removing politics from other threads, I offer this as background for all disinterested but interested observers of the State of the Onion:
Is that an election in your pocket, or are you just pleased to see me?The U.S. Presidential election has made headlines around the world. Believe it or not - this is
not the first time in U.S. history that things have been this close -- or this crazy...
On election night in 1876, Rutherford Hayes went to bed believing he had lost the presidential election. The next day, however, his Republican campaign manager boldly proclaimed him the winner, opening the curtain on the most fiercely disputed election in American history.
It was discovered that three Republican states in the South (Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana) had sent in double returns. The Democrats screamed foul, until it was revealed they, too, had committed election return fraud. Congress debated the election results for weeks.
The year ended with no U.S. president-elect. In January 1877, Congress appointed an electoral commission to laboriously re-count the entire vote and settle the dispute. On March 2, the commission announced that Hayes had 185 electoral votes and Samuel Tilden 184. If only one of the 20 disputed electoral votes had gone to him, Tilden would have been elected. His popular vote was 4,284,020; Hayes's trailed at 4,036,572.
With thanks to Lee Daniel Quinn at <words@iop.com>, from Useless-Infomaster http://uselessdigest@uselessknowledge.com
There was an interesting election in Winchester (I don't recall the details, I'll see if I can find it on the web - see below). One of the candidates (Gerry Malone) lost by two votes (to Mark Oaten) and demanded not only a re-count but a re-vote. He won his appeal and the vote was re-run.
The outcome? He lost by a huge majority - taken as a sign that the electorate do not like their decisions to be questioned!
http://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/97/oct10/news2.htmlhttp://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmhansrd/vo971217/debtext/71217-05.htm
While enjoying my daily giggle at UserFriendly.org, I saw a banner ad that caused an even bigger smile. It was for CNN "Election2000 Too close to call Stay with CNN for complete coverage." It brought back memories of how often the phrase "too close to call" was used in media coverage of the election in progress. Of course, almost immediately after using the phrase, the media organisations would proceed to "call it." While it doesn't rank with asking some train/plane/boat wreck survivor "how do you feel to have survived while watching your entire family brutally dismembered?", it was an amusing example of how to use language without being bogged down by petty details such as meaning.
What is most upsetting to me, is a Florida official who calmly mentioned (reported in Friday, 11/10, NY Times, but buried on page 33 or so) that in the last election (2 years ago) 15,000 votes( in one county!) where thrown out because they were double punched. over 19,000 in state!
So they knew they had a problem two years ago, and think nothing of dis enfranchizing almost 20,000 voters! If this were happening in any other country, we would be up in arms and taking away "favored nation status" for election fraud!
the officials in Florida should be brought up on charges--not for this election, but for what happened in 1998!
I voted for Gore, and even if he end up with popular vote, I expect he will step aside for Bush if Bush wins Florida electorate. I didn't want Bush, but I am all for an orderly transfer of power...
Actually, there was a squeaker even later. In 1916, Woodrow Wilson was running against Charles Evans Hughes and a couple of minor party candidates (Socialist and Prohibition). The outcome of the election rested on California, and not only on California but eventually on the returns from one county somewhere in Northern California. A couple of days after the election, the returns came in by mail or some equally slow medium and Wilson carried California by only 4000 votes. He had at one point been ready to concede to Hughes.
BTW, a concession is absolutely meaningless. Just as meaningless as having Bush and Gore agree that they will abide by this or that. What matters is the votes, not what the candidates agree on.
well, of course you're right, Ted -- to borrow poker parlance, the votes read. but here we have an unseemly squabble over who gets to read (read interpret) the votes.
who gets to read..And of course for both the Mother of Parliaments and her illegitimate daughter, we then have the unseemly business of translating into what a vote is actually
worth. In Victorian England they called this process a 'rotten borough' system - now we call it democracy
>now we call it democracy
what this U.S. election (soon to be referred to as The Appointment) is all about is affirming that what we have is not a democracy, but a republic.
Allo Ted,
Being from Canada I have no opinion whatsoever as to who is a better candidate but I deduce by your comment that you back Mr. Gore since he is the one who called Mr. Bush to concede and you are saying that a concession is meaningless.
But WHY is a concession meaningless? Maybe I misunderstand the term, or the concept. Why would Gore have bothered to concede if it meant nothing and was a worthless statement?
The way it looks now, to people removed from the situation, is that Gore is wishy-washy and does not stick to his word.
a concession is just a pro forma statement made by the loser when it becomes obvious that it's all over but the fat lady's song and he wants everyone to put the champagne back on ice and turn out the lights. evidently in mid-song it was determined that the fat lady had succumbed to acalculia. as I said earlier, the votes read -- you can't just up and quit. (well, you can; but you don't while your supporters are waiting to drink that champagne!)
actually, it wouldn't have made any difference if he'd gone ahead and made the concession speech and it later turned out that he had won -- except that it would have been rather embarassing (but what could be more embarassing that what's going on now??).
what this U.S. election (soon to be referred to as The Appointment) is all about is affirming that what we have is not a democracy, but a republic.
True. It's also been a good demonstration of how unutterly unworkable a pure democracy would be. If everybody expressed their will on every subject, the resulting paralysis would make the current shambles look supremely well organised.
I'm confused as to why some of the foreign media think that this is a majoy crisis in America. They conclude that just because the election is close it means that our government is in total disarray. Obviously, the squabbling over the vote tally is unsettling, but the fact that two candidates are equally disliked isn't really a tragedy. Obviously if the Republican party had done the intelligent thing and nominated John McCain this problem would have never arisen.
Also, why would a machine recount be unacceptable? It doesn't favor any side. It would make just as many mistakes for Bush as it would for Gore. The hand count is obviously more subjective and has a greater chance of mistakes. As in the World Series, does the best of seven win?
why would a machine recount be unacceptable? It doesn't favor any sideYes, why don't they just throw dice? it would be faster and cheaper
. By the way, media here in Switzerland don't talk of a "major crisis" or "disarray". They are just relieved that the blame for this one can't be put on the Swiss banks
.
>"major crisis" or "disarray"
The press must love it - it's a great story and no-one has died yet! They have 364/5 days a year to fill their pages with non-stories. This is just a protracted opportunity for over-paid commentators to ... comment-ate!
>commentators to ... comment-ate!
thank you, jo, for the subtle exhibit of just how malformed orientate is.
malformed...Ya just love it or ate it
Actually I was just thinking what a wonderful word commentate really is!
what a wonderful word commentate really is!... but don't let that dissuade our cousins from coining say 'commentarisation' or some other monstrosity
I was wondering mav - what do you think of commentarisationism? Do you think it could catch on?
>commentarisationism?
I don't see a need; but anticommentarisationism...
Jazz,
Perhaps the reason the media is viewing this as such a crisis has something to do with the fact that everyone in the US who has any stake in this election, and anyone who had anything to do with either the design or the execution of the election has decided to file a lawsuit. I've stopped trying to keep up with it all, but haven't Gush and Bore both threatened to sue each other and the Florida Board of Elections, and the people of Palm Beach for not being able to vote properly? Haven't the People of Palm Beach filed suit against Buchanan for having his button above Gore's? Hasn't a significant percentage of the population of Florida filed suit against the poor woman who designed the ill-fated ballot? Hasn't tsuwm shown us that the British Monarchy plans to take legal action against the United States as a whole for their indecision. Isn't there a Constitutional Amendment being discussed to remove the Electoral College because it's such a poor way of picking a president. (however unlikely that is to succeed)
I heard someone say that when they run the ballots through the machines 5 times they get 5 different answers. Maybe they think they can do it by hand better. Maybe they're just having fun being in the spotlight.
As for McCain, I certainly know that I'd have been much happier to have McCain than Bush for a President. (is this the first time I've agreed with you about anything on this subject?)
happier to have McCain than Bush...
McCain frittered away his chances. Maybe Bush will grow on you?
anticommentarisationismI think Jackie would find greater orectic impulse in anticomentatarisationism...
orectic Well, at first I thought this might be a gutter word. When I looked it up, I got a reference to agriculture. Now,
agriculture generally involves dirt; and, gutters carry dirt; and, candidates sling mud at each other; so I guess this is a very appropriate word, mav!
Jackie would find greater orectic impulse in anticomentatarisationismYup--I swore I wouldn't post in this thread. NOW look what you made me do! Maybe I'm a common tater after all.
taterDown this way, taters grow as an early crop in the soil. Reckon you're a sweet tater, down in the south?
But blame tsuwm for soiling your political reputatatatation!
>McCain frittered away his chances. Maybe Bush will grow on you?
Are we suggesting that McCain has had his chips?
>Maybe Bush will grow on you?<
and maybe moss and mold will grow on me, but i would like that at all either!
xara,
Actually, I was referring to the foreign treatment of the election the morning after. I saw clips on November 8 of various foreign news casts in which they were declaring this a crisis and breakdown of the American system. And this was before all of the lawsuits. What insanity!
I saw clips on November 8 of various foreign news casts in which they were declaring this a crisis and breakdown of the American system.It might be worth remembering that you saw
clips, no doubt carefully selected and edited. Since commercial TV news has to make an impact quickly, the clips chosen would be designed to give as shocking a picture as possible, playing upon the xenophobia for which the US is renowned. Speaking from here, it certainly seems that the general reaction outside the US is much closer to bemused amusement than to any sense of crisis. The way US news organisations tripped over themselves in their indecent haste to proclaim a winner, only to be forced to spend the next few days scraping egg off their dials, probably contributed to the entertainment value for the rest of us.
I’d have to agree with MaxQ on this one. Most people I know don’t think America is in a crisis. I’d say the general feeling here is that it should be got and done with already.
bel, I loved that "got and done." Here we'd say "over and done." Whence? Anyone else around the world use one or t'other expression?
I've finally become an addict and it didn't even hurt.
My sincerest contrafibularities - aren't you glad that's over and done with? Your comment about half- and quarter-hour timezones intrigued me. How many of those are there? Here in NZ the Chatham Islands are 45 minutes ahead of us, where else are there timezone increments of other one hour?
where else are there timezone increments of other one hour? Max,
I can only speak with authority for the Australian locations South Australia (Adelaide) and Northern Territory (Darwin), both GMT +9:30, but judging from the choices I get when I make a custom change to my Windows clock or your handy clockrack (I think the list I see is courtesy of Mr Gates), there are also the following:
GMT -3:30 Newfoundland
GMT +3:30 Tehran
GMT +4:30 Kabul
GMT +5:30 Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, New Delhi
Agrees with the list at
http://time.greenwich2000.com/info/time-now.htmNote the Chatham Islands don't appear on either.
The Greenwich site refers to "standard" time zones which differ from GMT by an integer number of hours.
Correct about the four Indian metros. India made the decision to have the entire country on a single time zone (no summer time either), and the only one that was not too bizarre for either westernmost or easternmost India was the half hour. I think that if you look at a time zone map (oh so helpdfully provided in the reference section of mist 'business' diaries), you'll see that thanks to China also adopting a rather extreme policy on time zones, you can travel north from India into China and suddenly find 2 and a half hours added to your time. Also, if you travel from Assam through Bangladesh into West Bengal, your time (even though you're headed westwards) can go from, say, 0630 to 0700 (and then back to 0630 again).
A quick scan also seems to show that Nepal may be 5 and three quarter hours ahead of GMT.
In reply to:
Note the Chatham Islands don't appear on either.
I suppose that a few small islands with perhaps 600 or so human residents don't amount to a hill of beans, now that the pseudo-millennium madness has passed.
