But there's a two-fold yield here; not only do these strategic ballot initiatives manipulate conversation, they motivate the base to vote because of the manipulated concept promoted.

In the case of the mourning dove ballot initiative here in Michigan, the conversation is steered towards hunters' rights (including gun rights), wildlife management and increasing revenues through increased tourism.  The conversation is NOT about conservation or the merits of eco-tourism over hunting.

The added filip is that the bill gets hunters off their butts and to the polls; these are guys who may have been turned off by the Bush administration and to voting Repug because of its crappy handling of the environment to date.

Where I see the ballot initiatives failing is on their wording, in particular the Ward Connerly anti-affirmative action initiative.  A Michigan Democratic voter education organization, the Justice Caucus, presented a report to the Michigan Democratic Party on the use of ballot initiatives to stimulate voting.  Their data showed that voters are far more likely to turn out to vote NO on an initiative, than they are to vote YES.  

Of the three questionable ballot initiatives in Michigan, none of them are phrased in a way to stimulate turn-out for right-wingers, although the underlying proposal gets 'wingers fired up.  

Anti-Affirmative action: A NO vote is preferred by progressives.

Eminent Domain: A NO vote is preferred by progressives.

Mourning Dove:  A NO vote is preferred by progressives.

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out.  I think that one of these ballot initiatives is going to pass, but I don't know that it's enough to motivate the right-wing base to come out and vote in the same proportions as they have in the past.

by RayneToday on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 01:15:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]