>The media’s inability to articulate the proposition’s purpose may have led to voter bewilderment, as illustrated in the CBS article, which features a California resident who asserts: “I don’t like Daylight Saving Time. It disrupts me every fall.” Given that DST begins in the spring, this Californian probably meant to assail Standard Time but inadvertently contributed to anti-DST fervor.

There's nothing incorrect here, as the existence of a time switch to Daylight Savings Time necessitates a jump back to Standard Time. The individual is basically saying "I don't like [the switch to] Daylight Saving Time."

The rest of the article ignores that store hours etc. are changeable, and that those hours do not change infrequently. Some places have both summer and winter hours already.

Going daylight savings time all year round because we're too lazy to bother with changing store hours is absurd. Why in god's name would we decide that noon, when the sun is at its highest point, is not 12PM? To highlight the absurdity, imagine explaining this to kids 100 years from now: "well, 13:00 corresponds to solar noon because a century ago people in the United States decided it made more sense to shift all our time zones one over rather than change work hours. That's why our time zone has the word 'Daylight' in instead of just being called Pacific Time."

(A note: I am aware that solar noon does not exactly correspond to 12:00 PM due to the peculiarities of Earth's orbit, but being off by up to 16 minutes isn't that bad, particularly as the variation is centered around 12:00 PM. And yes, as you move closer to the edge of a time zone the offset between solar noon and 12:00 PM grows, but there is generally an attempt made to correspond with solar noon.)