can u give out ur predictions on who will win
 

They haven't changed. Ahem.
 

Admission: The SQUELCH! party never planned to and never will bring our troops home from Iraq. We really shouldn't have promised that. In fact, when we're elected we plan to send many prominent members of the ASUC overseas as part of the surge.

PS: I for one think the referendums have a much smaller chance of passing than you thought. They're much harder to get traction for when you don't have the university essentially campaigning for them (RSF, ClassPass, etc...).

I think a round of betting and wagering on who is going to win is called for. Sort of an ASUC tournament bracket.
My first and very obvious prediction: TGIF is going to pass with a phenomenal margin, something like 79% to 21%. All my friends voted for this and I have no idea why.

My second prediction is Wang and Weiner making it into the senate on the Squelch ticket.
 

I'll wager that the margin is even bigger for TGIF.

Among folks I'm familiar with, the referenda aren't all that popular. Still, the vast majority of sort-of-not-really-kind-of folks who don't really care will only see the ballot question, so I'm not putting too much faith in that negative response.
 

I think from talking to a lot of people, the general consensus is that the referenda looked a lot stronger when they first got on the ballot than they do now that the election is over and the horrors of running a campaign on general concepts rather than on specific candidates has been fully realized by the organizers.

What I'd say is that it's almost impossible to predict what's going to happen with the referenda. They were pretty unique this year in that none of them had super strong support from the major parties.

I mean, no group really came out against them in any serious way or spoke out (Sorry Beetle, you don't count as a group). But on the other hand, unlike other successful referenda, there just wasn't that overwhelming effort from the university or one of the major parties.

I wouldn't be surprised if both of them passed by 20%, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they each lost by 30. It's really a situation that comes down to what people did when they were done voting for their friend and then got to the referenda and had no idea what the hell they were. My gut says most people abstained and then what's left is just sort of people who voted with their gut, and I can't really predict what that gut was.

If I really wanted to guess, this would be my prediction:
Both Student Life and Squelch: 58% no. Unusually close for referenda, but that's because they were unusual ballot propositions.
 

I guess we could consider the possibility of not even snagging 20% turnout for them, though I doubt it'll hapen.
 

My predictions:
I agree with Simon, I think the vote for the fees could go any way, TGIF aside. The Student Life fee will do better than the Squelch fee though, because the Student Life fee has campus entertainment groups behind it. I'll be a wishful thinker and say the fees all lose besides TGIF. The constitutional amendments will pass.

Other predictions:
Outcomes for the exec races will not be a sweep for either party, and will be somewhat affected by the Daily Cal endorsements (which will actually have mattered for the first time in awhile) --
Ilana Nankin (but it'll be close), Taylor Allbright, Daniel Montes, Curtis Lee, and Ajay Krishnamurthy.

For the Senate I predict 9-10 Student Action, 7-8 CalSERVE (Shawn Jain will be the 8th on the bubble), Nadir Shams, Kenan Wang of SQUELCH!, and Dimitri Garcia of DAAP.

Chad Kunert won't make it in because he has not been as visible of a campaigner as Victoria Mitchell was last year.