That is about as far as I can go in the hope that a reader will think that I am talking about the US Presidential race. I have deliberately suggested that electing Donald Trump is correct to raise the ire of most of those I know (who wanted a Clinton victory).
I want to draw attention to a different ballot. It is the one that asked voters to increase the hotel tax to fund a stadium for the San Diego Chargers. I was ignorant of the choice facing the voters until last Sunday night. While watching the NFL game between the Chargers and the Titans, I heard the commentator saying that the tax was a win-win. The tax would fund a stadium and it would be paid for by visitors rather than locals. Maybe he was correct but economists are usually weary of win-win statement. At a minimum, their attention is heightened when such statements are made. It is a sort of manure detector drilled into economists. That said, Nobel Prize winner, Thomas Schelling, gave a commencement address where he said "To those of you who become professional economists I urge you: get out there and help find those free lunches".
The good folks of San Diego have decided against increasing the tax from 12.5% to 16.5% in an effort to raise $1.15m (see ESPN report on the story here). The Economist magazine had a wonderful piece on the broader context earlier this year (here). There is a clear implication that taxpayers lose out from the major leagues leveraging their power.
I don't know enough about the details to say categorically that the voters got it right. However, I can imagine some economists colleagues using the Ron Burgundy quote "You stay classy San Diego". But will the Chargers use another quote from Ron?