Talk:1940 New York state election

Don't get confused

Election/voting day has traditionally been set by law as well as the beginning of the term of office--the process of campaigning has not. NY swears its gov in on Jan 1 regardless if that day falls on a sunday. The US pres is never sworn in at a SUNDAY inaug and inaugurals fall near Jan 20ish. Sundays are a church going day; not for political celebration and all its drinking. A NY gov can never be elected in the middle of a US pres's term because both US pres's and NY gov's are elected in November and start terms in January.66.74.176.59 (talk) 08:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

"In the middle" may not be taken always literally, but sometimes as a manner of speech. The elections are actually in the exact middle, on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November spaced exactly two years apart. The congressional elections like those of 2014, are commonly termed the "mid-term" elections, because they happen in the middle of the presidential term, sensu lato. Please avoid hairsplitting, articles should be correct, but readable. Kraxler (talk) 11:57, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I guess your feeble attempt to justify the colloquialism and imperfect manner of speech, "in the middle" is endorsement enough for me to refer all edit descriptions to me about what I have not achieved can be referred to you? You have now endorsed on behalf of WP that all types of manners of speech that are not literal are acceptable?

You are mistaken about timelines and as much as you would like to attempt to justify them the truth of the matter is that it is not true. Presidential terms start in late January and elections are in November. In order for something to be slightly in the middle of a presidential term of office would be in January when in fact precinct voting day is in November--upwards of two months short of a middle? So regardless of your sensu lato the logic of the matter is that you are wrong, you are wrong to present that illogic logic as acceptable and no wonder kids throw back at others how stupid can supposedly educated people can be. So please, leave your logic to that which applies to your life and not impose it on others.66.74.176.59 (talk) 13:23, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

RE "that all types of manners of speech that are not literal are acceptable?" - It always depends on the context.

RE "Presidential terms start in late January and elections are in November" - Well, yes, but aren't you mixing apples and oranges? The presidential elections are held in November too. So the mid-term elections are exactly in the middle between the preceding and the following presidential elections. Besides, before 1935, the President's term and the congress members' term both began on March 4, so that those elected at the mid-term election in November would take office exactly in the middle of the President's term on March 4. You can see that at that time there was mathematical exactness in the expression "in the middle". Nowadays Congress starts on january 3, and the President's term on January 20, so there is a very slight bias, which may be considered immaterial, we still say "mid-term election" and everybody understands what we mean by that. An encyclopedia is not the right place for hair-splitting. Kraxler (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

"An encyclopedia is not the right place for hair-splitting." The Encyclopedia Britannica, London Times, NY Times, Los Angeles Times--all authorities on information. What they say, how they say it carry weight. Context is important but the words chosen to express are just as important and can possibly very well expose a prejudice or misunderstanding. If word choice was not so important than it would not be WP practice to indicate in an article what form of English is being used--British or American. Apples and oranges? It is important when speaking about things to refer to them correctly and not get one confused with the other especially when describing something by using the meaning of the other term(s). When the phrase "in the middle of" gets thrown in then the details of each word have greater significance in order to avoid being misleading or there being confusion. Is not that the reason for the use of grammar? Grammar is a logic. Word use is a logic. What sets up confusion and being misunderstood is using logic in one aspect but not the other.66.74.176.59 (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Please check out Wiktionary:middle "2. The part between the beginning and the end". You see, in the English language, the word "middle" is not a point (in the geometrical sense), but something with a certain size and duration. I don't write the dictionary, I just use it. And so should you. Please refrain from further wasting your and anybody else's time. Kraxler (talk) 14:40, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

According to your logic, if a Wiki product supports you then it is credible. Wiki is not an independent source. It would be as if you wanted to fill the hole you made in your own tooth when drilling out the cavity, or you opening up your own skull to remove your own brain. You just do not do it unless of course there is some over-riding reason such as medical professionals are unable to get to you can you possess the skills set to do so or be guided through bu someone else via the phone or radio.

Last time I checked neither of my parents were named Kraxler or wrote under that name in WP. Also, you do not pay my bills therefore you believing that you have the right to tell me what to do with my time is not your purview and therefore you should take a respectful and responsible route of non-involvement and SHUT UP. Otherwise you open yourself to ridicule and potential embarrassment. Not to mention bullying. You have never had the responsibility to answer anything I have written so your interactions are of your own volition. If you do not like something that is not your responsibility then maybe you should refrain from considering it your role on earth having the only legitimate right to respond and to "set things your perceived right".

I have read that WP articles should be readable. There also need to be written so that what is contained in an article is not potentially confusing. I doubt that the meaning of the word middle as sourced by yourself from a Wiki product is good enough especially when middle can be any where from after the beginning to before the end. Have WP interest groups in the maths and sciences found the definition you found acceptable. The area of architecture, buildings and measures must certainly be interesting to be used in daily life when someone says to cut that beam in the middle--you know somewhere after the start if the beam and somewhere before it ends. If that is the intent of your call on this matter then may I suggest a review of the works of Escher be determine just what you may want to change your username.

I wonder how "good" or "useful" you would find such a definition of "middle" as found in Wiki if it were your personal freedom or even life on the line. Would you rely on such a definition that did not adequately represent your position? I seriously doubt it because for using the wrong word or wrong definition or the wrong arrangement of words or use of punctuation they can have you coming or going--the thumb or the pinkie. You get to decide. But then your next choice comes to the index or the ring. They both come after the beginning or before the end but that is not in the "middle" because everyone seems to recognize the middle when life gets real phuqutd hp!

So, how does the middle sound now--any place after the start and before the end?66.74.176.59 (talk) 05:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Interesting--does not seem as if middle is sufficient a word and Wiki's meaning to be if use

"Central binomial coefficient (category Factorial and binomial topics)"; "coefficient by They are called central since they show up exactly in the middle of the even-numbered rows in Pascal's triangle. The first few central binomial". Would "exactly" be necessary if middle--anywhere from after start to before end--was good?66.74.176.59 (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)