The recognition

Yesterday afternoon, a friend and I were standing on the steps of the Nottingham Council House, waiting for another friend, when a man near to us turned to me and congratulated me on my recent nomination. He then said that he was a lecturer from the University of Nottingham and had been present at the Nottingham Post Student Awards from the other night, as was his wife, who he said works at the Clifton Campus of NTU.

In addition, the lecturer was an American (from Wisconsin, in fact, and his wife from Ohio) and noted that I stood out among all the other finalists for him and his wife because it had been stated at the ceremony that I was homeschooled in the United States. While it was lovely to receive the recognition, I hope I will encounter the lecturer and his wife again, as they seemed like friendly people.

"Girl Next Door" - Saving Jane

I remember the song "Girl Next Door" by Saving Jane, an Ohio band fronted by Marti Dodson. I enjoyed the song and have the album, also named Girl Next Door, where it comes from. "Girl Next Door" is Saving Jane's biggest hit and was popular in 2005/2006.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpi589a3wIU

I am unsure what Saving Jane's exact status is now: they supposedly disbanded, with some of the members, including Dodson, forming Union Rose; however, Dodson is also a part of another musical project called Sailor Sky (site plays music). I would like to see another song by Dodson become a hit, regardless of which banner she releases it under; I'm fond of her voice.

Writing about mundane topics

Sometimes I write about seemingly mundane or trivial topics. On this blog I have written pieces on phone storage expansion, a board game, the way Ohio votes and ice cream trucks, all of which are subjects that are either ordinary or that people rarely think or care about. "Phone storage? A tech-lover's obsession. An out-of-date board game? Big deal. Ohio's voting record? Meh...not election season anymore! An ice cream truck? Those are for kids!" For what reason would I or anyone else want to write about unimportant issues?

The answer is that we enjoy writing, no matter the topic. It is both challenging and fun for a writer to take a boring subject such as phone storage and turn it into an interesting piece of creative writing. What better way to exercise the mind and improve one's writing skills than by converting boring items into something someone would want to read, and have fun while doing it? Anything can and should be written about.

There is also the chance that writing about the mundane or trivia could give some people useful information. After all, two definitions of mundane are "commonplace" and "everyday": you'll not only improve your skills, but perhaps you'll share a unique perspective or knowledge about something people experience each day. Regarding trivia, "trivial" is not synonymous with "boring", and people often enjoy the occasional useless but fascinating fact. Ohio's voting record, for example, is unimportant to most people, but to those who follow elections or political history it's a worthwhile morsel of knowledge.

This doesn't mean you potentially bore your audience by writing solely about mundane or trivial items and ignoring the important issues. If it's necessary, there's nothing wrong with keeping your work for your eyes and review only, but if you have a loyal readership and are a good writer, then your writing will be appreciated, regardless of whether or not it's about the appearance of well-kept lawns. Keep writing!

Dennis Kucinich

Another politician I have respect for in the United States, Dennis Kucinich (Rep. D-OH), is now certain to leave the government when the 112th Congress expires: he announced yesterday that he will not be contesting an open House seat in Washington. In March, he competed with Marcy Kaptur for the Democratic nomination in Ohio's 9th congressional district, but he was unsuccessful.

I agree with him not seeking a seat in Washington, but I do have mixed emotions about his decision. On one hand, I was highly disappointed to see that his district was affected when Ohio lost two of its House seats and electoral votes as a result of the 2010 census. I have long admired Kucinich's strong anti-war views, his support for healthcare for every American, and his willingness to criticize people from both major parties: I think he is needed in Congress and that those aforementioned qualities need to be emphasized more.

At the same time, Washington is far away from Ohio, and Kucinich does not have any ties to the state; here in the United Kingdom, I do not support the practice of "parachuting" somebody into a seat far away from their residence, and so I would be a hypocrite to endorse it elsewhere. In addition, there was no guarantee that Kucinich would have won the primary anyway, and it would have been awful if his career in Congress had ended on him losing two primaries in two different states within the same year. Finally, if he had gone to Washington, he would likely have had an aura of "abandoning Ohio" surrounding him.

I loathe to lose a strong anti-war voice in the House, but again, I do believe that Kucinich made the correct decision by not attempting to run for a House seat in Washington. Over the past forty years, he has been involved in Ohio politics in some form or another: it is the state he comes from, and I am sure there is still more he can do for it.

Longaberger headquarters

In my current rush of viewing places in Ohio, I came across a picture of The Longaberger Company headquarters in Newark. The building belongs on the list of unique-looking structures, here is a picture I found of it:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Newark-ohio-longaberger-headquarters-front.jpg

I love the basket-style architecture of the building. I had not seen it before today, yet it should get more recognition!

Ohio's voting record

In my post about US state nicknames, I wrote that I mistakenly thought Ohio to be nicknamed the "Bellwether State". I led myself into thinking that because of Ohio's ability to vote with the winning candidate of the presidential elections over 90% of the time.

Since 1896 onwards, Ohio has voted for the winner in all except two elections: 1944 and 1960. In 1944, Governor Thomas E. Dewey narrowly carried the state over President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and in 1960 Vice President Richard Nixon comfortably won the state over Senator John F. Kennedy; in addition, 1960 was the last time Ohio voted against the victor of an election.

Missouri had the best record of being a bellwether until the 2008 election, when it voted against the winner (although the state was incredibly close); before then the last two times it voted the opposite way to the victor was in 1956 and 1900...hence its lower win rate than Ohio. Despite Ohio's record, apparently the state with the better track is Nevada, as it has supported the winner in every election since 1912 except for 1976; however, if Nevada is put on the same timeline as Ohio, it voted against the winner in 1896, 1900, and 1908.

John Scott Harrison

I found a small yet interesting piece of American history last night. Recently I have been doing some research into the geography of Ohio, and I came across a place called North Bend, a town in the Cincinnati - Northern Kentucky metropolitan area. In the early second half of the 19th century a man named John Scott Harrison retired there after losing his House of Representatives seat.

Harrison is unique because he is the only man (and also only person) in all of United States history to be both the child of a president and the parent of another. His father was William Henry Harrison, the ninth president; and his son was Benjamin Harrison, the twenty-third. As for Harrison's own political career, he represented Ohio's second congressional district for two terms, serving from 1853-57, when he was defeated in his re-election for a third term. He lived in North Bend until his death in 1878; unfortunately, he did not see one of his sons become president (Benjamin Harrison was elected in 1888).

Small, obscure historical facts such as this always fascinate me. I appreciate looking up a particular topic and coming across minor events or people with an interesting, unexpected fact to them.

United States presidential elections 2000 and 2004

Here are some statistics about the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections in the United States that I find interesting. In 2000, then-Governor George W. Bush won the presidency by winning the electoral vote but losing the popular vote; meanwhile, then-Vice President Al Gore lost the electoral vote but did win the popular vote. Bush won 271 electoral votes and 50,456,002 popular votes while Gore won 266 electoral votes (though should have won 267 but there was a faithless elector in Washington D.C.), and 50,999,897 popular votes. Florida was highly disputed in that election, and had the state been given to Gore he would have won both votes.

In 2004, then-President Bush was running for re-election, and his challenger was Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Bush won this election, this time winning both the electoral vote (286) and the popular vote (62,040,610); while Kerry only won 251 electoral votes (he should have won 252, but an electoral voter in Minnesota accidentally voted for Kerry's running mate instead) and 59,028,444 popular votes. The margins of victory here, while a little too close for comfort, are more significant than in 2000; however, the state that was most disputed in this election was Ohio, although not to the extent Florida was.

Had Kerry won Ohio, Bush would have been narrowly defeated in the electoral college with 266 votes to Kerry's 272 (or 271 when factoring in the Minnesota voter, making the result 271-266 as it was in 2000, but this time it would have been the winner who would have lost a vote), but won the popular vote by more than three million voters. Bush would then have had the record of being the first person to have been elected president without winning the votes of the people, and subsequently voted out after losing in the electoral college but winning the larger share (and even majority) of the popular vote. I am not sure if that would be a record anyone would want to hold, but I suppose it would be better than having the record of winning every state in one election to end up losing them all in the next.

Of course, this outcome did not happen, but I do find these statistics fascinating. I also find it interesting that both Gore and Kerry did not receive the total amount of electoral votes they should have (one because of the faithless elector making a protest, the other from an error), and that had Bush lost Ohio in 2004 he would received the same amount of electoral votes as Gore.