<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" >

<channel>
	<title>North Carolina Genealogy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net</link>
	<description>North Carolina Genealogy and History resources, links, information and articles</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 06:29:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Gift Idea for Someone that Has Everything - A Painting from a Digital Image</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/27/gift-idea-for-someone-that-has-everything-a-painting-from-a-digital-image/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/27/gift-idea-for-someone-that-has-everything-a-painting-from-a-digital-image/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 06:29:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Heirlooms]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[family pictures]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[gift ideas]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[painting]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[portrait]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=547</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I ran across fyneart.com this evening and it reminded me of one of the things I&#8217;ve wanted to have done SOME time.  Have a painting done.  Maybe this is a throwback to watching historically based tv shows where there were houses full of paintings of family members, but I&#8217;ve always wanted to see [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I ran across <a href="http://www.fyneart.com">fyneart.com</a> this evening and it reminded me of one of the things I&#8217;ve wanted to have done SOME time.  Have a painting done.  Maybe this is a throwback to watching historically based tv shows where there were houses full of paintings of family members, but I&#8217;ve always wanted to see about having paintings done of my family.  Yes, we have some pictures, but if you compare a photo and a portrait painting side by side, there&#8217;s something more&#8230;. enchanting about a painted portrait.</p>
<p>Anyway, fyneart.com is apparently located in the UK, so I wondered what options there were here in the US&#8230;.</p>
<p><span id="more-547"></span></p>
<p>I&#8217;ve found several companies doing this same thing.  <a href="http://www.americanoilportraits.com/">American Oil Portraits</a>, <a href="http://www.oilpaintportrait.com">Oil Paint Portraits</a>, <a href="http://www.colorviewportraits.com">Colorview Portraits</a>, <a href="http://www.portraitmasters.net/">Portrait Masters</a>, <a href="http://www.paintyourlife.com/">Paint Your Life</a>, and <a href="http://www.anythingpaintedoncanvas.com/">Anything Painted on Canvas</a>.</p>
<p>It looks like hte prices start from around $80 at the lowest and go up from there.  Some of the sites offer oil paintings only, but some offer charcoal or other options.  (Charcoal seems a bit less expensive.)  Whatever you choose I&#8217;m sure that a painting would be a memorable gift.  These are the kinds of things passed down from one generation to another.</p>
<p>I think for any of these I would want to take a look at their work first, many seem to require only 20% up front and then you will have a chance to take a look at the work and approve it before paying the balance.  Since you can use any digital photo, there&#8217;s no reason it has to be a recent picture, but it could even be a remake of an older painting.</p>
<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/27/gift-idea-for-someone-that-has-everything-a-painting-from-a-digital-image/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Popular Baby Names in the Year 2000</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/25/popular-baby-names-in-the-year-2000/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/25/popular-baby-names-in-the-year-2000/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:20:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Series]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[popular names]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[popular baby names]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[popular names 2000]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=334</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a listing of the most popular baby names from the year 2000:

1 	Jacob 	Emily
2 	Michael 	Hannah
3 	Matthew 	Madison
4 	Joshua 	Ashley
5 	Christopher 	Sarah
6 	Nicholas 	Alexis
7 	Andrew 	Samantha
8 	Joseph 	Jessica
9 	Daniel 	Taylor
10 	Tyler 	Elizabeth
11 	William 	Lauren
12 	Brandon 	Alyssa
13 	Ryan 	Kayla
14 	John 	Abigail
15 	Zachary 	Brianna
16 	David 	Olivia
17 	Anthony 	Emma
18 	James 	Megan
19 	Justin 	Grace
20 	Alexander 	Victoria
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a listing of the most popular baby names from the year 2000:</p>
<p><span id="more-334"></span></p>
<p>1 	Jacob 	Emily<br />
2 	Michael 	Hannah<br />
3 	Matthew 	Madison<br />
4 	Joshua 	Ashley<br />
5 	Christopher 	Sarah<br />
6 	Nicholas 	Alexis<br />
7 	Andrew 	Samantha<br />
8 	Joseph 	Jessica<br />
9 	Daniel 	Taylor<br />
10 	Tyler 	Elizabeth<br />
11 	William 	Lauren<br />
12 	Brandon 	Alyssa<br />
13 	Ryan 	Kayla<br />
14 	John 	Abigail<br />
15 	Zachary 	Brianna<br />
16 	David 	Olivia<br />
17 	Anthony 	Emma<br />
18 	James 	Megan<br />
19 	Justin 	Grace<br />
20 	Alexander 	Victoria</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/25/popular-baby-names-in-the-year-2000/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Popular Name Series</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/18/popular-name-series/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/18/popular-name-series/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Series]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[popular names]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[article series]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[popular baby names]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=332</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Primarily Using information from the Social Security Administration I thought I would start a series of popular baby names for various years.  (I&#8217;m going to pick mostly census years, although I thought I&#8217;d start with the current year.)  I&#8217;m going to be alternating the posts between here and my South Carolina Genealogy Site, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Primarily Using information from <a href="\http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/">the Social Security Administration</a> I thought I would start a series of popular baby names for various years.  (I&#8217;m going to pick mostly census years, although I thought I&#8217;d start with the current year.)  I&#8217;m going to be alternating the posts between here and my <a href="http://www.southcarolinagenealogy.org">South Carolina Genealogy Site</a>, so pop over there if you can&#8217;t find the year you&#8217;re looking for here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/18/popular-name-series/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Picasa 3 &#124; Facial Recognition and the Family Genealogist</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/11/picasa-3-facial-recognition-and-the-family-genealogist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/11/picasa-3-facial-recognition-and-the-family-genealogist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:45:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Technical Notes]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[facial recognition]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[family pictures]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[google]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[picasa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=326</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve posted a quick article over at South Carolina Genealogy about the new Picasa version and what use it could be for the Family Genealogist in organizing pictures of family members.  The big feature of interest is facial recognition (you do have to label some to start with, or hope others have labeled and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve posted a quick article over at <a href="http://www.southcarolinagenealogy.org/2008/10/29/picasa-3-for-the-family-genealogist-and-facial-recognition/">South Carolina Genealogy</a> about the new Picasa version and what use it could be for the Family Genealogist in organizing pictures of family members.  The big feature of interest is facial recognition (you do have to label some to start with, or hope others have labeled and shared their picture name tags.)  This is a component of the Picasa Web Albums.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/11/picasa-3-facial-recognition-and-the-family-genealogist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>County Page Updates &#124; Alamance, Catawba, Moore</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/10/county-page-updates-alamance-catawba-moore/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/10/county-page-updates-alamance-catawba-moore/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[General Site Info]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Alamance]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Catawba]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Moore]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks in part to some forum posts over the weekend I&#8217;ve been making some updates to the following county pages today:  Alamance County Genealogy, Catawba County Genealogy, and Moore County Genealogy.  Moore County got the biggest update, with a feed from the forums plus a thumbnail sketch of the county history.  Alamance [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks in part to some forum posts over the weekend I&#8217;ve been making some updates to the following county pages today:  <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/alamance/">Alamance County Genealogy</a>, <a href="http://http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/catawba/">Catawba County Genealogy</a>, and <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/moore/">Moore County Genealogy</a>.  Moore County got the biggest update, with a feed from the forums plus a thumbnail sketch of the county history.  Alamance and Catawba got forum feeds added to the page.  The forum feeds are RSS feeds from the County forum of the same name which shows the subject and summary of the most recent posts in that forum.  Not quite 1/5th of the counties have forum feeds added yet, but as posts collect in the forum I&#8217;ll be adding the feeds on the appropriate pages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/10/county-page-updates-alamance-catawba-moore/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>United States - Election Tuesday 2008 - History of United States Presidential Elections</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/04/united-states-election-tuesday-2008-history-of-united-states-presidential-elections/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/04/united-states-election-tuesday-2008-history-of-united-states-presidential-elections/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Historical References]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[presidential election]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[United States history]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Every four years we hear the same thing&#8230;. &#8220;This is the most important election in our lifetimes&#8221; and it is truly a solemn and remarkable thing that occurs.  The population of the country come out and without shots fired&#8230;. they change the course of their country.  No matter who wins the election it&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Every four years we hear the same thing&#8230;. &#8220;This is the most important election in our lifetimes&#8221; and it is truly a solemn and remarkable thing that occurs.  The population of the country come out and without shots fired&#8230;. they change the course of their country.  No matter who wins the election it&#8217;s always an awesome and awe-inspiring process.  In recent years it&#8217;s been more evident than ever how few votes can really swing an election.  Do your part, cast an informed vote.</p>
<p>With that I move on to post a History of United States Presidential Elections&#8230;</p>
<p><span id="more-329"></span></p>
<p>From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Presidential_Election">The Wikipedia</a></p>
<p>Elections for President and Vice President of the United States are indirect elections that occur quadrennially (the count beginning with the year 1792) on Election Day, the Tuesday after the first Monday of November. Voters cast ballots for a slate of electors of the U.S. Electoral College, who in turn directly elect the President and Vice President. The most recent election occurred on November 2, 2004. The next election is scheduled for November 4, 2008.</p>
<p>The process is regulated by a combination of both federal and state laws. Each state has a number of electors equal to the number of its Senators and Representatives in the U.S. Congress. Additionally, Washington, D.C. is given a number of electors equal to the number held by the smallest states.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Under the U.S. Constitution, each state legislature is allowed to designate a method of choosing electors. Thus, the popular vote on Election Day is conducted by the various states and not directly by the federal government. Once chosen, the Electoral College electors can vote for anyone, but – with rare exceptions like an unpledged elector or faithless elector – they vote for their designated candidates and their votes are certified by Congress in early January. The Congress is the final judge of the electors; the last serious dispute was in United States presidential election, 2000.</p>
<p>The nomination process, including the primary elections and the nominating conventions, were never specified in the Constitution, and were instead developed by the states and the political parties.</p>
<p>History</p>
<p>Article Two of the U.S. Constitution originally established the method of presidential elections, including the electoral college. This was a result of a compromise between those constitutional framers who wanted the Congress to choose the president, and those who preferred a national popular vote.</p>
<p>Each state is allocated a number of electors that is equal to the size of its delegation in both houses of Congress combined. With the ratification of the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution in 1961, the District of Columbia is also granted a number of electors, equal to the number of those held by the least populous state.</p>
<p>Under the original system established by Article Two, electors could cast two votes to two different candidates for president. The candidate with the highest number of votes became the president, and the second-place candidate became the vice president. This presented a problem during the presidential election of 1800 when Aaron Burr received the same number of electoral votes as Thomas Jefferson and challenged Jefferson&#8217;s election to the office. In the end, Jefferson was chosen as the president due to Alexander Hamilton&#8217;s influence in the House of Representatives. This created a deep rivalry between Burr and Hamilton which resulted in their famous 1804 duel.</p>
<p>In response to the 1800 election, the 12th Amendment was passed, requiring electors to cast two distinct votes: one for President and another for Vice President. The Amendment also established rules when no candidate wins a majority vote in the Electoral College. If no candidate receives a majority, the selection of President is decided by a ballot of the House of Representatives. For the purposes of electing the President, each state only has one vote. A ballot of the Senate is held to choose the Vice President. In this ballot, each senator has one vote. If the President is not chosen by Inauguration Day, the Vice President-elect acts as President. If neither are chosen by then, Congress by law determines who shall act as President, pursuant to the 20th Amendment.</p>
<p>In the presidential election of 1824, Andrew Jackson received a plurality, but not a majority, of electoral votes cast. The election was thrown to the House of Representatives, and John Quincy Adams was elected to the presidency. In this case as well, a deep rivalry was fermented, this time between Andrew Jackson and House Speaker Henry Clay, who had also been a candidate in the election.</p>
<p>Constitutionally, the manner for choosing electors is determined within each state by its legislature. Gradually throughout the years, the states began conducting popular elections to help choose their slate of electors, resulting in the overall, nationwide indirect election system that it is today.</p>
<p>Candidates can fail to get the most votes in the nationwide popular vote in a Presidential election and still win that election. This occurred in 1876, 1888 and 2000. Numerous constitutional amendments have been submitted seeking to replace the Electoral College with a direct popular vote, but none has ever successfully passed both Houses of Congress.</p>
<p>Nominating process</p>
<p>The modern nominating process of U.S. presidential elections currently consists of two major parts: a series of presidential primary elections and caucuses held in each state, and the presidential nominating conventions held by each political party. This process was never included in the United States Constitution, and thus evolved over time by the political parties to clear the field of candidates.</p>
<p>The primary elections and caucuses are run by state and local governments. Some states only hold primary elections, some only hold caucuses, and others use a combination of both. These primaries and caucuses are staggered between January and June before the federal election, with Iowa and New Hampshire traditionally holding the first presidential state caucus and primary, respectively.</p>
<p>Like the general election, presidential caucuses or primaries are indirect elections. The major political parties officially vote for their presidential candidate at their respective nominating conventions, usually all held in the summer before the federal election. Depending on each state&#8217;s law and state&#8217;s political party rules, when voters cast ballots for a candidate in a presidential caucus or primary, they may actually be voting to award delegates &#8220;bound&#8221; to vote for a candidate at the presidential nominating conventions, or they may simply be expressing an opinion that the state party is not bound to follow in selecting delegates to their respective national convention.</p>
<p>In addition to delegates chosen during primaries and caucuses, state delegations to both the Democratic and Republican conventions also include &#8220;unpledged&#8221; delegates who can vote for whomever they want. For Republicans, these include top party officials. Democrats have a more expansive group of unpledged delegates called &#8220;superdelegates&#8221;, who are party leaders and elected officials.</p>
<p>Each party&#8217;s presidential candidate also chooses a vice presidential nominee to run with him on the same ticket, and this choice is basically rubber-stamped by the convention.</p>
<p>The popular vote on Election Day</p>
<p>Under the constitution, the manner for choosing electors for the Electoral College is determined by each state&#8217;s legislature. Today, the states and the District of Columbia each conduct their own popular elections on Election Day to help determine their respective slate of electors. Thus, the presidential election is really an amalgamation of separate and simultaneous state elections instead of a single national election run by the federal government.</p>
<p>Like any other election in the United States, the eligibility of an individual for voting is set out in the Constitution and also regulated at state level. The Constitution states that suffrage cannot be denied on grounds of race or color, sex or age for citizens eighteen years or older. Beyond these basic qualifications, it is the responsibility of state legislatures to regulate voter eligibility.</p>
<p>Generally, voters are required to vote on a ballot where they select the candidate of their choice. The presidential ballot is actually voting &#8220;for the electors of a candidate&#8221; meaning that the voter is not actually voting for the candidate, but endorsing a slate of electors pledged to vote for a specific Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate.</p>
<p>Many voting ballots allow a voter to &#8220;blanket vote&#8221; for all candidates in a particular political party or to select individual candidates on a line by line voting system. Which candidates appear on the voting ticket is determined through a legal process known as ballot access. Usually, the size of the candidate&#8217;s political party and the results of the major nomination conventions determine who is pre-listed on the presidential ballot. Thus, the presidential election ticket will not list every single candidate running for President, but only those who have secured a major party nomination or whose size of their political party warrants having been formally listed. Laws are in effect to have other candidates pre-listed on a ticket, provided that a sufficient number of voters have endorsed the candidate, usually through a signature list. Never, however, in U.S. history has a 3rd party candidate for president secured a place on the election ticket in this fashion.[citation needed]</p>
<p>The final way to be elected for president is to have one&#8217;s name written in at the time of election as a write-in candidate. This is used for candidates who did not fulfill the legal requirements to be pre-listed on the voting ticket. It is also used by voters to express a distaste for the listed candidates, by writing in a ridiculous candidate for president such as Mickey Mouse. In any event, a write-in candidate has never won an election for President of the United States.</p>
<p>Electoral college</p>
<p>Most state laws establish a plurality voting system (&#8221;winner-take-all&#8221;), under which the ticket that wins the most popular votes in a state wins all of that state&#8217;s allocated electoral votes, and thus has their slate of electors chosen to vote in the Electoral College. Maine and Nebraska do not use this method, opting instead to give two electoral votes to the statewide winner and one electoral vote to the winner of each Congressional district.</p>
<p>Each state&#8217;s winning slate of electors then meets at their respective state&#8217;s capital on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to cast their electoral votes on separate ballots for President and Vice President. Although Electoral College members can technically vote for anyone under the U.S. Constitution, 24 states have laws to punish faithless electors,  those who do not cast their electoral votes for the person whom they have pledged to elect.</p>
<p>In early January, the total Electoral College vote count is opened by the sitting Vice President, acting in his capacity as President of the Senate, and read aloud to a joint session of the incoming Congress, which was elected at the same time as the President. In the event that no candidate receives a majority of the electoral vote (currently at least 270), the President is determined by the rules outlined by the 12th Amendment.</p>
<p>Unless there are faithless electors, disputes, or other controversies, the events in December and January mentioned above are largely a formality in the public eye since the winner can be determined based on the state-by-state popular vote results.</p>
<p>Trends</p>
<p>In recent decades, one of the presidential nominees of the Democratic and Republican parties has almost always been an incumbent president or a sitting or former vice president. When the candidate has not been a president or vice president, nominees of the two main parties have been state Governors or U.S. Senators. The last nominee from either party who had not previously served in such an office was General Dwight D. Eisenhower, who won the Republican nomination and ultimately the presidency in the 1952 election.</p>
<p>A number of trends in the political experience of presidents have been observed over the years. The first was the place of Secretary of State as a &#8220;stepping-stone&#8221; to the White House, with five of the six Presidents who served between 1801 and 1841 previously holding that office. However, since 1841, only one Secretary of State has gone on to be President (James Buchanan). Contemporary electoral success has clearly favored state governors. Of the last five presidents, four (Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush) have been governors of a state (all except for George H. W. Bush). Geographically, these presidents were from either very large states (California, Texas) or from a state south of the Mason-Dixon Line and east of Texas (Georgia, Arkansas). In all, sixteen presidents have been former governors, including seven who were in office as governor as the time of their election to the presidency.</p>
<p>Fifteen presidents have previously served in the Senate, including four of the five Presidents who served between 1945 and 1974. However, only two were sitting U.S. Senators at the time they were elected president (Warren G. Harding in 1920 and John F. Kennedy in 1960). Major-party candidate Senators Andrew Jackson (1824), Lewis Cass (1848), Stephen Douglas (1860), Barry Goldwater (1964), George McGovern (1972), and John Kerry (2004) all lost their elections. No sitting member of the House of Representatives has been elected president, although eighteen presidents have been former members of the House. Fourteen presidents have previously served as vice presidents. In 2008, the nominees of both major-parties are sitting U.S. Senators, so a senator will probably be elected president for the 2009-2013 term.</p>
<p>Results<br />
Order 	Election year 	Winner 	Other major candidates[2]<br />
1st 	1789 	George Washington (none) 	John Adams (none)<br />
John Jay (none)<br />
Robert H. Harrison (none)<br />
John Rutledge (none)<br />
2nd 	1792 	George Washington (none) 	John Adams (Federalist)<br />
George Clinton (Democratic-Republican)<br />
3rd 	1796 	John Adams (Federalist) 	Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)<br />
Thomas Pinckney (Federalist)<br />
Aaron Burr (Democratic-Republican)<br />
Samuel Adams (Democratic-Republican)<br />
Oliver Ellsworth (Federalist)<br />
George Clinton (Democratic-Republican)<br />
4th 	1800 	Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican) 	Aaron Burr (Democratic-Republican)<br />
John Adams (Federalist)<br />
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist)<br />
5th 	1804 	Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican) 	Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist)<br />
6th 	1808 	James Madison (Democratic-Republican) 	Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist)<br />
George Clinton (Democratic-Republican)<br />
James Monroe (Democratic-Republican)<br />
7th 	1812 	James Madison (Democratic-Republican) 	DeWitt Clinton (Federalist)<br />
8th 	1816 	James Monroe (Democratic-Republican) 	Rufus King (Federalist)<br />
9th 	1820 	James Monroe (Democratic-Republican) 	(not opposed)<br />
10th 	1824*† 	John Quincy Adams* (Democratic-Republican) 	Andrew Jackson† (Democratic-Republican)<br />
William H. Crawford (Democratic-Republican)<br />
Henry Clay (Democratic-Republican)<br />
11th 	1828 	Andrew Jackson (Democrat) 	John Quincy Adams (National Republican)<br />
12th 	1832 	Andrew Jackson (Democrat) 	Henry Clay (National Republican)<br />
John Floyd (Nullifier)<br />
William Wirt (Anti-Masonic)<br />
13th 	1836 	Martin Van Buren (Democrat) 	William Henry Harrison (Whig)<br />
Hugh Lawson White (Whig)<br />
Daniel Webster (Whig)<br />
Willie Person Mangum (Whig)<br />
14th 	1840 	William Henry Harrison (Whig) 	Martin Van Buren (Democrat)<br />
15th 	1844* 	James K. Polk* (Democrat) 	Henry Clay (Whig)<br />
James G. Birney (Liberty)<br />
16th 	1848 	Zachary Taylor (Whig) 	Lewis Cass (Democrat)<br />
Martin Van Buren (Free Soil)<br />
17th 	1852 	Franklin Pierce (Democrat) 	Winfield Scott (Whig)<br />
John P. Hale (Free Soil)<br />
18th 	1856* 	James Buchanan* (Democrat) 	John C. Frémont (Republican)<br />
Millard Fillmore (American Party/Whig)<br />
19th 	1860* 	Abraham Lincoln* (Republican) 	John C. Breckinridge (Southern Democrat)<br />
John Bell (Constitutional Union)<br />
Stephen A. Douglas (Northern Democrat)<br />
20th 	1864 	Abraham Lincoln (National Union) 	George B. McClellan (Democrat)<br />
21st 	1868 	Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) 	Horatio Seymour (Democrat)<br />
22nd 	1872 	Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) 	Horace Greeley (Democrat/Liberal Republican)[3]<br />
Thomas A. Hendricks (Democrat)<br />
B. Gratz Brown (Democrat/Liberal Republican)<br />
Charles J. Jenkins (Democrat)<br />
23rd 	1876*‡ 	Rutherford B. Hayes* (Republican) 	Samuel J. Tilden‡ (Democrat)<br />
24th 	1880* 	James A. Garfield* (Republican) 	Winfield Scott Hancock (Democrat)<br />
James Weaver (Greenback)<br />
25th 	1884* 	Grover Cleveland* (Democrat) 	James G. Blaine (Republican)<br />
John St. John Prohibition)<br />
Benjamin Butler (Greenback)<br />
26th 	1888*† 	Benjamin Harrison* (Republican) 	Grover Cleveland† (Democrat)<br />
Clinton B. Fisk (Prohibition)<br />
Alson Streeter (Union Labor)<br />
27th 	1892* 	Grover Cleveland* (Democrat) 	Benjamin Harrison (Republican)<br />
James Weaver (Populist)<br />
John Bidwell (Prohibition)<br />
28th 	1896 	William McKinley (Republican) 	William Jennings Bryan (Democrat/Populist)<br />
29th 	1900 	William McKinley (Republican) 	William Jennings Bryan (Democrat)<br />
John Woolley (Prohibition)<br />
30th 	1904 	Theodore Roosevelt (Republican) 	Alton B. Parker (Democrat)<br />
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)<br />
Silas Swallow (Prohibition)<br />
31st 	1908 	William Howard Taft (Republican) 	William Jennings Bryan (Democrat)<br />
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)<br />
Eugene Chafin (Prohibition)<br />
32nd 	1912* 	Woodrow Wilson* (Democrat) 	Theodore Roosevelt (Bull-Moose)<br />
William Howard Taft (Republican)<br />
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)<br />
Eugene Chafin (Prohibition)<br />
33rd 	1916* 	Woodrow Wilson* (Democrat) 	Charles Evans Hughes (Republican)<br />
Allan L. Benson (Socialist)<br />
James Hanly (Prohibition)<br />
34th 	1920 	Warren G. Harding (Republican) 	James M. Cox (Democrat)<br />
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)<br />
35th 	1924 	Calvin Coolidge (Republican) 	John W. Davis (Democrat)<br />
Robert M. La Follette, Sr. (Progressive)<br />
36th 	1928 	Herbert Hoover (Republican) 	Al Smith (Democrat)<br />
37th 	1932 	Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) 	Herbert Hoover (Republican)<br />
Norman Thomas (Socialist)<br />
38th 	1936 	Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) 	Alf Landon (Republican)<br />
William Lemke (Union)<br />
39th 	1940 	Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) 	Wendell Willkie (Republican)<br />
40th 	1944 	Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) 	Thomas E. Dewey (Republican)<br />
41st 	1948* 	Harry S. Truman* (Democrat) 	Thomas E. Dewey (Republican)<br />
Strom Thurmond (States&#8217; Rights Democratic)<br />
Henry A. Wallace (Progressive/Labor)<br />
42nd 	1952 	Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 	Adlai Stevenson (Democrat)<br />
43rd 	1956 	Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 	Adlai Stevenson (Democrat)<br />
44th 	1960* 	John F. Kennedy* (Democrat) 	Richard Nixon (Republican)<br />
Harry F. Byrd (Democrat)<br />
45th 	1964 	Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat) 	Barry Goldwater (Republican)<br />
46th 	1968* 	Richard Nixon* (Republican) 	Hubert Humphrey (Democrat)<br />
George Wallace (American Independent)<br />
47th 	1972 	Richard Nixon (Republican) 	George McGovern (Democrat)<br />
John G. Schmitz (American)<br />
48th 	1976 	Jimmy Carter (Democrat) 	Gerald Ford (Republican)<br />
49th 	1980 	Ronald Reagan (Republican) 	Jimmy Carter (Democrat)<br />
John B. Anderson (none)<br />
Edward Clark (Libertarian)<br />
50th 	1984 	Ronald Reagan (Republican) 	Walter Mondale (Democrat)<br />
51st 	1988 	George H. W. Bush (Republican) 	Michael Dukakis (Democrat)<br />
52nd 	1992* 	Bill Clinton* (Democrat) 	George H. W. Bush (Republican)<br />
Ross Perot (none)<br />
53rd 	1996* 	Bill Clinton* (Democrat) 	Bob Dole (Republican)<br />
Ross Perot (Reform)<br />
54th 	2000*† 	George W. Bush* (Republican) 	Al Gore† (Democrat)<br />
Ralph Nader (Green)<br />
55th 	2004 	George W. Bush (Republican) 	John Kerry (Democrat)<br />
56th 	2008 	To be determined 	John McCain (Republican)<br />
Barack Obama (Democrat)<br />
Bob Barr (Libertarian)<br />
Ralph Nader (Independent)<br />
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution)<br />
Cynthia McKinney (Green)</p>
<p>    * Winner received less than an absolute majority of the popular vote.<br />
    † Losing candidate received a plurality of the popular vote.<br />
    ‡ Losing candidate received an absolute majority of the popular vote.</p>
<p>Voter turnout</p>
<p>Voter turnout in presidential elections has been on the decline in recent years, although the 2004 election showed a noticeable increase over the turnout in 1996 and 2000. While voter turnout has been decreasing, voter registration has been increasing. Registration rates varied from 65% to 70% of the voting age population from the 1960s to the 1980s, and due in part to greater government outreach programs, registration swelled to 75% in 1996 and 2000. Despite greater registration, however, turnout in general has not greatly improved.<br />
Election 	Voting Age Population ¹ 	Turnout 	 % Turnout of VAP<br />
2004 	215,694,000 	122,295,345 	56.69%<br />
2000 	205,815,000 	105,586,274 	51.31%<br />
1996 	196,511,000 	96,456,345 	49.08%<br />
1992 	189,529,000 	104,405,155 	55.09%<br />
1988 	182,778,000 	91,594,693 	50.11%<br />
1984 	174,466,000 	92,652,680 	53.11%<br />
1980 	164,597,000 	86,515,221 	52.56%<br />
1976 	152,309,190 	81,555,789 	53.55%<br />
1972 	140,776,000 	77,718,554 	55.21%<br />
1968 	120,328,186 	73,199,998 	60.83%<br />
1964 	114,090,000 	70,644,592 	60.92%<br />
1960 	109,159,000 	68,838,204 	63.06%</p>
<p>¹ The voting age population includes all persons age 18 and over as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau, which necessarily includes a significant number of persons ineligible to vote, such as non-citizens, felons, and the mentally incompetent. The actual number of eligible voters is somewhat lower, and the number of registered voters is lower still. The number of non-citizens in 1994 was approximately 13 million, and in 1996, felons numbered around 1.3 million, so it can be estimated that around 7-10% of the voting age population is ineligible to vote.</p>
<p>Note that the large drop in percentage turnout between 1968 and 1972 can be attributed (at least in part) to the expansion of the franchise to 18 year olds (previously restricted to those 21 and older).</p>
<p>From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Presidential_Election">The Wikipedia</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/11/04/united-states-election-tuesday-2008-history-of-united-states-presidential-elections/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Strange Cache Problem - Technical Note</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/31/strange-cache-problem-technical-note/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/31/strange-cache-problem-technical-note/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 02:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[General Site Info]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[cache]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[site news]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[technical note]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=532</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The last several days I suspect that at least the front page wasn&#8217;t showing here.  My first clue was when a couple articles I have pending at an article site were rejected because the links didn&#8217;t measure up to their editorial guidelines.  ((?)?)  So, I took a look and the front page [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The last several days I suspect that at least the front page wasn&#8217;t showing here.  My first clue was when a couple articles I have pending at an article site were rejected because the links didn&#8217;t measure up to their editorial guidelines.  ((?)?)  So, I took a look and the front page looked okay to me.  Then, being a <a href="http://www.computerrepairasheville.com">Computer Technician</a> I wondered what I would see from another browser.  403 Forbidden and some error message about not having permissions to access a certain file.  It turns out that since I was logged in it wasn&#8217;t an issue in my usual browser.  I thought traffic looked low (about a third of normal) for the last few days.</p>
<p>Anyway, the cache is only partly working right now, but the problem has been resolved, so things should be back to normal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/31/strange-cache-problem-technical-note/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Zoom H2 Handy Recorder - GREAT for interviews</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/28/zoom-h2-handy-recorder-great-for-interviews/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/28/zoom-h2-handy-recorder-great-for-interviews/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 14:27:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[H2]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[H4]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[handy recorder]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Zoom]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Zoom H2]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=318</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve done a couple of posts now over at my Asheville Music Lessons site looking at the Zoom H2, (here&#8217;s the Zoom H2 review).  I got the opportunity to play with one for a few days and I think for the kind of interviews the family genealogist would be conducting it is a fantastic [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve done a couple of posts now over at my <a href="http://www.ashevillemusiclessons.com">Asheville Music Lessons</a> site looking at the <a href="http://www.ashevillemusiclessons.com/2008/10/17/zoom-h2-introduction/">Zoom H2</a>, (here&#8217;s the <a href="http://www.ashevillemusiclessons.com/2008/10/24/zoom-h2-mini-review/">Zoom H2 review</a>).  I got the opportunity to play with one for a few days and I think for the kind of interviews the family genealogist would be conducting it is a fantastic tool for this&#8230;</p>
<p><span id="more-318"></span><br />
</p>
<p>This is in the same line as the Zoom H4 which I&#8217;ve talked quite a bit about.  The main differences are as follows:  H4 - multitrack recording capability - 2 stereo microphones - larger (stereo input from professional mikes possible.)  H2 - stereo only recording - 4 microphones (2 stereo pair for surround sound recording) - smaller (1/8 input jack for line input.)</p>
<p>The look of the H2 reminds me of a classic studio microphone.  It comes with a 512 MB memory card, but can accept up to 8GB (or more I think the largest compatible card I saw was 32GB - you need to look carefully for known working cards&#8230;)  8GB will give you about 12 hours and 40 minutes of stereo WAV (cd quality) recording.  I didn&#8217;t look to see how much capacity in mp3 recording mode (days?)  It runs on AA batteries (or included DC wall jack.)  it comes with a carrying case, tripod stand, mic stand adapter and wind screen cover.</p>
<p>It sells for around $200 US so it&#8217;s not a cheap investment, but for preserving audio in the form of interviews or music I think it would be a GREAT tool in the arsenal.</p>
<p><iframe src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=northcarolingene&#038;o=1&#038;p=8&#038;l=as1&#038;asins=B000VTM55S&#038;fc1=000000&#038;IS2=1&#038;lt1=_blank&#038;m=amazon&#038;lc1=0000FF&#038;bc1=000000&#038;bg1=FFFFFF&#038;f=ifr" style="width:120px;height:240px;" scrolling="no" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/28/zoom-h2-handy-recorder-great-for-interviews/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>North Carolina African American Genealogy Research at the Olivia Raney Local History Library</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/21/north-carolina-african-american-genealogy-research-at-the-olivia-raney-local-history-library/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/21/north-carolina-african-american-genealogy-research-at-the-olivia-raney-local-history-library/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:13:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[African American Genealogy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Resource Materials]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[african american]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Olivia Raney History Library]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=313</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I found this interesting list of selected resources for African American research at the Olivia Raney History Library.  The Olivia Raney History library is on many peoples Must visit lists.  It&#8217;s located in Wake County with more information available here.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found <a href="http://web.co.wake.nc.us/library/locations/orl/ResMaterials/Pathfinders/AfrAmer.htm">this interesting list</a> of selected resources for African American research at the Olivia Raney History Library.  The Olivia Raney History library is on many peoples <a href="http://www.obcgs.com/raneylib.htm">Must visit</a> lists.  It&#8217;s located in Wake County with more information available <a href="http://www.wakegov.com/libraries/locations/orl/default.htm">here.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/21/north-carolina-african-american-genealogy-research-at-the-olivia-raney-local-history-library/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mecklenburg and Ashe Page update</title>
		<link>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/17/mecklenburg-and-ashe-page-update/</link>
		<comments>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/17/mecklenburg-and-ashe-page-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Avery</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[General Site Info]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[ashe]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[cabarrus]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Chatham]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[edgecombe]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[forum]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[greene]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[lenoir]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[mecklenburg]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[new hanover]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[orange]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Wilkes]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Yancey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/?p=465</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, I&#8217;m still working on county page updates.  There are, after all, 100 of them (!) and this isn&#8217;t the only thing I do&#8230; today I visited Mecklenburg County NC&#8217;s page for a BIG update as well as including the forum feed.  I also added the forum feed for Ashe County as well. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I&#8217;m still working on county page updates.  There are, after all, 100 of them (!) and this isn&#8217;t the only thing I do&#8230; today I visited <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/mecklenburg/">Mecklenburg County NC</a>&#8217;s page for a BIG update as well as including the forum feed.  I also added the forum feed for <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/ashe/">Ashe County</a> as well.  I like having the forum feeds on the county pages because it just gives those posts MUCH more visibility and as each of the county forums get busier I&#8217;ll be adding them in there.  So&#8230;. be sure to stop by and <a href="http://forums.northcarolinagenealogy.net">post queries</a> in the Forums!!  (We&#8217;re getting a surge of traffic today - we&#8217;ve had around 300 views thus far today.)</p>
<p>And&#8230;. <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/new-hanover/">New Hanover County&#8217;s page</a> has been updated.  Forum feeds added to <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/cabarrus/">Cabarrus</a>, <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/chatham/">Chatham</a>, <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/edgecombe/">Edgecombe</a>, <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/greene/">Greene</a> and <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/lenoir/">Lenoir</a> Counties.  Forum feed added to the <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/johnston/">Johnston County</a> page on 10-20.</p>
<p>Also <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/wake/">Wake County</a> has had an update.  (AND <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/orange/">Orange County</a>.)  <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/harnett/">Harnett County</a> now has a forum feed.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/union/">Union County</a>, <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/wilkes/">Wilkes County</a> and <a href="http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/north-carolina-counties/yancey/">Yancey County</a> pages have all seen updates too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.northcarolinagenealogy.net/2008/10/17/mecklenburg-and-ashe-page-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 2.195 seconds -->
<!-- Cached page served by WP-Super-Cache -->
<!-- Compression = gzip -->