This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: none. This is largely ambiguous, contradictory, and needs to be clarified and better sourced and structured. Please help improve this article if you can; the talk page may contain suggestions. (May 2012)

In North American English, the term plurality, used in the context of voting, refers to the largest number of votes to be received by any candidate (or any proposal in a referendum).^[1] It is contrasted with a majority, which is more than half of the votes.^[1] For example, in a multiple contested race, plurality is the candidate with the most votes^{[contradiction]}, while in a majority election a candidate can only win if they also receive over half of the votes. When no candidate receives a majority in the first round of voting, a two-round system or preferential voting system can be used to choose a winner.^{[clarification needed]} When there are only two choices, the plurality choice is also the majority choice.^{[citation needed]}

Systems allowing plurality election are more vulnerable to corruption using the spoiler effect than systems which require a majority.^[2]

In British English[link]

In UK constituency elections, which typically feature three or more candidates representing major parties, a plurality is sometimes referred to as a "majority" or a "relative majority" while the terms "overall majority" or "absolute majority" are use to describe the support of more than one half of votes cast.^[3] The plurality voting system is called first past the post in the UK.

For example, consider an election where 100 votes are cast for three candidates, with Alice polling 40 votes, Bob 31, and Carol 29. A Briton might say "Alice won with a majority of 9" while a Canadian might say "Alice won with a plurality." The Canadian might say "Alice won with a majority" only if Alice polled at least 51 votes.^{[not relevant]}

In British English, the terms simple majority and relative majority are synonyms for plurality^{[citation needed]}, and much more commonly used to distinguish that sense of 'majority' from overall majority or absolute majority.

Demographics[link]

The term is also used in demographics, to refer to populations, as defined by particular parameters such as ethnicity, religion, age, etc., which represent the highest percentage of the whole as compared to other similarly defined groups, but do not constitute a majority of the population.

See also[link]

• Plurality voting system
• Plurality-at-large voting
• Types of Ballot Casting Election : Majority / Plurality / Blackballing
• Voting system

References[link]

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. It needs additional citations for verification. Tagged since March 2009. It needs attention from an expert on the subject. Tagged since May 2010. It may contain original research. Tagged since May 2010.

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with First-past-the-post. (Discuss) Proposed since September 2010.

The plurality voting system is a single-winner voting system often used to elect executive officers or to elect members of a legislative assembly which is based on single-member constituencies. This voting method is also used in multi-member constituencies in what is referred to as an exhaustive counting system where one member is elected at a time and the process repeated until the number of vacancies is filled.

The most common system, used in Canada, the lower house (Lok Sabha) in India, the United Kingdom, and some United States elections, is simple plurality, first-past-the-post or winner-takes-all. In this voting system the single winner is the person with the most votes (plurality); there is no requirement that the winner gain an absolute majority of votes.^[1]

In some countries such as France (as well as in some jurisdictions of the United States, such as Louisiana and Georgia) the "two-ballot" or "runoff election" plurality system is used. In order to ensure the winner gains a majority of votes, two rounds of voting occur. If any candidate in the first round gains a majority of votes, then there is no second round. Otherwise, the two highest-voted candidates of the first round compete in a two-candidate second round or all candidates above a certain threshold in the first round compete in a two-, three- or four-candidate second round.

In political science, the use of the plurality voting system alongside multiple, single-winner constituencies to elect a multi-member body is often referred to as single-member district plurality or SMDP.^[2] Plurality voting is also variously referred to as winner-takes-all or relative/simple majority voting; however, these terms can also refer to elections for multiple winners in a particular constituency using bloc voting.

Terminology[link]

The terms Highest vote, Majority vote and Plurality voting are often confused.

First past the post[link]

The term first past the post (abbreviated FPTP or FPP) was coined as an analogy to horse racing, where the winner of the race is the first to pass a particular point (the "post") on the track (in this case a plurality of votes), after which all other runners automatically and completely lose (that is, the payoff is "winner-takes-all"). There is, however, no "post" that the winning candidate must pass in order to win, as the winning candidate is required only to have received the highest number of votes in his or her favour. This results in the alternative name sometimes being "farthest past the post".

In a multiple member first-past-the-post ballot, the first candidates in order of highest vote to cross the "line" (that is, those who have the successivley greater number of votes) are elected. In some cases, the system involves an iteration of the counting of Plurality votes.

Historically, FPTP has been a contentious electoral system, giving rise to the concept of electoral reform and a multiplicity of different voting systems intended to address perceived weaknesses of plurality voting.

Voting[link]

Plurality voting is used for local and/or national elections in 43 of the 191 countries of the United Nations, as well as in the Republic of China (Taiwan). Plurality voting is particularly prevalent in the United Kingdom and former British colonies, including the United States, Canada and India.^[3]

In single winner plurality voting, each voter is allowed to vote for only one candidate, and the winner of the election is whichever candidate represents a plurality of voters, that is, whoever received the largest number of votes. This makes the plurality voting system among the simplest of all voting systems for voters and vote counting officials (it is however very contentious to draw district boundary lines in this system).

In an election for a legislative body, each voter in a given geographically-defined electoral district votes for one candidate from a list of candidates competing to represent that district. Under the plurality system, the winner of the election acts as representative of the entire electoral district, and serves with representatives of other electoral districts.

In an election for a single seat, such as president in a presidential system, the same style of ballot is used and the candidate who receives the largest number of votes represents the entire population.

The two-round voting system uses first-past-the-post voting method in the first round of voting. In this case the two highest polling candidates that cross the line progress to the second round Run-off ballot.

In a multiple member Plurality election the counting of the ballot uses an exhaustive iteration process using the same ballot papers to elect one person each iteration for each vacant position.

Ballot types[link]

Generally plurality ballots (single-mark ballots) can be categorized into two forms. The simplest form is a blank ballot where the name of a candidate is written in by hand. A more structured ballot will list all the candidates and allow a mark to be made by a single candidate, however a structured ballot can also include space for a write-in candidate.

Examples of plurality voting[link]

General elections in the United Kingdom[link]

The United Kingdom, like the United States and Canada, uses single-member districts as the base for national elections: Each electoral district or constituency chooses one member of parliament, namely the candidate that gets the most votes, whether he reaches a majority of votes or not ("first past the post"). In 1992, for example, a Liberal Democrat in Scotland won with just 26 percent of the votes. This system of single-member districts with plurality victors tends to produce two large political parties. (In countries with proportional representation there is not such a great incentive on forming two large parties, and that contributes to multi-party systems.)

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland use the first past the post system for general elections in the UK, but use versions of proportional representation for local elections and European elections.

The countries that inherited the British majoritarian system tend toward two large parties, one left, the other right, such as the U.S. Democrats and Republicans. Canada is an exception to this pattern, because its third parties are territorially concentrated, especially the separatist Bloc Québécois. New Zealand used the British system, and it too yielded two large parties. It also left many New Zealanders discontent, because other viewpoints got ignored, so its parliament in 1993 adopted a new electoral law, modeled on Germany's system of proportional representation (PR) with a partial selection by constituencies. New Zealand soon developed a more complex party system.^[4]

Example[link]

Imagine that Tennessee is having an election on the location of its capital. The population of Tennessee is concentrated around its four major cities, which are spread throughout the state. For this example, suppose that the entire electorate lives in these four cities, and that everyone wants to live as near to the capital as possible.

The candidates for the capital are:

• Memphis, the state's largest city, with 42% of the voters, but located far from the other cities
• Nashville, with 26% of the voters, near the center of Tennessee
• Knoxville, with 17% of the voters
• Chattanooga, with 15% of the voters

The preferences of the voters would be divided like this:

Voting is accomplished whereby each voter in each city selects one city on the ballot (Memphis voters select Memphis, Nashville voters select Nashville, etc.) Votes are tabulated; Memphis is selected with the most votes (42%). Note that this system does not require that the winner have a majority, but only a plurality. Memphis wins because it has the most votes, even though 58% of the voters in this example preferred Memphis least. Notice that this problem does not hold anymore in the two-round system.

Disadvantages[link]

Tactical voting[link]

To a much greater extent than many other electoral methods, plurality electoral systems encourage tactical voting techniques, like "compromising". Voters are pressured to vote for one of the two candidates they predict are most likely to win, even if their true preference is neither, because a vote for any other candidate will likely be wasted and have no impact on the final result.

In the Tennessee example, if all the voters for Chattanooga and Knoxville had instead voted for Nashville, then Nashville would have won (with 58% of the vote); this would only have been the 3rd choice for those voters, but voting for their respective 1st choices (their own cities) actually results in their 4th choice (Memphis) being elected.

The difficulty is sometimes summed up, in an extreme form, as "All votes for anyone other than the second place are votes for the winner", because by voting for other candidates, they have denied those votes to the second place candidate who could have won had they received them. It is often claimed by United States Democrats that Democrat Al Gore lost the 2000 Presidential Election to Republican George W. Bush because some voters on the left voted for Ralph Nader of the Green Party, who exit polls indicated would have preferred Gore at 45% to Bush at 27%, with the rest not voting in Nader's absence.^[5]

Such a mentality is reflected by elections in Puerto Rico and its three principal voter groups: the Independentistas (pro-independence), the Populares (pro-commonwealth), and the Estadistas (pro-statehood). Historically, there has been a tendency for Independentista voters to elect Popular candidates and policies. This phenomenon is responsible for some Popular victories, even though the Estadistas have the most voters on the island. It is so widely recognised that the Puertoricans sometimes call the Independentistas who vote for the Populares "melons", because the fruit is green on the outside but red on the inside (in reference to the party colors).

Because voters have to predict in advance who the top two candidates will be, this can cause significant perturbation to the system:

• Substantial power is given to the media. Some voters will tend to believe the media's assertions as to who the leading contenders are likely to be in the election. Even voters who distrust the media will know that other voters do believe the media, and therefore those candidates who receive the most media attention will nonetheless be the most popular and thus most likely to be in one of the top two.

• A newly appointed candidate, who is in fact supported by the majority of voters, may be considered (due to the lack of a track record) to not be likely to become one of the top two candidates; thus, they will receive a reduced number of votes, which will then give them a reputation as a low poller in future elections, compounding the problem.

• The system may promote votes against more so than votes for. In the UK, entire campaigns have been organised with the aim of voting against the Conservative party by voting either Labour or Liberal Democrat. For example, in a constituency held by the Conservatives, with the Liberal Democrats as the second-place party and the Labour Party in third, Labour supporters might be urged to vote for the Liberal Democrat candidate (who has a smaller majority to close and more support in the constituency) than their own candidate on the basis that Labour supporters would prefer an MP from a competing left/liberal party than a Conservative one.

• If enough voters use this tactic, the first-past-the-post system becomes, effectively, runoff voting - a completely different system - where the first round is held in the court of public opinion, A good example of this is the Winchester by-election, 1997.

Proponents of other single-winner voting systems argue that their proposals would reduce the need for tactical voting and reduce the spoiler effect. Examples include the commonly used two-round system of runoffs and instant runoff voting, along with less tested systems such as approval voting and Condorcet methods.

Fewer political parties[link]

Duverger's law is an idea in political science which says that constituencies that use first-past-the-post systems will become two-party systems, given enough time.

First-past-the-post tends to reduce the number of political parties to a greater extent than most other methods, thus making it more likely that a single party will hold a majority of legislative seats. (In the United Kingdom, 21 out of 24 General Elections since 1922 have produced a single party majority government.)

FPTP's tendency toward fewer parties and more frequent one-party rule can also produce a government that may not consider as wide a range of perspectives and concerns. It is entirely possible that a voter will find that all major parties agree on a particular issue. In this case, the voter will not have any meaningful way of expressing a dissenting opinion through his or her vote.

As fewer choices are offered to the voters, voters may vote for a candidate with whom they largely disagree so as to oppose a candidate with whom they disagree even more. The downside of this is that candidates will less closely reflect the viewpoints of those who vote for them.

It may also be argued that one-party rule is more likely to lead to radical changes in government policy that are only favoured by a plurality or bare majority of the voters, whereas multi-party systems usually require greater consensus in order to make dramatic changes.

Wasted votes[link]

This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.

Wasted votes are votes cast for losing candidates or votes cast for winning candidates in excess of the number required for victory. For example, in the UK General Election of 2005, 52% of votes were cast for losing candidates and 18% were excess votes - a total of 70% wasted votes. This is perhaps the most fundamental criticism of FPTP, that a large majority of votes may play no part in determining the outcome. Alternative electoral systems attempt to ensure that almost all votes are effective in influencing the result and the number of wasted votes is consequently minimised.

Gerrymandering[link]

Because FPTP permits a high level of wasted vote, an election under FPTP is easily gerrymandered. Through gerrymandering, constituencies are deliberately designed to unfairly increase the number of seats won by one party at the expense of another.

In brief, suppose that governing party G wishes to reduce the seats that will be won by opposition party O in the next election. It creates a number of constituencies in each of which O has an overwhelming majority of votes. O will win these seats, but a large number of its voters will waste their votes. Then the rest of the constituencies are designed with small majorities for G. Few G votes are wasted, and G will win a large number of seats by small margins. As a result of the gerrymander, O's seats have cost it more votes than G's seats.

Manipulation charges[link]

The presence of spoilers often gives rise to suspicions that manipulation of the slate has taken place. The spoiler may have received incentives to run. A spoiler may also drop out at the last moment, inducing charges that such an act was intended from the beginning.

Disproportionate influence of smaller parties[link]

Smaller parties can disproportionately change the outcome of an FPTP election by swinging what is called the 50-50% balance of two party systems, by creating a faction within one or both ends of the political spectrum which shifts the winner of the election from an absolute majority outcome to a simple majority outcome favouring the previously less favoured party. In comparison, for electoral systems using proportional representation small groups win only their proportional share of representation. However in PR systems, small parties can become decisive in Parliament so gaining a power of blackmail against the Government, a problem which is generally reduced by the FPTP system.^[6][7]

Issues specific to particular countries[link]

Solomon Islands[link]

In August 2008, Sir Peter Kenilorea commented on what he perceived as the flaws of a first-past-the-post electoral system in the Solomon Islands:

An[...] underlying cause of political instability and poor governance, in my opinion, is our electoral system and its related problems. It has been identified by a number of academics and practitioners that the First Past the Post system is such that a Member elected to Parliament is sometimes elected by a small percentage of voters where there are many candidates in a particular constituency. I believe that this system is part of the reason why voters ignore political parties and why candidates try an appeal to voters' material desires and relationships instead of political parties. [...] Moreover, this system creates a political environment where a Member is elected by a relatively small number of voters with the effect that this Member is then expected to ignore his party’s philosophy and instead look after that core base of voters in terms of their material needs. Another relevant factor that I see in relation to the electoral system is the proven fact that it is rather conducive, and thus has not prevented, corrupt elections practices such as ballot buying.

—^[8]

Advantages[link]

Obvious preservation of "one person, one vote" principle[link]

The arguments for a plurality voting system rely on the preservation of the "one person, one vote" principle (often shortened to OMOV for "one man, one vote" or more recently "one member, one vote"), as cited by the Supreme Court of the United States, wherein each voter is only able to cast one vote in a given election, where that vote can only go to one candidate. Plurality voting systems elect the candidate who is preferred first by the largest number of voters, although this need not be an absolute majority. Other voting systems, such as instant-runoff voting, party-list proportional representation or single transferable vote also preserve OMOV, but it is not as obvious that they do so, because they rely on lower voter preference to enable a candidate to earn either an absolute majority (single member district) or a quota (multi-member district), respectively.

Moderation[link]

Some other voting systems can end up giving a higher chance of victory to a candidate perceived as having extreme views. Under a first-past-the-post system, voters are often afraid of "wasting" their vote on a candidate unlikely to win, so they cast their vote towards their most preferable choice possible of victory. Advocates of plurality voting suggest that this results in most candidates having to field a fairly moderate or centrist position. This is debated by advocates of other systems, who argue that preferential voting or range voting systems, by getting more information from voters, allow a more rigorous definition of the word "moderate" and can be designed to explicitly favor candidates fitting that description.

Fewer minority parties[link]

Plurality voting tends to promote two-party systems (even more so than other single-winner systems). Supporters^[who?] view this as beneficial, as parliamentary governments, or other coalitions, are typically more stable in two-party systems, and thus small minorities are not given undue voice. First-past-the-post minimizes the influence of third parties and thus arguably keeps out extremists. However, this can also deny fair representation to positive third parties, racial minorities, women, and others.

Advantages compared to proportional representation[link]

Plurality is often conflated with Single-winner voting systems in general, in order to contrast it with Proportional representation. In this context it shares advantages, such as local accountability, with other single-winner systems.

Current events[link]

The United Kingdom continues to use the first-past-the-post electoral system for general elections, and for local government elections in England and Wales. Changes to the UK system have been proposed, and alternatives were examined by the Jenkins Commission in the late 1990s. After the formation of a new coalition government in 2010, it was announced as part of the coalition agreement that a referendum would be held on 5 May 2011 on switching to the alternative vote system. The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 received Royal Assent in February 2011 to allow the referendum to occur. It was rejected by British voters on May 6.

Canada also uses this system for national and provincial elections. In May 2005 the Canadian province of British Columbia had a referendum on abolishing single-member district plurality in favour of multi-member districts with the Single Transferable Vote system after the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform made a recommendation for the reform. The referendum obtained 57% of the vote, but failed to meet the 60% requirement for passing. An October 2007 referendum in the Canadian province of Ontario on adopting a Mixed Member Proportional system, also requiring 60% approval, failed with only 36.9% voting in favour.

Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, the Republic of Ireland, Australia and New Zealand are notable examples of countries within the UK, or with previous links to it, that use non-FPTP electoral systems (Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales use First Past the Post in United Kingdom general elections, however).

Recent examples of nations which have undergone democratic reforms but have not adopted the FPTP system include South Africa, almost all of the former Eastern bloc nations, Russia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Use[link]

Countries that use this system to elect the lower or only house of their legislature include:

The plurality election system is used in the Republic of China on Taiwan for executive offices such as county magistrates, mayors, and the president, but not for legislative seats which used the single non-transferable vote system. This has produced an interesting party structure in which there are two broad coalitions of parties which cooperate in executive elections but which compete internally in legislative elections.^[9]

See also[link]

• 2006 Texas Governor Election (a real-life example where incumbent Rick Perry won re-election despite gaining less than 40 percent of the vote)
• Cube rule
• Plurality-at-large voting
• List of democracy and elections-related topics
• Proportional representation
• Single non-transferable vote
• Single transferable vote
• Runoff voting
• Voting system

Notes[link]

External links[link]

• A handbook of Electoral System Design from International IDEA
• Atlas of Electoral Systems of the World Colour-coded world maps showing the electoral systems used by every democratic country in the world, also available with more details as tables of text. Part of the information on Electoral Systems offered by the World Policy Institute (WPI)'s Project for Global Democracy & Human Rights
• ACE Project: What is the electoral system for Chamber 1 of the national legislature?
• ACE Project: First Past The Post - Detailed explanation of first-past-the-post voting
• ACE Project: Experiments with moving away from FPTP in the UK
• ACE Project: Electing a President using FPTP
• ACE Project: FPTP on a grand scale in India
• The Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform says the new proportional electoral system it proposes for British Columbia will improve the practice of democracy in the province.
• ASSEMBLY AUDIO AND VIDEO Below, you'll find audio and video recordings of six Learning Phase weekends, a meeting held in Prince George and the six Deliberation Phase weekends. The Learning Phase and Deliberation Phase recordings were broadcast on Hansard TV during 2004. - week 5 gives a detailed description by David Farrell, of the University of Manchester (England), Elizabeth McLeay of Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
• Districting in FPTP systems, The unusual "earmuff" shape of the 4th Congressional District of Illinois connects two Hispanic neighborhoods while remaining contiguous by narrowly tracing Interstate 294.
• The Problem With First-Past-The-Post Electing (data from UK general election 2005)

Darragh MacAnthony
Darragh MacAnthony
Born	Darren (1976-03-24) 24 March 1976 (age 36) Dublin, Ireland
Residence	Florida, London
Occupation	Entrepreneur, Football club chairman
Parents	Austin Macanthony
Website
http://www.darraghmacanthony.com

Darragh MacAnthony (born 24 March 1976) is a Dublin-born football chairman and entrepreneur. The son of Austin MacAnthony, a nightclub owner,^[1] MacAnthony was educated at St Mary's College, Dublin.^[2] He moved to Spain with his family as a 15-year-old.^[3]

Peterborough United[link]

MacAnthony became Peterborough United chairman in 2006.

Since September 2006 MacAnthony has been chairman of Peterborough United F.C.^[4] Outgoing chairman Barry Fry cited a Sky One documentary, Big Ron Manager, as a factor in attracting investment from MacAnthony.^[5] Legally obliged to give first refusal to a third party (Peterborough United Holdings Ltd) in the event of a sale, Fry retained 99.8% ownership of the club, but MacAnthony gained power of attorney for the club's affairs.^[6]

MacAnthony took over as chairman at Peterborough at the age of 30, making him the youngest chairman in the Football League.^[7] As a sign of his ambition, a printed note from MacAnthony was added to Peterborough United's match programme in August 2007. In it, he promised fans promotion from League Two to the Championship in two seasons,^[3] which was duly delivered, though the club were subsequently relegated to League One. In March 2007, Peterborough United signed a £3 million shirt sponsorship deal with MacAnthony's company MRI Overseas Property.^[8] MacAnthony became owner of the club in August 2007, buying the club for a nominal £1 after taking on the club's debts.^[9]

In January 2007, manager Keith Alexander was sacked and replaced by Darren Ferguson, who was at the time untried as a manager. Ferguson initially delivered big returns, delivering back-to-back promotions in his first two full seasons. Ferguson left Peterborough, by mutual consent, on 9 November 2009 after a disappointing start to the 2009-10 season.^[10] AFC Bournemouth manager Eddie Howe was linked with the job, but after discussions with his chairman Eddie Mitchell it was decided that Peterborough would not be given permission to talk to Howe.^[11] Peterborough were relegated in 2010.^[12] In the 2010–11 season MacAnthony reappointed Darren Ferguson, and Peterborough United were once again promoted to the second tier.^[13]

Business interests[link]

MacAnthony attended a business college in London, but left after two months to sell Time-Share in Spain.^[14] He formed the property group Macanthony Realty International (MRI) in 2000,^[15] selling overseas holiday homes to mainly Irish and British customers. From a head office in Marbella,^[2] the company offered properties in countries including the Bahamas, Bulgaria, Cyprus and the Dominican Republic,^[16] with MacAnthony stating in 2005 that he gave the number of his personal mobile telephone to clients.^[17] but the UK Company was liquidated in the UK 2009 as reported in the London Gazette. In 2006, MacAnthony funded a satellite TV channel, Overseas Property TV, which was presented by his younger sister.^[18] and was also liquidated in 2009 leaving debts reported in the London Gazette. MacAnthony Realty International Ireland is also under receivership 2011 - Insolvency Journal Ireland.

The The Sunday Times Rich List estimated his wealth at £150 million in 2007, and £68 million in 2008.^[19]

MacAnthony has pledged his financial support for the Helping Hands Group, a company, not a charity which supports disabled people in the Peterborough Area.Helping Hands.

Note: MacAnthony and other past and present directors of MacAnthony Realty International Overseas appeared before Investigating judge Beatriz Gomez-Escolar in Marbella Criminal Court to answer questions about €500,0000+ owed to 50 former clients for the failure to provide furniture for apartments. Irish Herrald Irish Independent

References[link]

Larry King
King in September 2010
Born	Lawrence Harvey Zeiger (1933-11-19) November 19, 1933 (age 78) Brooklyn, New York City, U.S.
Occupation	Television/Radio personality
Years active	1957–present
Religion	Judaism
Spouse	Freda Miller (1952-1953; annulled) Annette Kaye (1961; divorced) Alene Akins (1961-1963; divorced) Mickey Stuphin (1963-1967; divorced) Alene Akins (1967-1972; divorced) Sharon Lepore (1976-1983; divorced) Julie Alexander (1989-1992; divorced) Shawn Southwick (1997–present)

Larry King (born November 19, 1933) is an American television and radio host whose work has been recognized with awards including two Peabodys and ten Cable ACE Awards. He began as a local Florida journalist and radio interviewer in the 1950s and 1960s and became prominent as an all-night national radio broadcaster starting in 1978. From 1985-2010, he hosted the nightly interview TV program Larry King Live on CNN.

Early life[link]

King was born Lawrence Harvey Zeiger in Brooklyn, New York City, to an Austrian immigrant Edward Zeiger, a restaurant owner and defense plant worker, and his wife Jennie Gitlitz, a garment worker, who emigrated from Belarus.^[1][2][3] King grew up in a religiously observant Jewish home,^[4] but in adulthood became an agnostic.^[5]

King's father died at 44 of heart disease,^[6] and his mother had to go on welfare to support her two sons. His father's death greatly affected King, and he lost interest in school. After graduating from high school, he worked to help support his mother. From an early age, however, he had wanted to go into radio.^[7] King is a fan of the Los Angeles Dodgers.

Career[link]

Miami radio and television[link]

A CBS staff announcer, whom King met by chance, told him to go to Florida, a growing media market where openings still existed for inexperienced broadcasters. King rode a train to Miami. After initial setbacks, King persisted and got his first job in radio. The manager of a small station, WAHR (now WMBM) in Miami Beach, hired him to clean up and perform miscellaneous tasks.^[8] When one of their announcers quit, they put King on the air. His first broadcast was on May 1, 1957, when he worked as the disc jockey from 9 a.m. to noon.^[9] He also did two afternoon newscasts and a sportscast. He was paid $55 a week. He acquired the name Larry King when the general manager Marshall Simmonds said that Zeiger was too ethnic and difficult to remember, so Larry chose the surname King, which he got from an ad in The Miami Herald for King's Wholesale Liquor, minutes before air.^[10] He started interviewing on a midmorning show for WIOD, at Pumpernik's Restaurant in Miami Beach.^[11] He would interview anyone who walked in. His first interview was with a waiter at the restaurant.^[12] Two days later, singer Bobby Darin, in Miami for a concert later that day, walked into Pumpernik's as a result of coming across King's show on his radio; Darin became King's first celebrity interview guest.^[13]

His Miami radio show launched him to local stardom. A few years later, in May 1960, he hosted Miami Undercover, airing Sunday nights at 11:30 p.m. on WPST-TV Channel 10 (now WPLG).^[14] On the show, he moderated debates on important issues of the time. King credits his success on local TV to the assistance of another showbiz legend, comedian Jackie Gleason, whose national TV variety show was being filmed in Miami Beach during this period. "That show really took off because Gleason came to Miami," King said in a 1996 interview he gave when inducted into the Broadcasters' Hall of Fame. "He did that show and stayed all night with me. We stayed till five in the morning. He didn't like the set, so we broke into the general manager's office and changed the set. Gleason changed the set, he changed the lighting, and he became like a mentor of mine."^[15] Jackie Gleason was instrumental in getting Larry a hard-to-get on air interview with Frank Sinatra during this time.

During this period, WIOD gave King further exposure as a color commentator for the Miami Dolphins of the National Football League, during their 1970 season and most of their 1971 season.^[16] However, he was dismissed by both WIOD and television station WTVJ as a late-night radio host and sports commentator as of December 20, 1971, when he was arrested after being accused of grand larceny by a former business partner.^[17] Other staffers covered the Dolphins' games into their 24–3 loss to Dallas in Super Bowl VI. King also lost his weekly column at the Miami Beach Sun newspaper. The charges were dropped on March 10, 1972, and King spent the next several years in reviving his career, including a stint as the color announcer in Louisiana for the Shreveport Steamer of the World Football League in 1974–75 on KWKH. Eventually, King was rehired by WIOD in Miami. For several years during the 1970s in South Florida, he hosted a sports talk-show called "Sports-a-la-King" that featured guests and callers.

National radio[link]

Interviewing Vladimir Putin

In 1978, he went national, inheriting the nightly talk show slot on the Mutual Broadcasting System, broadcast coast-to-coast, that had been "Long John" Nebel's until his death, and had been pioneered by Herb Jepko.^[18] One reason King got the Mutual job is that he had once been an announcer at WGMA-AM in Hollywood, Florida, which was then owned by C. Edward Little. Little went on to become president of Mutual and was the one who hired King when Nebel died. King's Mutual show developed a devoted audience.^{[citation needed]}

It was broadcast live Monday through Friday from midnight to 5:30 a.m. Eastern Time. King would interview a guest for the first 90 minutes, with callers asking questions that continued the interview for another 90 minutes. At 3 a.m., he would allow callers to discuss any topic they pleased with him, until the end of the program, when he expressed his own political opinions. That segment was called "Open Phone America". Some of the regular callers used the pseudonyms "The Portland Laugher", "The Miami Derelict", "The Todd Cruz Caller", "The Scandal Scooper", "Mr. Radio" and "The Water Is Warm Caller". "Mr. Radio" made over 200 calls to King during Open Phone America. The show was successful, starting with relatively few affiliates and eventually growing to more than 500. It ran until 1994.^{[citation needed]}

For its final year, the show was moved to afternoons, but, because most talk radio stations at the time had an established policy of local origination in the time-slot (3 to 6 p.m. Eastern Time) that Mutual offered the show, a very low percentage of King's overnight affiliates agreed to carry his daytime show and it was unable to generate the same audience size.^{[citation needed]} The afternoon show was eventually given to David Brenner and radio affiliates were given the option of carrying the audio of King's new CNN evening television program. The Westwood One radio simulcast of the CNN show continued until December 31, 2009.

CNN[link]

He started his Larry King Live CNN show in June 1985, hosting a broad range of guests from controversial figures of UFO conspiracy theories and alleged psychics,^[19] to prominent politicians and leading figures in the entertainment industry, often doing their first or only interview on breaking news stories on his show.

King during a recording of his Larry King Live program at the Pentagon in Arlington, VA in 2006

Unlike many interviewers, King has a direct, non-confrontational approach. His reputation for asking easy, open-ended questions has made him attractive to important figures who want to state their position while avoiding being challenged on contentious topics.^[20] His interview style is characteristically frank, but with occasional bursts of irreverence and humor. His approach attracts some guests who would not otherwise appear. King, who is known for his general lack of pre-interview preparation, once bragged that he never read the books of authors before they made their appearances on his program.

In a show dedicated to the surviving Beatles, King asked George Harrison's widow about the song "Something", which was written about George Harrison's first wife. He seemed surprised when she did not know very much about the song.

Throughout his career King has interviewed many of the leading figures of his time. CNN claimed during his final episode that he had performed 60,000 interviews in his career.

King also wrote a regular newspaper column in USA Today for almost 20 years, from shortly after that newspaper's origin in 1982 until September 2001.^[21] The column consisted of short "plugs, superlatives and dropped names" but was dropped when the newspaper redesigned its "Life" section.^[22] The column was resurrected in blog form in November 2008^[23] and on Twitter in April 2009.^[24]

Departure[link]

On June 29, 2010, King announced that after 25 years, he would be stepping down from his nightly job hosting Larry King Live. However, he stated that he would remain with CNN to host occasional specials.^[25] The announcement came in the wake of speculation that CNN had approached Piers Morgan, the British television personality and journalist, as King's primetime replacement,^[26] which was confirmed in September.^[27][28]

The final edition of Larry King Live aired on December 16, 2010.^[29] The show concluded with his last thoughts and a thank you to his audience for watching and supporting him over the years.^[30]

On February 17, 2012 CNN announced that he would no longer host specials.^[31]

Other ventures[link]

King was the moderator of the 6th KAZENERGY Eurasian Forum in Astana, Kazakhstan, an annual forum for Kazakhstan's energy sector occurring in October 2011.^[32][33][34]

Charitable works[link]

As a result of heart attacks, he established the Larry King Cardiac Foundation, an organization to which David Letterman, through his American Foundation for Courtesy and Grooming, has also contributed. King gave $1 million to George Washington University's School of Media and Public Affairs for scholarships to students from disadvantaged backgrounds.^{[citation needed]} King serves as a member of the Board of Directors on the Police Athletic League of New York City, a nonprofit youth development agency serving inner-city children and teenagers.^{[citation needed]}

On September 3, 2005, following Hurricane Katrina, King aired "How You Can Help", a three-hour special designed to provide a forum and information clearinghouse for viewers to understand and join nationwide and global relief efforts. On January 18, 2010, in the wake the 2010 Haiti earthquake, King aired "Haiti: How You Can Help", a special two-hour edition designed to show viewers how to take action and be a part of the global outreach. Following the Deepwater Horizon explosion, King aired "Disaster in the Gulf: How You Can Help", a special two-hour edition designed to show viewers how to take action in the clean-up efforts on the Gulf Coast.

On August 30, 2010, King served as the host of Chabad's 30th annual "To Life" telethon, in Los Angeles.

Controversial positions[link]

On September 10, 1990, while on The Joan Rivers Show, Rivers asked King which contestant in the Miss America pageant was "the ugliest". King responded, "Miss Pennsylvania. She was one of the 10 finalists and she did a great ventriloquist bit [...] The dummy was prettier."^[35] King was a judge for the September 8, 1990 pageant. King later sent Miss Pennsylvania, Marla Wynne, a dozen long-stemmed roses and a telegram apologizing for saying she was the ugliest contestant in the pageant that year.^[36]

In 1997, King was one of 34 celebrities to sign an open letter to then-German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, published as a newspaper advertisement in the International Herald Tribune, which protested the treatment of Scientologists in Germany, comparing it to the Nazis' oppression of Jews in the 1930s.^[37] Other signatories included Dustin Hoffman and Goldie Hawn.^[37]

Personal life[link]

King has been married eight times, to seven different women.^[38] He married high-school sweetheart Freda Miller in 1951 at age 18.^[39] The union ended the following year at the behest of their parents, who reportedly had the marriage annulled.^[39] King was later briefly married to Annette Kaye^[39] who gave birth to his son, Larry Jr., in November 1961. King did not meet Larry Jr. until the son was in his thirties.^[40] Larry Jr. and his wife, Shannon, have three children.^[38]

In 1961, King married his third wife, Alene Akins, a Playboy bunny at one of the magazine's eponymous nightclubs. The couple had son Andy in 1962, and divorced the following year.^[39] In 1963, King married his fourth wife, Mary Francis "Mickey" Stuphin, who divorced King.^[39] He remarried Akins, with whom he had a second child, Chaia, in 1969.^[39] The couple divorced a second time in 1972.^[39] In 1997, Dove Books published a book written by King and Chaia, Daddy Day, Daughter Day. Aimed at young children, it tells each of their accounts of his divorce from Akins.

On September 25, 1976, King married his fifth wife, math teacher and production assistant Sharon Lepore. The couple divorced in 1983.^[41]

King met businesswoman Julie Alexander in summer 1989, and proposed to her on the couple's first date, on August 1, 1989.^[42] Alexander became King's sixth wife on October 7, 1989, when the two were married in Washington, D.C.^[43] The couple lived in different cities, however, with Alexander in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and King in Washington, D.C., where he worked. The couple separated in 1990 and divorced in 1992.^[43] He became engaged to actress Deanna Lund in 1995, after five weeks of dating, but they never married.^[44]

He married his seventh wife, Shawn Southwick, born in 1959^[45][46] as Shawn Oro Engemann,^[45] a former singer and TV host,^[47] in King's Los Angeles, California, hospital room three days before King underwent heart surgery to clear a clogged blood vessel.^[46] The couple have two children: Chance, born March 1999,^{[citation needed]} and Cannon, born May 2000.^{[citation needed]} He is stepfather to Danny Southwick.^{[citation needed]} On King and Southwick's 10th anniversary in September 2007, Southwick boasted she was "the only [wife] to have lasted into the two digits".^[47] On April 14, 2010, both Larry and Shawn King filed for divorce.^[46][48] but have since stopped the proceedings, claiming "We love our children, we love each other, we love being a family. That is all that matters to us".^[49]

On February 24, 1987, King suffered a major heart attack and then had quintuple-bypass surgery.^{[citation needed]} Since then, King has written two books about living with heart disease. Mr. King, You're Having a Heart Attack: How a Heart Attack and Bypass Surgery Changed My Life (1989, ISBN 0-440-50039-7) was written with New York's Newsday science editor B. D. Colen. Taking On Heart Disease: Famous Personalities Recall How They Triumphed over the Nation's #1 Killer and How You Can, Too (2004, ISBN 1-57954-820-2) features the experience of various celebrities with cardiovascular disease including Peggy Fleming and Regis Philbin.

In July 2009, King appeared on The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien, where he told host O'Brien about his wishes to be cryonically preserved upon death,^[50] as he had revealed in his book My Remarkable Journey.^[51] In December 2011, preceding a CNN Special on the topic, the Kings had a special dinner with friends Conan O'Brien, Tyra Banks, Shaquille O'Neal, Seth MacFarlane, Jack Dorsey, Quincy Jones and Russell Brand where his intent to do so was reiterated, among other topics that were discussed.^[52]

On February 12, 2010, Larry King revealed that he had undergone surgery five weeks earlier to place stents in his coronary artery to remove plaque from his heart. During the segment on Larry King Live which discussed Bill Clinton's similar procedure, King said he was "feeling great" and had been in hospital for just one day.^{[citation needed]}

Awards[link]

King has received many broadcasting awards. He won the Peabody Award for Excellence in broadcasting for both his radio (1982) and television (1992) shows. He has also won 10 CableACE awards for Best Interviewer and for Best Talk Show Series.

In 1989, King was inducted into the National Radio Hall of Fame,^{[citation needed]} and in 1996 to the Broadcasters' Hall of Fame.^[7] In 2002, the industry magazine Talkers named King both the fourth-greatest radio talk show host of all time and the top television talk show host of all time.^[53]

in June 1998, King received an Honorary Degree from Brooklyn College, City University of New York, for his life achievements.

King was given the Golden Mike Award for Lifetime Achievement in January 2009, by the Radio & Television News Association of Southern California.

King is an honorary member of the Rotary Club of Beverly Hills. He is also a recipient of the President's Award honoring his impact on media from the Los Angeles Press Club in 2006.

King is the first recipient of the Arizona State University Hugh Downs Award for Communication Excellence,^[54] presented April 11, 2007, via satellite by Downs himself.^[55] Downs sported red suspenders for the event and turned the tables on King by asking "very tough questions" about King's best, worst and most influential interviews during King's 50 years in broadcasting.^{[citation needed]}

References[link]

External links[link]

Find more about Larry King on Wikipedia's sister projects:
	Definitions and translations from Wiktionary
	Images and media from Commons
	Learning resources from Wikiversity
	News stories from Wikinews
	Quotations from Wikiquote
	Source texts from Wikisource
	Textbooks from Wikibooks

• CNN profile
• Larry King Cardiac Foundation - Foundation to fund treatments cardiac patients with little or no insurance
• Clark lawsuit
• Larry King at the Internet Movie Database
• Larry King Live - Transcripts of all interviews since 2000
• Larry King interviewed by Gianluca D'Agostino
• Larry King Archive of American Television video interview

Sarah Palin
Palin speaking at the 2012 CPAC in Washington, D.C.
9th Governor of Alaska
In office December 4, 2006 – July 26, 2009
Lieutenant	Sean Parnell
Preceded by	Frank Murkowski
Succeeded by	Sean Parnell
Chairperson of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
In office February 19, 2003 – January 23, 2004
Governor	Frank Murkowski
Preceded by	Camille Oechsli Taylor[1]
Succeeded by	John K. Norman[1]
Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska
In office October 14, 1996 – October 14, 2002
Preceded by	John Stein
Succeeded by	Dianne M. Keller
Member of the Wasilla City Council from Seat E
In office October 19, 1992 – October 14, 1996
Preceded by	Dorothy Smith
Succeeded by	Colleen Cottle
Personal details
Born	Sarah Louise Heath (1964-02-11) February 11, 1964 (age 48)[2] Sandpoint, Idaho, U.S.
Nationality	American
Political party	Republican
Spouse(s)	Todd Palin (m. August 29, 1988)
Children	Track (b. 1989) Bristol (b. 1990) Willow (b. 1994) Piper (b. 2001) Trig (b. 2008)[3]
Residence	Wasilla, Alaska
Alma mater	University of Idaho - (B.S., 1987)[4]
Occupation	Local news sportscaster Commercial fisherman Politician Author Political commentator[5]
Religion	Non-denominational Christian[6][7]
Signature

	This article is part of a series about Sarah Palin	Sarah Palin
McCain–Palin campaign, 2008 Governorship of Alaska, 2006–2009 Early political career of Sarah Palin, 1992–2005 Political positions · Electoral history Public image · Saturday Night Live parodies Resignation of Sarah Palin Going Rogue: An American Life Sarah Palin's Alaska

Sarah Louise Palin ⁱ/ˈpeɪlɨn/ (née Heath; born February 11, 1964) is an American politician, commentator and author. As the Republican Party nominee for Vice President in the 2008 presidential election, she was the first Alaskan on the national ticket of a major party and first Republican woman nominated for the vice presidency. Her book Going Rogue has sold more than two million copies. Since January 2010, she has provided political commentary for Fox News, and hosted a television show, Sarah Palin's Alaska. Five million viewers tuned in for the first episode, a record for The Learning Channel.

She was elected to Wasilla City Council in 1992 and became mayor of Wasilla in 1996. In 2003, after an unsuccessful run for lieutenant governor, she was appointed Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, responsible for overseeing the state's oil and gas fields for safety and efficiency. The youngest person and first woman to be elected Governor of Alaska, Palin held the office from December 2006 until her resignation in July 2009. She has since endorsed and campaigned for the Tea Party movement, as well as several candidates in the 2010 midterm elections. From the time of her Vice Presidential nomination in 2008, Palin was considered a potential candidate for the 2012 presidential election until she announced in October 2011 that she would not run.

Early life and family[link]

Palin was born in Sandpoint, Idaho. She is the third of four children (three daughters, one son) born to Charles R. "Chuck" Heath, a science teacher and track and field coach, and Sarah "Sally" (née Sheeran), a school secretary. Palin's siblings are Chuck Jr., Heather, and Molly.^{[8][9][10][11][12]} Palin is of English, Irish, and German ancestry.^[13]

When Palin was a few months old, the family moved to Skagway, Alaska,^[14] where her father received his teaching job.^[15] They relocated to Eagle River in 1969, and finally settled to Wasilla in 1972.^[16][17]

Palin played flute in the junior high band, then attended Wasilla High School where she was the head of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes,^[7] and a member of the girls' basketball and cross country running teams.^[18] During her senior year, she was co-captain and point guard of the basketball team that won the 1982 Alaska state championship, earning the nickname "Sarah Barracuda" for her competitive streak.^[19][20][21]

College[link]

After graduating from high school, Palin enrolled at the University of Hawaii at Hilo.^[22] Shortly after arriving in Hawaii, Palin transferred to Hawaii Pacific University in Honolulu for a semester in the fall of 1982, and then to North Idaho College, a community college in Coeur d'Alene, for the spring and fall semesters of 1983.^[23] (In June 2008, the Alumni Association of NIC gave her its Distinguished Alumni Achievement Award.)^[23][24]

In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla beauty pageant.^[25][26] She finished third in the Miss Alaska pageant,^[27][28] playing flute in the talent portion of the contest,^[29] and receiving both the Miss Congeniality award and a college scholarship.^[19]

She attended the University of Idaho in Moscow, Idaho, in late 1984 and early 1985, and Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska in late 1985. Palin returned to the University of Idaho in the spring of 1986, and received her bachelor's degree in communications with an emphasis in journalism in 1987.^{[23][30][31][32]}

Early career and marriage[link]

After graduation, she worked as a sportscaster for KTUU-TV and KTVA-TV in Anchorage,^[33][34] and as a sports reporter for the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman,^[35][36] fulfilling an early ambition.^[37]

On August 29, 1988, she eloped at age 24 with her high school sweetheart, Todd Palin. Following the birth of their first child, she helped in her husband's commercial fishing business.^[38]

Early political career[link]

City council[link]

Palin was elected to the Wasilla City Council in 1992 winning 530 votes to 310.^[39][40] Throughout her tenure on the city council and the rest of her political career, Palin has been a Republican since registering in 1982.^[41]