Talk:2010 California Attorney General election

Cited Polls
I repaired the link to the most recently cited Field Poll. The poll previously being cited here deals with the ballot initiatives (Propositions 20, 23, and 25) and it has nothing to do with the Attorney General's race. Lieutenant Governor & Attorney General poll. BluntDiplomat (talk) 02:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Why I'm updating the vote margin table
The trend in the percent margins may be of interest while the votes are being counted. Once the tally completes, the table can be deleted. Javaweb (talk) 05:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Javaweb What do other editors think? Javaweb (talk) 05:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Javaweb The Secretary of State publishes the interim tally. --Javaweb (talk) 19:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)Javaweb

Trivia: The LA Times says tallying the 50 counties individually gets a more up-to-date tally than the Sec. of State because the latter lags in updating each county's totals. The LA Times says 11/11 Cooley + 28,591   +0.3%. --Javaweb (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Javaweb

The current table is too long. I've copied the vote table to California_Attorney_General_election,_2010/Vote_Table with the thought of retaining only the most current entries in this article's table and adding a statement: A table of the previous daily vote counts is here. Any opinions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javaweb (talk • contribs) 00:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Recommend deleting the separate vote table article
My feeling is the table was "scaffolding" needed while the votes were counted so folks could see the tally trend. However, I purposely divorced it from the article so it could be deleted after the election was over but wanted to leave it to a consensus rather than delete it myself. Shorter articles are better than long ones and information that may have been fascinating before now becomes mere data clutter. I have copied the vote table to User:Javaweb/VoteTable You can use edit, copy and paste it somewhere if you wish to. I will delete my userspace copy in 5 days. --Javaweb (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Javaweb
 * I now see what was intended a little more clearly. This material should not really have been made as a separate page--certainly not with a name that indicates it being a subpage of the article (which is not actually possible in main article space). Such working material is  acceptable, but they are best done either on the article talk page, or as a subpage of the article talk page. (see WP:subpage ). I agree that the running tallies do not belong in the main article, so I have moved the page to be a subpage of this talk page, as Talk:California Attorney General election, 2010/Vote Table which is where they should stay. (Since the userspace subpage will not be needed, and we discourage having duplicate pages, just place a  tab on it & I will delete it.  I apologize for my slowness in realizing what was intended.     DGG ( talk ) 02:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I redirected it for the time being, sorry if that's inconvenient for tagging. Hekerui (talk) 11:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

@DGG, thanks for the subpage guidance. It will come in handy in the future. --99.66.147.87 (talk) 20:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Javaweb

Deleting Trump endorsement for Harris
I don’t think the Trump donation to Harris qualifies as an “endorsement” in the traditional sense. There’s basically no reporting on his donation before 2017, and the donation was not particularly publicized or mentioned at all during the campaign. A de facto private endorsement is not applicable. Dingers5Days (talk) 04:33, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Reference 8 has links to a Montana election, not the Republic Primary results
The table for the Republican Party primary results at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_California_Attorney_General_election#Results_2 refers to reference 8, which presumably should be a link to those results from the California Secretary of State's office, but instead the links are to the results of a 2012 Montana election at the Montana Secretary of State's office. Someone with more experience with Wikipedia should fix this (and perhaps ask the person who made the mistake to be more careful next time). 108.211.109.248 (talk) 21:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)