|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 16:43:39 GMT -8
If anyone takes anything away from these threads, it's this. Since we don't know any details of a deal, who is involved in that deal, and we don't know how the question is worded, plus the ensuing campaign that is going to take place once the deal is finally announced, anybody saying a deal is or not going to get done at this point is a pure guess. When the Padres won the vote necessary to get PEtco funded they had just made it to the world series and were riding a wave of public support....and they still only got 59% of the vote but luckily only needed 51%. Knowing that do you really think the Chargers will do better with the vote so close and public sentiment not so great? Wouldnt that be, as he said, making a guess?
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 17, 2016 16:44:41 GMT -8
Chargers are and always have been more popular than the Padres. Even after the last year. The public has seen what Petco has done to downtown. City already spends 10-15 millions n on Qualcomm. And IF SDSU is part of it, that helps too. Not saying the troll, you don't want that, but it's still true.
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 16:44:50 GMT -8
But wait a second, everyone here says a vote will not pass, i wonder how they already know? They know SD well and have info on the vote that got PETCO funded. Based on that alone many realize the Chargers getting the votes they'll need is an extreme long shot. This is why articles have been popping up saying just that over the last few weeks. So the articles are making a guess also?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 16:46:30 GMT -8
When the Padres won the vote necessary to get PEtco funded they had just made it to the world series and were riding a wave of public support....and they still only got 59% of the vote but luckily only needed 51%. Knowing that do you really think the Chargers will do better with the vote so close and public sentiment not so great? Wouldnt that be, as he said, making a guess? An educated one with empirical data, sure why not. Kind of like saying I can't jump across the grand canyon. I don't know for sure, so technically you could say I'm guessing, but we both know what the truth likely is...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 16:49:08 GMT -8
They know SD well and have info on the vote that got PETCO funded. Based on that alone many realize the Chargers getting the votes they'll need is an extreme long shot. This is why articles have been popping up saying just that over the last few weeks. So the articles are making a guess also? Nope, if you can read you will notice that the Padres, fresh off a World Series appearance, could only pull 59% of the vote to get petco funded...and the Chargers need more than that. So not a guess, but empirical data. Edit: Unless you think Chargers today are more popular than the Padres were during the Gwynn, Caminiti, Brown years.
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 17, 2016 16:50:08 GMT -8
So the articles are making a guess also? Nope, if you can read you will notice that the Padres, fresh off a World Series appearance, could pull 59% of the vote to get petco funded...and the Chargers need more than that. So not a guess, but empirical data. The Chargers need more than 59%?? What?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 16:53:01 GMT -8
Nope, if you can read you will notice that the Padres, fresh off a World Series appearance, could pull 59% of the vote to get petco funded...and the Chargers need more than that. So not a guess, but empirical data. The Chargers need more than 59%?? What? 2/3...or has that changed?
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 17, 2016 16:54:52 GMT -8
The Chargers need more than 59%?? What? 2/3...or has that changed? No new taxes. Simple majority. 50% + one vote. No way the city and chargers will present a deal requiring 2/3. No wonder you think it has no chance
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 16:54:58 GMT -8
Wouldnt that be, as he said, making a guess? An educated one with empirical data, sure why not. Kind of like saying I can't jump across the grand canyon. I don't know for sure, so technically you could say I'm guessing, but we both know what the truth likely is... So the odds of you jumping across the grand canyon are the same as the vote passing. Got it.
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 16:59:50 GMT -8
So the articles are making a guess also? Nope, if you can read you will notice that the Padres, fresh off a World Series appearance, could pull 59% of the vote to get petco funded...and the Chargers need more than that. So not a guess, but empirical data. Edit: Unless you think Chargers today are more popular than the Padres were during the Gwynn, Caminiti, Brown years. Oooh i see. Let me make sure i can read first...brb Ok, i cAn read. So your empirical data is the padres vote passing, and because a bunch of internet out of towners and you say no one like the chargers its as good as dead. Your arm hurt from that reach?
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Feb 17, 2016 17:00:29 GMT -8
Let's imagine for a moment that a vote is held asking the citizens of the city of San Diego to provide several hundred million dollars as partial funding for the construction of a new "Chargers" stadium. I believe that there will be significant opposition to that plan. (No doubt there will also be many San Diegans who will be in favor of the idea.) Question: How strong will be the opposition to public funding of a new "Chargers" stadium, and what prominent groups or persons might we expect to lead that opposition effort? Also, does anybody care to predict the outcome of such a vote? Some posters have indicated their belief that a vote would not garner oven 50%. (I'm assuming that a 2/3 majority would be required.) As of this date, I am unaware of any polling that has been done on the question. AzWm If the city's contribution toward building Spanoi Stadium comes strictly from increasing the hotel tax, because it wouldn't be a new tax on citizens, it would require just a simple majority. But even if the stadium is built in MV rather than downtown, just how accepting of that are the hoteliers going to be? Logic suggests that if the hotel tax is increased to being far above what it is in neighboring cities that visitors are gradually going to start staying there rather than downtown. Might not make much difference for individual vacationers but what about for conferences? I'm unaware of any polling either. However, I've heard so many folks who seem in the know say there's a lot greater likelihood of getting that 50% if it would be a countywide vote to think my speculation is accurate as to the need to not limit that hotel tax increase to just the city of SD. Of course, are the citizens of the entire county as dimwitted as those of the city of SD who allowed the Chargers to ream them on that seat guarantee? Only problem is the citizens initiative. If it gets more votes it will trump what some are saying the Chargers hope to get on the ballot. There will be a lot of people perauaded by the setting apart of land for educational, parks etc. So folks would have to choose to support a plan that gives the Chargers cash or funnels the hotel tax to the Chargers over one that costs them nothing and eliminates the 2.5% self tax, replacing it with a true tax that would be part of the monies elected officials would have to approve, etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 17:00:32 GMT -8
An educated one with empirical data, sure why not. Kind of like saying I can't jump across the grand canyon. I don't know for sure, so technically you could say I'm guessing, but we both know what the truth likely is... So the odds of you jumping across the grand canyon are the same as the vote passing. Got it. if 2/3, definitely. But has that changed to 50+1?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 17:01:46 GMT -8
Nope, if you can read you will notice that the Padres, fresh off a World Series appearance, could pull 59% of the vote to get petco funded...and the Chargers need more than that. So not a guess, but empirical data. Edit: Unless you think Chargers today are more popular than the Padres were during the Gwynn, Caminiti, Brown years. Oooh i see. Let me make sure i can read first...brb Ok, i cAn read. So your empirical data is the padres vote passing, and because a bunch of internet out of towners and you say no one like the chargers its as good as dead. Your arm hurt from that reach? You claim to be from SD, but if you honestly think people around here will vote to give their tax $ to the wealthy you must be from somewhere else....well that and your moniker is a place known for it's saturation of out of towners.
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 17:19:13 GMT -8
Oooh i see. Let me make sure i can read first...brb Ok, i cAn read. So your empirical data is the padres vote passing, and because a bunch of internet out of towners and you say no one like the chargers its as good as dead. Your arm hurt from that reach? You claim to be from SD, but if you honestly think people around here will vote to give their tax $ to the wealthy you must be from somewhere else....well that and your moniker is a place known for it's saturation of out of towners. I think, you think, we all think! We dont know though. Nice call out on the pb moniker, stay classy spearedu
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 17:25:46 GMT -8
You claim to be from SD, but if you honestly think people around here will vote to give their tax $ to the wealthy you must be from somewhere else....well that and your moniker is a place known for it's saturation of out of towners. I think, you think, we all think! We dont know though. Nice call out on the pb moniker, stay classy speareduYou keep mentioning out of towners in your posts, so only appropriate, Pb...lol
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Feb 17, 2016 17:34:33 GMT -8
I think, you think, we all think! We dont know though. Nice call out on the pb moniker, stay classy speareduYou keep mentioning out of towners in your posts, so only appropriate, Pb...lol You seem more interested in me and where im from than the thread topic. I already got a girlfriend, so lets get back on topic eh?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 17:39:38 GMT -8
You keep mentioning out of towners in your posts, so only appropriate, Pb...lol You seem more interested in me and where im from than the thread topic. I already got a girlfriend, so lets get back on topic eh? You're the only one who gets to bring up where posters are from. Got it...PB
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Feb 17, 2016 17:45:03 GMT -8
If anyone takes anything away from these threads, it's this. Since we don't know any details of a deal, who is involved in that deal, and we don't know how the question is worded, plus the ensuing campaign that is going to take place once the deal is finally announced, anybody saying a deal is or not going to get done at this point is a pure guess. When the Padres won the vote necessary to get PETCO funded they had just made it to the world series and were riding a wave of public support....and they still only got 59% of the vote but luckily only needed 51%. Knowing that do you really think the Chargers will do better with the vote so close and public sentiment not so great? Again, it depends on the deal and how it's presented to the public.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Feb 17, 2016 17:48:26 GMT -8
So the odds of you jumping across the grand canyon are the same as the vote passing. Got it. if 2/3, definitely. But has that changed to 50+1? Faulconer has said a thousand times it will not be a tax increase therefore it only needs to be 50% +1.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 17:49:34 GMT -8
When the Padres won the vote necessary to get PETCO funded they had just made it to the world series and were riding a wave of public support....and they still only got 59% of the vote but luckily only needed 51%. Knowing that do you really think the Chargers will do better with the vote so close and public sentiment not so great? Again, it depends on the deal and how it's presented to the public. Chargers will need it to appear as revenue neutral as possible. I also think a player who's loved locally, acting on behalf of the organization, will be needed to rally Folks and overcome the spending concerns. 180 approach from what they did last year.
|
|