Unofficial results for Newton’s Nov. 11, 2018 state and municipal ballot questions will be posted here.
Polls are closed. Find Newton’s election results here.
by Village 14 Election Desk | Nov 6, 2018 | Elections | 21 comments
Crazy Divers: Men be like...
drivers man be like
I doubt it will last but no ban no limit was the selection of choice so far…
14 precincts in and the gap seems to be widening for both questions.
Chris, it is widening for sure! there needs to be quite a few yes on ban yes on limits in the remaining wards…idk if there are enough to flip it…
I wish the Newton ballot results were by ward/precinct…
Does anyone else think these questions were extremely confusing for the average voter?
I voted against the ban, and in favor of limits. I did this because I kept hearing whichever has more “yes” votes will become the new policy. I was unaware that voting no on both would lead to no limit, and no ban. That’s how I would have liked to have voted, but I feel very mislead.
Mike Sem, a ballot question has to break 50% of the vote to be enacted.
Neither question has broken the threshold 50% all night — the ban has been around 42-44% and the limits at 43-46%, so I think that your wish of no ban and no limits is going to happen.
@Mike – I think there were quite a few people messaging in that way, both because the game-theory interpretation of the two questions is clever and interesting where No/No is kind of boring, and because others wanted to confuse the issue in general in hope of overcoming the deficit of the prior vote. If the “no”s end up holding – still far from certain – I think you could argue that they were carried by people who didn’t follow the debate but just read the questions and voted on them, rather than getting caught up in the “I need to vote Yes on limits to make sure the ban doesn’t happen” that seemed to dominate most of the discourse.
I voted for the ban. That’s what we have WALTHAM for.
I’m sorry you were confused Mike. I and others have explained the questions and answers as many times as possible. I guess you missed them.
I think that being told by many people how confusing the questions are has increased a feeling of confusion. I didn’t find them confusing at all since they are independent questions.
Just vote yes or no on the ban depending on what you want.
Just do the same if you want to limit the number of stores in Newton to 2-4.
It even says at the bottom where you vote on the ban question: vote no if you want the 2016 vote to stand and have at least 8 stores in Newton. (Paraphrasing.)
And vote no on 2-4 if you want the 2016 limits of up to 8 stores to be in Newton. (Again paraphrasing)
It was there in black and white just before you circle in your vote.
Congratulations to Newton’s voters for not falling for the NIMBY Prohibitionist arguments or the City Council’s silly limitations. No ban! No limits! Treat marijuana like alcohol, just as the voters said in 2016, reaffirmed tonight. Let’s get these stores up and running and bring the tax dollars into Newton’s coffers. A chance for Mayor Fuller to be a leader in terms of how MA communities implement this law. Hopefully now that it’s a settled issue in Newton she won’t be the too conservative coward she’s been on this issue thus far.
The ban question wasn’t confusing (beyond coming 2nd after 2-4 on ballot) and results look very similar to 2016 (~44% opt out), so not many 2016 Yes Newton Nimbies, or if they were, they were offset by those switching to respect the vote.
2-4 on the other hand, if folks wanted it to pass to better control locations, may have been hurt by its non-conditional nature or maybe those following ballot committee advice may have canceled each other out.
While $2.5K in RtV signs may be gathering dust, $12.5K on door knocking by RtV (through 10/19) may have been a good investment in reaching voters. I heard good things on the impressions the canvassers made.
It appears that the Opt-Out question was just a re-vote on the MA 2016 referendum that legalized recreational marijuana.
MA 20166 Referendum Yes=55.1% No=44.9% (Newton votes)
Newton 2018 Referendum No =55.7% Yes=45.3%
Compromise also fails, performing slightly better than ban. Yes=46.7%. No=53.2%.
Happy to see Charlie Baker winning the City of Newton by 5,000 votes.
If the 59,479 registered voter total from the primaries remains the same, then we had >68% turnout. That is ahead of the state (which was estimated at 52-54% last I heard), and also ahead of our last midterm turnout (59%).
Even if it was a single issue that drove the higher turnout, It’s great to see participation go up for any reason.
(Side note: I was concerned that my son, studying abroad and traveling the last two weeks, would be unable to get his ballot in. He confirmed to me that he received it in time and mailed it in. So good for him and good for the City on getting a ballot mailed out to Hungary.)
edited to add grammatical sanity
@Doug – by any chance, was your son in Hungary to study at the Budapest Semester in Math? My son did that and had a fantastic experience.
Apologies for being OT, but Hungary’s such an unusual place to spend a semester abroad unless your a math (or computer science) major.
He’s at UNH in the business school. They have an exchange program there
I hope he enjoys his time there as much as my son did – he loved Budapest, though it’s sad to see how authoritarian the country has become and how bad the antisemitism, xenophobia, etc. have become.
It’s interesting how overwhelmingly opposed Newton’s wealthy residents were to Question One (75/25) which was put forward by our hard working nurses, poor families and loyal union members.
This just proves that your Newton Progressives aren’t really all that progressive.
They’ll tell union members at the “fix the gas leaks” rallies that they love them and wholeheartedly support unions, but when it matters, Newton’s progressives band together to protect the hospital executives next door.
Phonies.
Whoa there. I wouldn’t conflate Question 1 with being for or against unions. While a union supported the measure, it was not presented to the public as a union question.
Should medical staff unionize? Absolutely. Should unions negotiate staff:patient ratios? Sure! But should patient ratios be enshrined as state law? For complex reasons that went beyond the arguments presented, I think there are problems with that.
What Dulles said.