First, let's get this out of the way.
US President / Vice President: Harris / Walz
No seriously, it doesn't matter what your political views are, you need to vote for Harris. Trump has said, done and attempted so many horrible things that I don't even need to bother to list them here - just look at court records if you want the short summary. But there's one thing that can never be forgiven: he full on tried to overthrow the government. If you accept that, you are against democracy. And once democracy gone, it's REALLY hard to get back.
(edit to add: LegalEagle says it better than I do)
But also, do you bastards even remember how good you had it? I was a passive spectator through two Obama terms, looking on in wonder at the magical progress of the US system. I was so excited for what I had coming up when I naturalized in 2014... but do you know what the hell ticket I had to vote on for the first time? Clinton vs Trump! Are you kidding me? Do you know what sort of bullshit bait-and-switch that was?
The Harris/Walz ticket is the first ticket I've actually been excited about since I naturalized! Some actual honest good human beings, with some reasonable policy ideas, and the competence to articulate and possibly even execute them. This is the best we've had by far in a very long, dark time. DON'T RUIN THIS FOR ME!
I-2066: Repeal natural gas -> electric incentives
No = incentivize electric, no incentives for natural gas.
Yes = incentivize natural gas, no incentives for electrification.
Both positions are stupid. Natural gas is great. It's cheap, reliable, and high-powered. The environmental impacts of burning natural gas are real but pretty minor - all US stoves equal the pollution of 500k cars (which isn't that many). But electrification is obviously good in the long term - it's easier, safer, and better for the environment to rely on electricity. Trying to hinder electrification is just as bad as blocking natural gas.
Also, both position statements were offensively misleading.
Voting no, but only because, given both options are dumb, I'd rather not lock into a dumb position by initiative.
I-2109: Repeal capital gains tax
No = keep capital gains tax.
Yes = repeal capital gains tax.
Starting at $250k of annual passive gains. Do you have any idea how much stock you need to be holding to get that much capital gains in a year? No, neither do I. And probably never will.
Extra credit for the Yes campaign saying how well funded our education system is, in a year where our schools are cutting services down to the bone just to stay afloat.
NO!
I-2117: Repeal carbon credits system
No = preserve CCA; keep carbon credits, fight climate change, accept things are more expensive.
Yes = remove CCA; get rid of carbon credits, maybe things are cheaper?
We need to do our part to mitigate climate change, and the Climate Commitment Act is not the worst plan I've seen. If we throw up our hands and do nothing (as the initiative suggests), then our kids are probably going to be occupying a dead world before long.
... but on the other hand... yeah, it's a tax. A brutally regressive one. It's hard to tell families that are barely getting by that they need to pay more for gas, more for food, because of some problem decades down the road, while big companies continue to profiteer undeterred.
I'm going no, but I entirely understand and respect why someone would vote yes here.
I-2124: Make Long-Term Care Optional
What is this, long-term care for mayflies*? For the services for which WA Cares is meant to cover, the lifetime coverage of $36k will be exhausted in weeks, not years, and that's already the best possible outcome. The ridiculous one-time lifetime opt-out was terribly managed.
[* I asked Gemini what animal has the shortest lifespan.]
I fully support the idea of a State LTC system, but WA Cares is a dumpster fire, beyond redemption. My only regret is that this initiative only makes it optional, rather than immediately putting it fully out of its misery. But with payroll deductions optional, I expect the system will only live about as long as someone under the care of WA Cares (so, a few months).
YES!
The rest of the races are honestly too boring to speak about. The pattern that emerges, from the Senate race to Congress to even the Washington Governor race is having an established Democrat fighting a "moderate" Republican, with no argument other than "replacing a career politician". The Republican candidates have put themselves into a corner: they have to publicly denounce Trump and support abortion to have any electability in the general, but give up any meaningful way to differentiate themselves from strong incumbents.
This shows up most strongly with Governor candidate Dave Reichert, who has tried to pass himself off as a moderate, but has an awful voting history in Congress, and revealed much of his true thinking about Trump to friendly media.
I voted blue through Secretary of State, then got bored...
