Welcome to the Official 24Ahead California Voter's Guide:

President: Hillary Clinton or none.
As you can see from looking around, I've strongly opposed massive and illegal immigration for over 14 years at this site. Trump's handling of the issue - absurdly unrealistic plans and absurdly counter-productive arguments - puts him as much on the other side of the issue from me as someone like Hillary. For those who also oppose massive and illegal immigration, it's better to fight her than him. Add on top of that the general thuggish stupidity of the Trump clan and his followers and Trump's sheer incompetence. I can't in good conscience vote for Donald Trump even as a protest vote designed to send a message to Hillary. I'd sooner vote for Stalin. Gary Johnson or Jill Stein aren't options as protest votes either.

U.S. Senator: No vote. Both Loretta Sanchez and Kamala Harris are horrible candidates who strongly support illegal immigration. Harris is the strong favorite. Voting Sanchez to send a message to Harris would send the wrong message to Sanchez, and apparently write-ins aren't allowed.

U.S. Representatives: I endorse Mike Antonovich in the 25th District. Mostly because of his opposition to illegal immigration, but also more recently due to a sleazy mailer from his opponent Anthony Portantino that brings up a supposed quote, perhaps taken out of context, from 46 years ago. Since I appreciate things like this and I don't have a time masheen to 1970, I endorse Antonovich.

In the 39th District, Ed Royce has also at least occasionally opposed illegal immigration.

In the 23rd District, Kevin McCarthy is on the other side; whatever the positions of his opponent Wendy Reed, it would be good to be rid of him.

For all other Representatives, vote for the Republican both to keep President Clinton in check and to send a message.

State Senators and Assemblymembers: Vote for the Republican to send a message unless you're in a very pro-Republican district (i.e., Modoc County). In that case vote for the Democrat to send a message to the GOP.

Propositions:
Regarding the propositions related to spending, I'm not opposed to public spending or government programs. What I do oppose is how the State of California and many of its cities spends their money. California governments spend billions of dollars each year enabling illegal immigration so crooked businesses can get labor that's cheap to them, while they pass the costs off on everyone else. If spending propositions are voted down, that might force leaders to choose whether they want to continue that practice.

Proposition 51: Strong no. See the note above: we already spend too much educating illegal aliens and their children.

Proposition 52: Yes.

Proposition 53: Yes.

Proposition 54: Yes.

Proposition 55: Weak no.

Proposition 56: Strong yes.

Proposition 57: Strong no.

Proposition 58: Strong no.
Proposition opposes assimilation, supports bilingual and multiculturalism.

Proposition 59: Strong no.
Not because I favor the Citizens United decision, but because those who oppose it refuse to use the methods available to them to make their points. Instead, they use the Citizens United decision as a crutch.

Proposition 60: Weak no.

Los Angeles County Measure A: No.

Los Angeles County Measure M: No.

Los Angeles City Proposition HHH: Strong no.
I'm not at all opposed to spending $1 billion on housing for the homeless, especially if it has strong oversight. As indicated above, I just want that to be taken from some of the money that's spent enabling illegal immigration.