zenmaster11
1850
45
4
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2022/aug/02/kansas-abortion-ballot-language
Aug 3, 2022 2:24 AM
zenmaster11
1850
45
4
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2022/aug/02/kansas-abortion-ballot-language
SeasonedCitizen
Voting "NO" meant you want to preserve abortion rights, it seems it's not working out the way the GQP expected. Watch them ignore results
DTCarl05
Officially voted No. abortion protected. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/02/us/elections/results-kansas-abortion-amendment.html
GhostoftheNorth
Well GQP followers are easy to confuse anyways.
SteveD31415
This is SOP for referenda. Opponents will promote a misleading measure hoping to cancel out the real one.
RetrogradeLlama
A Kansas GOP PAC sent out text messages telling people to vote "yes" to preserve abortion rights. It's actually a "No" that saves them.
notimelikethepast
May have actually backfired given early results.
RawSugarPackage
This is what REALLY irks me. They make the language confusing instead of accepting what ppl want.
RetrogradeLlama
Yes, it was intentional.
YouWillNeverFindMe
So... What exactly? I'm a European
Spice002
Basically your options are "No, I would not like to have the gov ban abortions" or "yes, I would like the gov to ban abortions," but the /1
Spice002
title of it on the ballot is "Abortion Rights?" with your yes or no options. Think of really vague opt out options that trick you to opt in.
YouWillNeverFindMe
Treason against the political system IMO, shouldn't even need to be a written law to punish that...