like it increases the ability of lawmakers to spend money without accountability.
Rainy day fund? This would increase it's size. Bad idea. I thought conservatives were against free spending, although I'm not sure this was their idea.

Like you Frank, I am leaning "no" on 3 & 4. Decidedly "yes" on #2. I don't understand why we need to make hunting and fishing a constitutional guarantee. Seems silly if you ask me. But I really don't care one way or the other. If it makes my hunting and fishing friends happy, I'm figuring what the heck. Voting yes does not seem as though it will hurt anything.

CostalRat

I guess I don't get the paranoia thing on gun control. I don't see any basis for a fear of the feds coming to get your 12 ga. late in the night. Unless you are running a meth lab. It also seems like another way for SC to give the Federal Govt, read damn yankees, the finger. We've had enough of that attitude. It doesn't help.

We had one constitutional amendment on the ballot.

The Illinois Governor Recall Amendment, also known as House Joint Constitutional Amendment 31, will appear on the November 2, 2010 ballot in Illinois as an legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The proposal would allow voters to recall the governor and require that at least 20 state representatives and 10 state senators, equally balanced from each party in each chamber, sign a notice of intent to recall the governor before a petition can begin to be circulated.[1][2]

In order for the amendment to be adopted, 60 percent of voters must approve the measure.[3][4]

Given the tendency of IL governors to end up in prison, I voted "Yes".