My thoughts & choices: 2018 #Arizona midterm election ballot

I got my early-voting general election ballot last week & let me tell you, it looks overwhelming: way too many propositions and choices, especially in the "judges of the superior court" section. 
As far as how I voted; for the most important choice of all: of course I voted for Kyrsten Sinema.
Sinema used to represent my district (in the house of reps) & I am well aware she's a centrist. Nevertheless, I know she'll be more independent of Democratic interest than McSally & GOP interests. In other words, McSally would be nothing more than a Trump/McConnell flunkie, Sinema would be more of an independent lawmaker.

Here are a few of the other choices I made that I deem important:

I voted "yes" on prop 419 which would require individuals and organizations to disclose any campaign donations valued at more than $1000 intended to influence a Phoenix election.

I voted "yes" on prop 127. Prop 127 would amend Arizona's state constitution to require utility companies to get 50 percent of the power it sells from renewable sources like solar, wind, and biomass by 2030. 
I'm surprised "the valley of the sun" is not actively researching and preparing for using solar energy in the future without a mandate from the voters. Heck,"APS" & "SRP" can afford to do some research on their own (APS earned $488 million in profits last year). Nevertheless, according to an article on Tucson.com, Governor Ducey signed legislation earlier this year with the specific intent of allowing utilities to ignore the mandate proposed in prop 127 by paying a minimal fee. Speaking of Ducey, of course I voted against him and for David Garcia.

I voted "no" on prop 126 which would preserve the states' & local governments' authority to impose a tax on services in the future, because you shouldn't be able to take away a potential revenue source for the state.

I voted "no" on prop 305 because if approved, it "would poke holes in the funding bucket of public education". Prop 305 wants to fund ESA expansion by taking away money from the public and charter school systems. 

I voted "no" on prop 306 because if approved: 
http://ktar.com/story/2254626/proposition-306-would-alter-arizonas-clean-elections-funding-system/

"It will take away the rule-making authority of Clean Elections and put it in a gubernatorially appointed partisan body that will eventually neuter Clean Elections, and we will lose our publicly financed system”

As far as the other important choice (for me): Mayor of Phoenix, I had to do research on four candidates. 
Of course I wouldn't choose the Libertarian or the Republican candidate so it came down to the Democrat Daniel Valenzuela & the supposedly Independent Kate Gallego:  

Kate Gallego is a Harvard and Wharton School graduate. According to a recent AZCentral (opinion) article she pretty much won a recent Mayoral debate. But she does support a water rate increase of about $2.35 per month in 2019 and an additional $2.29 per month in 2020 for the average consumer (less for people who don't use a lot of water). 

Like most people, I feel like I pay a lot for water as it is, but the "AZCentral" article does explain the increase would support "$1.5 billion in new systems for north Phoenix, repairs and replacement of aging water pipelines in south and central Phoenix and other updates to the city's massive water treatment and delivery systems".

Apart from that, I've found no negative news on Gallego (only did "research" on google for a few minutes though), Only other relevant info is, she has been endorsed by EMILY's list.

I did find some negative news on Valenzuela. First news story has to do with salacious unverified claims from an anonymous woman, however:

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/media-allegation-against-phoenix-daniel-valenzuela-mayoral-10921744  "New Times was unable to confirm the veracity of the woman's claims and is not publishing the allegations, nor the video."

The other story has to do with reports Valenzuela was $12,208 in debt and his city salary was being garnished to pay back the money:

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/phoenix-mayor-candidate-daniel-valenzuela-debt-garnished-10739330

"Court records include a 2006 agreement to obtain the open-ended credit plan; the document bears Valenzuela's signature, but does not mention his spouse."

Having large debts is not a big deal to me, but Valenzuela blaming his exwife for it does seem lame. However, I don't like "salacious claims" from a woman, then again, the claims are unverified.

I admit it was a tough choice between Gallego and Valenzuela. Valenzuela seems more than capable of doing the job, & he is endorsed by former mayors Phil Gordon, Paul Johnson and Skip Rimsza as well as by the "Arizona police association" and "the professional fire fighters of Arizona". 

Still, I chose Kate Gallego; it seems to me she's smart and willing to make hard choices for the benefit of the city of Phoenix. 

As far as the rest of the candidates & propositions there's too many to list, but I think you get the idea of how I voted. I did vote against the two Justices of the Supreme Court (Bolick, Pelander), because supposedly, if David Garcia were to win, he would appoint their replacements. 
Unfortunately, Ducey leads Garcia by a wide margin in recent polls. Speaking of it, every report I see from the MSM insists Arizona will remain red which I know is depressing. Nevertheless, I hope those reports don't stop you from voting early or in person: there's too much at stake and there's no excuse for you to stay on the sidelines.

Will we have a democratic blue wave or a Trump red wave in November?

I was reading an article in "Time" magazine titled "The real fake news crisis" by Katy Steinmetz (it was published a few weeks ago), when I came across this short paragraph:
 "If you've seen something before, your brain subconsciously uses that as an indication that it's true".
"This is a tendency that propagandists have been aware of forever. The difference is that it has never been easier to get eyeballs on the message, nor to get enemies of the message to help spread it." 

I know it's been said countless times before, but by retweeting everything Trump posts (even if we're only correcting lies) we are just helping him spread his message. I know people have to respond to the many lies and that's understandable. However, we have to do it in an effective way instead of just helping the Donald with his twitter metrics.

Looking at my Twitter feed, I admit, some days I get tired of the constant scandals & investigations surrounding Trump. But if I take a look at this blog during 2017, I can see I was consumed with much of it. Constantly reading and posting my thoughts about the Trump administration's many scandals. This year, not so much. Therefore, I fear many people are just like me & they will just tune everything out & won't even vote. Which is dangerous, because the news keep uncovering important stories like the allegations of tax fraud & evasion by the Trump family (recently reported by the NYTimes):
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

By now, we all know that when there are damaging stories like the Trump-tax-schemes reported by the times, Trump prefers to dominate the news in other ways. & he knows his ridiculous tweets & campaign rally speeches will always be top news. Trump also knows many of his MAGA followers are in constant attack mode, attacking liberals, "SWJ's", immigrants, black athletes who protest during the anthem, etc. so he gives them what they want. 
The left, on the other hand, appears divided. Establishment and grassroots candidates still fighting it out long after the primaries have ended. Fighting for ideological purity or who is a real progressive. Some are even referring to it as the fight between the center-left establishment, the left and the "dumb dumb left". But come November; will the left, the center-left establishment and the democratic base actually unite and go out to vote? I hope so, but it doesn't appear likely.

The accusations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh are the unknown factor of the midterm elections. The narrative of the MSM in order to help the senate confirm Kavanaugh is that it will cause a red wave if he's not. But in reality, nobody knows. & the lessons of 2016 can't be forgotten. Many MSM political analysts assured us Hillary would win and she lost (despite getting more votes, of course). 

Thus, when I hear pundits talking about a democratic blue wave, I'm skeptical. It all depends on people actually going out and voting. & the democratic base is notorious for not voting in the midterms. A couple of weeks ago I watched part of a concert on MSNBC where the rapper "Cardi B" encouraged young people to go out and vote. Cardi B admitted she didn't vote in 2016 because she didn't think Trump would win. The question is: how many young people in the democratic base (who are busy with school & work) won't bother to vote because all they hear is talk of a massive Democratic blue wave? At the same time, you can never underestimate the ability of the political right and its older base to vote strategically: many on the right were willing to vote for Trump despite his moral failings & vulgarities because they wanted a right-wing Supreme Court Justice (or two, or three).

We are almost exactly one month away from the midterms. I am well aware because I am constantly watching the attack ads against AZ democratic senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema everytime I turn on the TV. And if anyone tells you they know what will happen a month from now, ignore them, go out and vote, & encourage everyone you know to do the same.