From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2000 #593 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk VideoTree sign-up: http://www.jmdl.com/trading Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Friday, November 10 2000 Volume 2000 : Number 593 The 'Official' Joni Mitchell Homepage, created by Wally Breese, can be found at http://www.jonimitchell.com. It contains the latest news, a detailed bio, Original Interviews, essays, lyrics and much much more. The JMDL website can be found at http://www.jmdl.com and contains interviews, articles, the member gallery, archives, and much more. Sign up for VideoTree #2 now: http://www.jmdl.com/trading ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Rock Stars and Requests - NJC [Murphycopy@aol.com] the table I didn't include in the electoral college debate (njc) [Anne Sa] Re: Craziness (NJC) [michael w yarbrough ] Re: Craziness (NJC) [michael w yarbrough ] Re: Great idea (NJC) [michael w yarbrough ] Re: Craziness (NJC) [michael w yarbrough ] Re: Craziness NJC ["Lori R. Fye" ] RE: what to buy next ["Blair Fraipont" ] George W. ["Blair Fraipont" ] Re: Craziness NJC [FMYFL@aol.com] Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) [michael w yarbrough ] Re: Craziness/my mistake (NJC) ["Lori R. Fye" ] RE: Food of our childhoods NJC/Hello all [Alison E ] Re: Craziness (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) [dsk ] Re: Craziness (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Great idea (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Craziness, the Election [davidpaulmarine@webtv.net (David Marine)] Re: Craziness (NJC) [Don Sloan ] RE: Craziness (NJC) ["Eric Wilcox" ] Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) [dsk ] NJC bush.gore [catman ] Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) [catman ] Illinois NJC [Vince Lavieri ] Re: Craziness (NJC), USA Election, Long ["Jim L'Hommedieu" > You mention Ted Nugent's "total abstinence from any use of drugs" in your post. Are you sure about that? Why didn't he just carry the guitar in its case to and from the stage area? --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 13:43:53 -0500 From: Anne Sandstrom Subject: the table I didn't include in the electoral college debate (njc) Oops... I forgot to paste in the table that shows one way of determining how much 'weight' each state has in the process. If a state has low voter turnout, each delegate from that state represents fewer people. (I did another table that assumes that if you vote for anyone other than the winner of your state, your vote gets thrown out. In that case, the delegates from the state only represent those who cast winning votes. The results are equally disproportionate, but not in the same states.) Anne ALABAMA 1.31 ALASKA 3.29 ARIZONA 1.46 ARKANSAS 1.59 CALIFORNIA 1.35 COLORADO 1.12 CONNECTICUT 1.33 DELAWARE 2.23 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 3.86 FLORIDA 1.02 GEORGIA 1.24 HAWAII 2.65 IDAHO 1.98 ILLINOIS 1.14 INDIANA 1.36 IOWA 1.31 KANSAS 1.39 KENTUCKY 1.27 LOUISIANA 1.25 MAINE 1.51 MARYLAND 1.27 MASSACHUSETTS 1.09 MICHIGAN 1.04 MINNESOTA 1.00 MISSISSIPPI 1.81 MISSOURI 1.14 MONTANA 1.79 NEBRASKA 1.87 NEVADA 1.60 NEW HAMPSHIRE 1.72 NEW JERSEY 1.18 NEW MEXICO 2.30 NEW YORK 1.28 NORTH CAROLINA 1.22 NORTH DAKOTA 2.53 OHIO 1.12 OKLAHOMA 1.58 OREGON 1.20 PENNSYLVANIA 1.15 RHODE ISLAND 2.36 SOUTH CAROLINA 1.38 SOUTH DAKOTA 2.32 TENNESSEE 1.29 TEXAS 1.22 VERMONT 2.51 VIRGINIA 1.18 WASHINGTON 1.50 WEST VIRGINIA 1.91 WISCONSIN 1.04 WYOMING 3.43 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:46:36 -0600 (CST) From: michael w yarbrough Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) Kakki wrote: > Richard Daley, Jr.s (Gore's sampaign manager and spokesman) precinct also > used a "butterfly" ballot. How ironic! All I will say as far as the Bill Daley (Richard's his brother, the mayor) is Gore's campaign chair (not manager, but that's an irrelevant distinction here). The ballots in Chicago are butterfly ballots, BUT the holes for no offices were interspersed with each other in the way they were in FL, with the exception of the judge retentions where one votes yes or no for each judge up. That part was quite confusing, I have to say, but not unworkable. While all this hoo-ha can be annoying, particularly in a country where we're used to knowing much more quickly (precisely BECAUSE of media projections before final vote counts, I'd add), I do think it's important to remember that the only institutionalized force we have to keep elections honest is the losing party. While all the allegations may not be true, relevant, etc., it is VITAL to our long-term belief in our democracy that our elections, though necessarily imperfect, are as fair as possible. And the only watchdog who will make that happen will be the losing party. As for the electoral college, axing it would shift balances dramatically, but not so much to big states as to big media markets, which represent people who do not necessarily share the same interests/beliefs (urban vs. suburban, etc.). There is no doubt, however, that rural folk would likely lose out unless they voted as a group, which is something to weigh very seriously before making a change. That said, even under the current system they largely DO vote as a group (Republican). This whole event (it is not a "crisis") SHOULD cause us to seriously reexamine a lot about how we conduct elections, but there SHOULD NOT be rash, ill-considered change because of it. - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:55:15 -0600 (CST) From: michael w yarbrough Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) I wrote: > > We can cut down on fraud and irregularity, > > and perhaps move to popular rather than electoral voting, to >reduce the > arbitrariness, but we cannot eliminate it. Dems >benefited from it with > Kennedy's election; Reps likely will >benefit from it with Bush's.. And Kakki responded: > See Michael, this is where I start to spin - the Dems in 1960 benefited from > *proven*, in a court of law, criminal fraud consisting of votes from people > who were dead and other ballot box stuffing (This was also was explained to > me by the esteemed NPR radio today). Please don't lump in the situation in > Florida with that unless fraud there is proven in a court of law, too. First a point of information (new to me as well): apparently IL was ultimately irrelevant in putting Kennedy over the top; TX was more important, and no improprieties that I am aware of were alleged there. (I still could be wrong). But the more important point: I am NOT saying that Republicans committed fraud and should go to jail or that this election should be overturned. The parallel I am drawing is this: BOTH fraud and legal but confusing voting practices increase the power of other forces to twist what is already a very imperfect measure of public will. Anti-fraud protections increased after 1960. After this election we should look much more closely at how ballots are printed and arranged. The secondary parallel is that in neither 1960 nor 2000 could the Democratic or Republican nominee claim that he represented the public's true will. The votes in both elections were just too damn close for that. Cries of moral outrage over unfair play were justified in 1960, but cries of moral outrage because the public will was thwarted were not. We don't know who, if anyone, represented the "true" will. And similar cries are unjustified now as well. - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:57:25 -0600 (CST) From: michael w yarbrough Subject: Re: Great idea (NJC) On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Kakki wrote: > Kate wrote: > > > call me a simple grrl but i think they oughta just split the >florida > electoral votes & give each of the guys 1/2. don't you >think marcel? > > Hey Kate, I think you just came up with a great "alternate" Electoral > College idea - if the candidates are within a hairbreaths percentage of each > other - split it down the middle. This is the smartest thing I've heard in > 3 days! Unfortunately this would require either a constitutional amendment or simultaneous legislation in 48 states, and since many (particularly mid-sized swing states such as Missouri) would lose influence under such a scheme, it seems rather unlikely. Still not a bad idea... - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 13:08:48 -0600 (CST) From: michael w yarbrough Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, dsk wrote: > Siresorrow@aol.com wrote: > > > ... and i'm wondering how many thousands of people didn't vote on the > > panhandle of florida because it was announced that the state had gone to > > gore? i don't see that being talked about on this list. > > No projections were made in any state until that state's polls had closed. All > the votes in Florida had already been cast, but not completely counted yet, when > the projection was made. The FL panhandle is in a different time zone. I've heard, but not confirmed, that network projections predated the later poll closings in that part of the state. - --M ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:11:12 -0800 (PST) From: "Lori R. Fye" Subject: Re: Craziness NJC > Actually us dumb bubba Floridians will do anything > for world wide attention:~) Jimmy! Having Disneyworld in your backyard isn't enough??? ; ) Lori, just now noticing the irony of this entire Mickey Mouse affair, in DC __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:19:59 EST From: "Blair Fraipont" Subject: RE: what to buy next Definitely get Turbulent INdigo next.. the music is so good on it.. and i love her voice, eventhough, it is comparatively different from that on Blue some 20 years earlier. blair _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:25:17 EST From: "Blair Fraipont" Subject: George W. ALl i can say about George W. is that he is a spoiled daddie's boy. HE has stated that all he ever wanted to be when he grew up was a Baseball contractor.. hmmmm Unlike Bill Clinton who actually aspired to be the president of the united states. Also, i believe Mr. Bush will ignore any of the Gay rights that we try to bring forward. Yes, al Gore doesnt believe in Gay marriage, but He is on our side, unlike the beedy-eyed GW. blair _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:31:30 EST From: FMYFL@aol.com Subject: Re: Craziness NJC Lori wrote: << > Actually us dumb bubba Floridians will do anything > for world wide attention:~) Jimmy! Having Disneyworld in your backyard isn't enough??? ; ) >> Disney's old hat. Once Little Elian went back to Cuba, no one paid any attention to us :( Jimmy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 13:59:43 -0600 (CST) From: michael w yarbrough Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, dsk wrote: > There's no equivalent behavior from the Democrats. Sorry, I don't buy that at all. The way people make fun of right-wing nuts is no less dehumanizing or wrong or common. - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:36:31 -0600 From: "kerry" Subject: american food NJC Wally wrote: >>>are there any special dishes that you think are typical of your region?>>> I love this list--the last digest's main themes were lesbians, food and politics! What a group! I especially like the first two. :>) As far as food native to this area - Milwaukee, Wisconsin--- Beer (considered a food group) and of course, CHEESE. We even deep fry it here. You can feel your arteries clog just thinking about it. Seriously, we have a lot of cultures represented here, but I'd say mainly a German influence. We have a HUGE German fest here in the summer complete with hundreds of pigs roasting on spits. (It's a horrifying sight to a vegetarian.) I ate a lot of sauerbraten growing up and now I eat tofu! Go figure. Another local tradition is the Friday night fish fry. I think it started as a Catholic thing, but now everyone flocks to restaurants on Friday nights for all-you-can-eat fried fish, usually served with cole slaw, fries and bread. Kerry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:28:40 -0800 (PST) From: "Lori R. Fye" Subject: Re: Craziness/my mistake (NJC) Debra wrote: > Don't know what effect that too-early projection > would have on the voters on the western side of the > state. To this griping that the networks call results too early and it affects voters in time zones where the polls haven't yet closed, I say: PHOOEY! If I was in the panhandle of Florida or out in California or anywhere in between, and the eastern half of my state or the East Coast was being called for the candidate I was not supporting, I would get my ass to the polls as quickly as possible and VOTE for my candidate! If I did otherwise, I deserve otherwise. Lori in DC __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:34:54 -0800 (PST) From: Alison E Subject: RE: Food of our childhoods NJC/Hello all Hello everyone! Coming out of lurk mode again, starting to get settled in my somewhat hectic new life in NYC. I am working for PBS in their sponsorship/marketing division (you can email me at the yahoo address or at aeinerson@pbs.org). Things are going well here (aside from my death defying trip-fall-splay into the street today. People on the street couldn't decide whether to laugh or pick my wet, dirty, coffee-covered ass up off the street. Most laughed, eventually someone helped me up). Things are going well, though and I am loving it. Never a dull moment. To Wally: I must mention that most famous of Utah desserts...JELLO! Where would we be without it? Also, from the mormon tradition, a lovely dish often referred to as "funeral potatoes" (basically potatoes with a lot of cheese, butter and milk, baked and topped with either potato chips, bread crumbs,or a horrific combination of the two). And don't forget, fry sauce! Another of Utah's invaluable contributions to the American culinary experience. Ketchup, mayo, maybe some pickle juice... The world will have so much to learn in 2002... Anyhow, I hope you are all well. I have been reading the posts faithfully, and am enjoying the conversation as usual. Take care all, alison e. in nyc __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:24:33 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) Well here is what I would call an honest and reasoned take containing no spin. Kakki > Just for everyone's information, I voted in Chicago on the butterfly ballot. It was VERY confusing! It was only for the judges, but I am a maniac and vote fairly informed on those races as well. I had 3 or 4 judges I definitely needed to retain. One was a gay brother who can always use a vote. I had every intention of complaining, once the election was over, to the powers that be. I do not care how long it takes, nor do I care if three or four more states warrant recounts - DO IT ! Get it right and nobody can bitch about it. I am wavering on a re-vote, although I know it would probably > help my candidate. I believe that in 1996 there were over 14,000 votes disqualified, but this is still a significant increase in an election that may be won by less than one half of one percent. This is a 40% increase in disqualifications, that is important. I also think only those that voted the first time should vote this time and I would limit it to the county in question. My feelings against a re-vote is legally really is no precedent and I also don't want to be a sore loser. > Finally, at this point also no matter who wins that candidate must bring the country together since this was a virtual heat. That would be the responsible thing to do. I am betting that unless that person is through the roof popular and successful, we'll see a new president in four years. Especially if Gore wins, I don't think Americans will vote > for the same party to be in office for a 16th year in a row. Just like the market, politics are also cyclical. > Anyway, my fellow Americans lets keep our wits about us. If we can't pick between these two perhaps I should just be appointed or anointed - you choose! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:53:52 -0500 From: dsk Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) Apparently I didn't express my thoughts clearly. Yes, I also have heard the right-wing made fun of, but not in a systematic way that is the equivalent of right-wing talk radio, where the information is unrelentingly one-sided and loaded with insults and name-calling, and which *millions* of people listen to and then believe they have the whole story. Along with getting facts as presented by only one point of view, they're also given a dose of hate to go with it, and taught that arguing is a matter of throwing insults around rather than considering and discussing different viewpoints. I don't know of anything equivalent to that on the Democrats side. I'm not saying there are no imperfections with the way Democrats do things, but systematic hatred isn't one of those imperfections. Debra Shea michael w yarbrough wrote: > On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, dsk wrote: > > > There's no equivalent behavior from the Democrats. > > Sorry, I don't buy that at all. The way people make fun of right-wing > nuts is no less dehumanizing or wrong or common. > > --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 21:00:05 -0000 From: "Garret" Subject: RE:WHAT DISCS TO BUY NEXT John, if you liked Blue you would probably really like the other albums from roughly the same time. i absolutely LOVE Ladies of teh Canyon. everyone must hear Rainy Night House!! it has woodstock, big yellow taxi, and circle game....so if you want to get an album with as few songs as possible from hits then this mightn't be the best choice. but it is a very very brilliant album -willy and real good for free are also Joni essentials, imho! For the Roses is a natural progression from LOTC and Blue. it is truly fantastic, my fave Joni at the moment. every track is a gem. then i'd recommend Turbulent Indigo just because it isn't like anything on Hits. it show s Joni in teh 90's and i think it's one of her strongest albums. or alternativly, buy misses. then listeneing to hits and misses decide which era joni you like and go for those albums:-) let us know what you decide. GARRET ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:40:07 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) > First a point of information (new to me as well): apparently >IL was ultimately irrelevant in putting Kennedy over the top; >TX was more important, and no improprieties that I am >aware of were alleged there. (I still could be wrong). Michael, I also heard the person on NPR say that the fraud was irrelevant to putting Kennedy over the top. But that was not my point. My only point was that the 1960 situation was proven to be fraud, and the 2000 situation has not at this time. > But the more important point: I am NOT saying that Republicans committed fraud and should go to jail or that this election should be overturned. The parallel I am drawing is this: BOTH fraud and legal but confusing voting practices increase the power of other forces to twist what is already a very imperfect measure of public will. Anti-fraud protections > increased after 1960. After this election we should look much more closely at how ballots are printed and arranged. I agree 100% > The secondary parallel is that in neither 1960 nor 2000 >could the Democratic or Republican nominee claim that he >represented the public's true will. The votes in both >elections were just too damn close for that. Great point. > Cries of moral outrage over unfair play were justified in >1960, but cries of moral outrage because the public will was >thwarted were not. We don't know who, if anyone, >represented the "true" will. And similar cries are unjustified >now as well. Nixon could have pursued it but chose not to "for the good of the country". I also agree with your previous post that if there is a movement to change the Electoral College system, it should commence after this election is resolved and not in the middle of it. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:44:50 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Great idea (NJC) Michael wrote: > Unfortunately this would require either a constitutional >amendment or simultaneous legislation in 48 states, and >since many (particularly mid-sized swing states such as >Missouri) would lose influence under such a > scheme, it seems rather unlikely. Great point - ANY change to the current EC system would require a constitutional amendment. > Still not a bad idea... The best one I've seen as far as coming the closest to making everyone happy. Although there will always be some people who are not happy, no matter what! Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:51:37 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) Debra wrote: > This shows how right-wingers are so easily frustrated and >have absolutely no tolerance of other views, and instead of trying to persuade people of their view by talking about ideas, they just toss insults around. That doesn't ever convince me of anything, no matter how many facts might be included among all those insults. > > There's no equivalent behavior from the Democrats. Thank >god for that. Can you imagine if everyone communicated >only by insulting the other side? Nothing would ever get >done. It would be an endless name-calling marathon. Debra, do you seriously believe this? Just on this list alone, not only in the past few weeks, but over time, I have read many people call Bush a "moron", "uneducated" (despite an MBA from Harward), a "scary" person who "will take away all our rights" and "destroy the country" and so on. Haven't you read these posts, too? The overwhelming majority who post about political matters here have vilified Bush with every hateful description they can conjure up. And we bascially only have one person, Marcel, on the other side of this all. Now if you tell me that this has not occurred here and is not accurate, then I will know that I've gone to Orwellian hell. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:27:29 EST From: MDESTE1@aol.com Subject: Past Close Elections Close Presidential Elections of the Past .c The Associated Press Presidential races won by less than 5 percent of the popular vote. Victors are listed first. 1976 Jimmy Carter (D), 50.1 percent, 40,830,763 votes, 297 Electoral College votes. Gerald Ford (R), 48 percent, 39,147,793 votes, 240 electoral votes. Ronald Reagan, 1 electoral vote. 1968 Richard Nixon (R), 43.4 percent, 31,785,480 votes, 301 electoral. Hubert Humphrey (D), 42.7 percent, 31,275,166 votes, 191 electoral. George Wallace (American Independent), 13.5 percent, 9,906,473 votes, 46 electoral. 1960 John F. Kennedy (D), 49.7 percent, 34,226,731 votes, 303 electoral. Richard Nixon (R), 49.5 percent, 34,108,157 votes, 219 electoral. Harry Byrd (D), 0.2 percent, 116,248 votes, 15 (unpledged electors). 1948 Harry Truman (D), 49.6 percent, 24,179,345 votes, 303 electoral. Thomas Dewey (R), 45.1 percent, 21,991,291 votes, 189 electoral. J. Strom Thurmond (States' Rights Democrat), 2.4 percent, 1,176,125 votes, 39 electoral. Henry Wallace (Progressive), 2.4 percent, 1,157,326 votes, 0 electoral. 1916 Woodrow Wilson (D), 49.2 percent, 9,126,300 votes, 277 electoral. Charles E. Hughes (R), 46.1 percent, 8,546,789 votes, 254 electoral. 1896 William McKinley (R), 51 percent, 7,108,480 votes, 271 electoral. William J. Bryan (D, Populist), 46.7 percent, 6,511,495 votes, 176 electoral. 1892 Grover Cleveland (D), 46.1 percent, 5,551,883 votes, 277 electoral. Benjamin Harrison (R), 43 percent, 5,179,244 votes, 145 electoral. James B. Weaver (Populist), 8.5 percent, 1,024,280 votes, 22 electoral. 1888 Benjamin Harrison (R), 47.8 percent, 5,443,892 votes, 233 electoral. Grover Cleveland (D), 48.6 percent, 5,534,488 votes, 168 electoral. 1880 James A. Garfield (R), 48.3 percent, 4,446,158 votes, 214 electoral. Winfield S. Hancock (D), 48.3 percent, 4,444,260 votes, 155 electoral. 1876 Rutherford B. Hayes (R), 48 percent, 4,034,311 votes, 185 electoral. Samuel J. Tilden (D), 51 percent, 4,288,546 votes, 184 electoral. 1848 Zachary Taylor (Whig), 47.3 percent, 1,361,393 votes, 163 electoral. Lewis Cass (D), 42.5 percent, 1,223,460 votes, 127 electoral. Martin Van Buren (Free Soil), 10.1 percent, 291,501 votes, 0 electoral. 1844 James K. Polk (D), 49.5 percent, 1,339,494 votes, 170 electoral. Henry Clay (Whig), 48.1 percent, 1,300,004 votes, 105 electoral. 1824 No candidate won an electoral majority, so the task of choosing the president fell to the House. Thirteen state delegations chose John Q. Adams, seven chose Andrew Jackson and three chose William Crawford. Adams became the president though Jackson won the popular vote. Adams (Democratic-Republican), 30.9 percent, 113,122 votes, 84 electoral. Jackson (Democratic-Republican), 41.3 percent, 151,271 votes, 99 electoral. Crawford (Democratic-Republican), 11.2 percent, 40,856 votes, 41 electoral. Clay (Democratic-Republican), 13 percent, 47,531 votes, 37 electoral. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:29:04 EST From: MDESTE1@aol.com Subject: Final re-count totals Latest Florida Recount Numbers .c The Associated Press With votes in all 67 counties recounted, the tally collected by The Associated Press shows Republican George W. Bush leading Democrat Al Gore by 327 votes. Gore has a net gain of 2,520 votes from the election night count. Bush has a net gain of 1,063 votes. The last count of all 67 counties before the recount showed Bush leading Gore by 1,784 votes. Gore Bush County Gore Bush Change Change Alachua 47,365 34,124 65 62 Baker 2,392 5,610 Bay 18,850 38,637 Bradford 3,075 5,414 3 1 Brevard 97,318 115,185 Broward 386,561 177,323 43 44 Calhoun 2,155 2,873 Charlott 29,645 35,426 4 7 Citrus 25,525 29,766 24 22 Clay 14,632 41,736 2 -9 Collier 29,918 60,433 13 7 Columbia 7,047 10,964 Dade 328,764 289,492 62 36 De Soto 3,320 4,256 -2 Dixie 1,826 2,697 1 -1 Duval 107,864 152,098 184 16 Escambia 40,943 73,017 -15 -12 Flagler 13,897 12,613 6 5 Franklin 2,046 2,454 4 6 Gadsden 9,735 4,767 170 17 Gilchris 1,910 3,300 Glades 1,442 1,841 2 1 Gulf 2,397 3,550 8 4 Hamilton 1,722 2,146 4 -7 Hardee 2,339 3,765 -2 1 Hendry 3,240 4,747 1 4 Hernando 32,644 30,646 Highland 14,167 20,206 15 10 Hilsboro 169,557 180,760 28 47 Holmes 2,177 5,011 23 26 Indianrv 19,768 28,635 -1 8 Jackson 6,868 9,138 Jeffrson 3,041 2,478 3 -3 Lafayete 789 1,670 1 1 Lake 36,571 50,010 16 47 Lee 73,560 106,141 30 18 Leon 61,425 39,053 Levy 5,398 6,858 -5 -2 Liberty 1,017 1,317 6 1 Madison 3,014 3,038 3 Manatee 49,177 57,952 8 4 Marion 44,665 55,141 17 6 Martin 26,620 33,970 1 106 Monroe 16,483 16,059 Nassau 6,879 16,280 -73 -124 Okaloosa 16,948 52,093 24 50 Okeechob 4,588 5,057 -1 Orange 140,220 134,517 105 41 Osceola 28,181 26,212 4 -4 Palmbech 269,696 152,954 751 108 Pasco 69,564 68,582 14 1 Pinellas 200,629 184,823 417 -61 Polk 75,196 90,191 219 90 Putnam 12,102 13,447 11 8 Sarasota 72,853 83,100 -1 Seminole 59,174 75,677 286 384 Sntarosa 12,802 36,274 7 26 St Johns 19,502 39,546 20 49 St Lucie 41,559 34,705 Sumter 9,637 12,127 3 1 Suwannee 4,075 8,006 -9 -8 Taylor 2,649 4,056 2 6 Union 1,407 2,332 8 6 Volusia 97,063 82,214 Wakulla 3,838 4,512 3 1 Walton 5,642 12,182 5 6 Washngtn 2,798 4,994 2 11 TOTALS 2,909,871 2,910,198 2,520 1,063 The AP county-by-county tally is an unofficial survey. The vote totals are subject to verification by the Florida Secretary of State's Office and subject to legal challenges by candidates and others. The Associated Press surveyed elections officials in each of Florida's 67 counties on Wednesday and Thursday to tabulate vote totals in the recount of the presidential election. The results were provided directly to the AP by election officials in those counties either in person or by phone. In every possible instance, the AP also obtained faxed copies of the recounted tally from the county officials. The same results were to be relayed from each county to the Florida secretary of state's office in Tallahassee, and she will then release a final unofficial tally. The vote totals include some but not all absentee ballots sent to Floridians living overseas. Those ballots had to be postmarked by Election Day, but can be returned as late as Nov. 17. AP-NY-11-10-00 1125EST Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:51:00 -0600 From: Today in Joni History Subject: Today in Joni History - November 10 1998: The Village Voice publishes a rather irreverent view of the recent MSG concert, saying "Was it possible? Could the tall blond under the Madison Square Garden spots be responsible for unleashing Jewel, Sarah, Paula, Alanis, Shawn, and a couple of Natalies on us? Funny, she didn't look cruel. She actually looked pleasant, not at all the soured sibyl who sulks through interviews, grousing about whiny white kids and her pantheon niche." Read it here: http://www.jmdl.com/articles/docs/981110vv.cfm - -------- Know a date or month specific Joni tidbit? Send it off to JoniFact@jmdl.com and we'll add it to the list. - -------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:01:59 -0800 (PST) From: davidpaulmarine@webtv.net (David Marine) Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election Hey List -- As Seal says, "we're never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy." I think it's telling that the last time we had such a close race was '60, just before a profound shift in our nation's consciousness. I believe that within the present turmoil are the seeds of a new America, though I don't pretend to know what it will look like. On another note, Carlton posted about the Reagan era and AIDS, and as someone who lived through that initial crisis on the front lines in NYC, I can tell you that the threat we felt was very real. C. Everett Koop has stated that the reason Reagan failed to respond to the crisis was not homophobia, but "a hatred of gay people at the highest level" (i.e. Reagan & co.). It's important to realize that for many who vote, the question of who is in office may literally be a life or death issue. Personally, I feel that Gore and his camp should fight Bush with every legal means at their disposal. David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:48:04 -0800 From: Don Sloan Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) Lori wrote in part: <> I'm not sure I sympathize with those who didn't vote the way they intended, even though we are all suffering because they did not. Our responsibility as voters is to be "educated" and "paying attention" EVERY time we vote. To that end, the folks in Florida had ample opportunity to prepare for the responsible exercise of their voting privilege well in advance of the election. Yet thousands of voters punched TWO holes for ONE vote or voted for the wrong guy. So maybe this entire mess would not be happening if the Floridians in the center of this storm had been "careful" and "paying attention" on November 7. Should we redo the whole thing because they were not? Let's all hope, no matter who we voted for, that whatever is done about Florida is in the best LONG-TERM interest of this country. The legal decisions made will be precedent setting and hopefully, even if the "players" and spin doctors don't understand or care about that, the courts will. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:13:05 -0600 From: "Eric Wilcox" Subject: RE: Craziness (NJC) And yet... whether or not we should sympathize with these people... Florida's ballots violated Florida Statute. The ballots were illegal under Florida law. so.... eric - -----Original Message----- From: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]On Behalf Of Don Sloan Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 2:48 PM To: JMDL Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC) Lori wrote in part: <> I'm not sure I sympathize with those who didn't vote the way they intended, even though we are all suffering because they did not. Our responsibility as voters is to be "educated" and "paying attention" EVERY time we vote. To that end, the folks in Florida had ample opportunity to prepare for the responsible exercise of their voting privilege well in advance of the election. Yet thousands of voters punched TWO holes for ONE vote or voted for the wrong guy. So maybe this entire mess would not be happening if the Floridians in the center of this storm had been "careful" and "paying attention" on November 7. Should we redo the whole thing because they were not? Let's all hope, no matter who we voted for, that whatever is done about Florida is in the best LONG-TERM interest of this country. The legal decisions made will be precedent setting and hopefully, even if the "players" and spin doctors don't understand or care about that, the courts will. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:38:20 -0500 From: dsk Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) Kakki wrote: > Debra wrote: > > > This shows how right-wingers are so easily frustrated and >have absolutely > no tolerance of other views, and instead of trying to persuade people of > their view by talking about ideas, they just toss insults around. That > doesn't ever convince me of anything, no matter how many facts might be > included among all those insults. > > > > There's no equivalent behavior from the Democrats. Thank >god for that. > Can you imagine if everyone communicated >only by insulting the other side? > Nothing would ever get >done. It would be an endless name-calling marathon. > > Debra, do you seriously believe this? Just on this list alone, not only in > the past few weeks, but over time, I have read many people call Bush a > "moron", "uneducated" (despite an MBA from Harward), a "scary" person who > "will take away all our rights" and "destroy the country" and so on. > Haven't you read these posts, too? Yes, I've read all the posts. My statement wasn't clear. I didn't mean to say that Democrats never say negative things about the other side, and say it as an insult sometimes. I did mean that there is no systematic way for Democrats to spread their one-sided view, as the right-wingers do through talk radio. We've seen examples of the different approaches right here on this list: Saying I think Bush is a moron who is not intelligent or experienced enough to lead this country is one thing, and it might offend people. So.... tell me differently. Show me why I'm wrong. I'm being specific enough that it's something that can be discussed. No matter how persuasive you are, I may never agree, but will always believe it's your right to think as you do. Reading that all Democrats are such morons they need assistance with reproduction is something else entirely. That's merely hateful name-calling. To disagree with that becomes a yes they are, no they're not, yes they are, no they're not, argument across the schoolyard. That's the talk radio approach. A lot of right-wingers have learned to argue the talk radio way, to communicate "only by insulting the other side" way. That seems very destructive to me, and I stick to my notion that, in general, more liberal thinkers do not limit the expression of their ideas to name-calling and insults. Can you imagine Tom Brokaw spending a half hour publicly making fun of anyone? I can't. But I have heard Rush Limbaugh spend 1/2 hour making fun of Hillary Clinton. Why does he do that? It just spreads hate. And then people repeat what they've heard and think they're well informed. So, as far as I know, there is no equivalent to that on the Democratic side. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:43:13 -0500 From: "Stephen Epstein" Subject: Wally NJC Wally, Did you get my e-mail? I tried 3 or 4 times and not sure if you got it. Stephen in Vancouver ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:48:54 +0000 From: catman Subject: NJC bush.gore Thanks for all the lively mail. Makes for a very interesting read. And only one person who cannot discuss without insulting. Very good! The news here is full of your election and our floods. I recall someone saying when Thatcher won her second term that 'they say every dog has it's day but this bitch has had two'! Not polite but I thought funny. Hope you get the result soon and that it is the one we want! - -- bw colin colin@tantra.fsbusiness.co.uk http://www.geocities.com/tantra_apso/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:56:34 +0000 From: catman Subject: Re: Craziness, the Election, and the Arrow (NJC) Debra wrote-amongst other well expressed things: A lot of right-wingers have learned to argue the talk radio way, to communicate "only by insulting the other side" way. That seems very destructive to me, and I stick to my notion that, in general, more liberal thinkers do not limit the expression of their ideas to name-calling and insults. I reply:we have the same here. On talk shows etc they always always bring out the conservatives-political/religious-and they always spend their time talking down to us and insulting those that have a different opinion. It boils down I am right and good and you are wrong, stupid and bad'. I brought up here once that I didn't think this 'equal opportunity' for all worked very well because people were not born with equal capabiliites. As a result, we have people who will never ever share the riches. I was told by a resident right winger 'to not worry my pretty little head about such things'. Those were not the exact words but amounted to smae. Never have I recieved anything other than insults from such people. Mind you I have since learned not to bother trying to have a decnt discussion and have discovered my email block! bw colin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:12:03 +0000 From: catman Subject: NJC diamond heist Here in Londond at the Dome, a robbery was foiled that if it succeeded would have been the biggest diamond theft of all time in the world. Anyway, a tv person(Graham Norton) has just said: Did you hear about the worlds largest diamond snatch? Liz Hurley just had her clitoris pierced!' - -- bw colin colin@tantra.fsbusiness.co.uk http://www.geocities.com/tantra_apso/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 18:53:51 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Illinois NJC I have seen the 1960 election and my native state of Illinois referred to in here and in media as a state that was somehow stolen. People think it is ironic that Bill Daley, son of the late Mayor Richard J. Daley, is involved in this election. First, remove Illinois' 1960 electoral votes from JFK and give them to Nixon and JFK still wins. Second, vote stealing in Illinois was practiced by the Democratic machine in Chicago and by the downstate Republican machine. The usual tactic was to hold back the vote until the other side blinked and then announce more votes that the other side had announced. Such tactics of the machines of both parties gave us Democrats such as Governor Adlai Stevenson, and Senator Paul Douglas, and Republicans such as Governor Bill Stratton and Senator Everitt Dirksen. In 1960 something different happened. Understand that the Kennedy family owns Merchandise Mart (since the 1930s, I believe) and that in the 1950s Sarge Shriver, husband of Eunice Kennedy, was head of the M. Mart and president of the Chicago Board of Education. Chicago is the most Roman Catholic city in the US, largest archdiocese and largest school system, etc. Currently one of RFK's sons operates the M. Mart and was considering a run for Congress from the North Shore, so the Kennedy connection continues. Given those factors, how do you think a Kennedy did in Roman Catholic Chicago? Let me tell you as someone who lived in Chicago in 1960, in a Republican household: JFK swept Chicago, period. It was the one time that Daley didn't resort to the usual tactics. The reality was that Daley released something like 95% of the Chicago vote as quickly as possible. The downstate Republicans were stunned by the size of the Chicago margin and spent all evening trying to steal enough votes to top the Chicago results; they failed, and Illinois went for JFK. The vote was held up from Illinois that night not because of Daley but because of the downstate Republcans trying to steal the election. As I said, in the electoral college, it didn't matter. I fought the Daley machine many years before I moved to Michigan, following Mayor Richard J. Daley's death. Having gone through the 1968 Democrtatic convention and the April 1968 "shoot to kill" order, the 1969 Weatherman Days of Rage, the 1969 shotting of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, the 1970 police riot at a Sly and the Family Stone concert (of all things) and as someone who worked against Daley in every election from 1964 through 1977 (and continued to financially contribute to the anti-machine people when I moved to Michigan), I am no Daley apologist. Daley did not steal the 1960 election, he didn't even steal Illinois. Not that year, not that election, didn't have to. It angers me to hear the same old thing said over and over and over. It is a nice story but it ain't true. The Bill Daley who heads the Gore campaign is the late Mayor's son and a former Secretary of Commerce and brother of thew current mayor of Chicago. They do their own things and should be judged on that. And as far as current day Chicago goes... still Democratic. The last three Republican candidates for mayor combined didn't hit 10% of the vote - each got about 3% in each election (my favorite GOP candidate was Ray Warddingly, who is a professional clown). And for Illinois: Bush in 1992 and Dole in 1996 didn't even campaign in Illinois after the Republican convention because the state was so strong for Clinton. This year Bush campaigned some but still lost bigtime in Illinois. Say what you will about all this Florida thing, please put aside the untrue story that Daley stole Illinois and elected JFK in 1960. Just isn't true. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 02:10:37 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Re: Craziness (NJC), USA Election, Long Hi Kakki, Okay, I do understand that the Electoral College has its roots deep in the Republic tradition as the Framers intended but, as I remember my Philosophy of American Political Thought class, we are also informed by the Democratic tradition which values the 'one vote' viewpoint. IMO, we are permitted to move forward as times change. (Obviously we don't want to throw our suffrage for example.) Okay, in historic times, it was impractical to physically transport all of the ballots to a central location for counting. Nowadays, the actual counting is done with punch cards which is usually more accurate and reliable. We have less need for the Republic tradition and more need for the Democratic tradition, IMO. Am I wrong? I am NOT advocating throwing out the Electoral College for this election- we couldn't even if the majority wanted to! But I am in favor of reforming the process in time. (I'm pretty sure that it would never get done with a Republican President and a Republican contolled Congress though!) - ----- As for the demeaning characterization of desert states as mere "acreage", I think the guy has a point, even if he's politically insensitive in his word choice. If the US is POPULATED by urban dwellers more and more, why give those in the desert a disproportionate say? I'm with Tom Jefferson on this one- one "man", one vote. Not Republicism. I'm REALLY enjoying this discussion, especially knowing that you have informed opinion. I'm trying to draw you out more than anything, dear. Kakki said, All I will say as far as the Electoral College goes is that I think all adult Americans should go back and take an American Government refresher course. We are a *Republic* - that's why our name is the "United STATES". Even though some people think it is logical to have the one with the most numbers win, that could eventually lead to the minority of states with the most population getting preferential treatment over the rest of the other states. Jim L'Hommedieu PS- Apologies if this is post is a retread- I'm too psyched to read my digests first! :) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 02:41:51 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: RE: craziness (NJC), USA election (LONG) Hi Mary, It's interesting, isn't it? My opinion is that we don't need to _wonder_ what to do with a close election. We have a process for deciding close elections. The fact that some voters, or even _many_ voters were confused is immaterial. Butterfly ballots have been used for a long time and both sides have approved them. Are we saying that the voters have SUDDENLY become so stupid or reckless that we should throw out the results of a Presidential election because the approved ballot confused them? Do we have to throw out every election when the PRESS reports that people were confused by the ballot? How could we possibly establish statistics to decide when we have 'enough' confusion and when we don't? (To repeat myself, reckless voting is not a reason to throw out an election.) In my opinion, what may change the validity of the election in Florida is the fact that Florida law refers to the hole that is to the RIGHT of the candidate's name. While I hate the idea of altering the process, I think that the Dems have a point when they say that butterfly ballots are therefore "illegal" in Florida. I think that this is an important point, technicality or not. Let's give them their day in court. Let's let the courts in Florida decide whether or not it is an illegal ballot. If they decide it's an illegal ballot, how in the world can we accept the count? - ----- Mary P. said, But ultimately, it boils down to whether the opinion of a party hack who likely did NOT see in the ballot the confusing construction that many voters did should be sufficient to invalidate the votes of the latter--which will determine the choice of Palm Beach County, which will determine the choice of Florida, which will determine the fate of the nation. The fact is, the confusion occurred, unforseen as it may have been by both Republicans and Democrats. What do we do now? What is fair? - ------- "Steady as she goes, Mister Sulu." Jim ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2000 #593 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe ------- Siquomb, isn't she?