Third Party & Independents: Archives

Nixon had more class than Kerry. The 1960 election was much closer than this one. Neither candidate won a majority. There were well-founded fears of voter fraud. Nixon conceded despite his own misgivings.

The election of 2004 is too close to only call because Kerry won’t go the right thing. Most Americans wanted a clean election. The more reasonable among us said that we prefer a solid victory by the opponent to a messy post election fight.

We have a clean victory but it looks like we are still going to get a messy fight. In order for Kerry to win in Ohio, he almost all the provisional and absentee votes would have to be valid and they would almost all (around 85%)have to go for Kerry. Since Kerry only one 49% of all the other votes cast, that would be a miracle well beyond normal experience and would almost certainly indicate manipulation or fraud.

If Ohio where Bush leads by 136,221 is too close to call, why not 21 Electoral Vote Pennsylvania, where Kerry leads by 121,818 (also a smaller percentage, or Michigan where Kerry leads by 113,098. Switch either of those, and Bush wins too.

I can imagine it must be galling that Democrats can’t make Bush pay for his “sin” of 2000, but Bush is clearly the winner. He won the majority of the popular vote. Gore did not in 2000 and Clinton did not in either 1996 or 1992.

Florida was a statistical tie. In fact the U.S. vote in 2000 was a statistical tie. Gore was a plurality (not majority) of ½ of 1%. This race is not close. Bush has an actual majority of the popular vote and a 3% difference. It is one thing to fight over a few hundred votes. More than 100,000 is a different matter.

This is not an ambiguous situation. John Kerry should not put his personal ambition ahead of his country’s welfare. He could learn from Richard Nixon and prove that he is not a crook.

Mother of Christ in a birchbark canoe, Jack! Is winning more important than havin a united America? Why not just let the count play out - and the recount if necessary.

It’s a close race. I think you could give us a little time to make sure it’s all legit. Bush filed the first lawsuit in 2000 to stop the recount. If it comes down to that in Ohio, I hope he won’t do it again. The last thing we need is another court-appointed president.

Nothing short of blind partisan faith could make someone believe that Kerry won Ohio. If you take an honest, non-partisan look at the numbers (compare Bush’s clear margin of victory with the number of provisional ballots left. Then think about what % of provisional ballots will be accepted, and then think abotu what % of that will likely fall toward Kerry. The math is pretty simple).

I understand that John Kerry fought long and hard, and it must be difficult to lose. As a fellow human being, I can understand that and will not knock him if it takes him a day or two to adjust to this before conceeding. But if he follows the pattern of 4 years ago, and drags america through this again, I will lose all respect for him. Bush has won the majority of Americans (the first time since 1988 that a candidate for president has won the majority) and he has won in the electoral college. The only question in my mind is not- if- but when- this is a fact everyone that isnt incredibly partisan must accept.

I have confidence that Ohio will count fairly. But I have no confidence that it will be over when the counting is done.

This is what I think would be fair to all. Determine the number of provisional ballots. If the number of provisional ballots is smaller than the Bush lead, declare Bush the winner. If the number of provisional ballots is greater than the Bush lead, determine the validity of the ballots. If the number of valid ballots is less than the Bush lead, declare Bush the winner. If the number is greater, count the votes and declare whoever gets the most the winner.

The problem is I don’t think it can work that simply. “New” votes will be discovered. Protestors will descend on the places where votes are being counted. All sorts of conspiracy theories will be aired in the mainstream media. By the time it is all done, nobody will be able to tell what the truth was. Nobody will accept the result in the end. No good can come from dragging this out. Only John Kerry has the power to stop the madness.

If you remember my previous comments on this sort of thing, you know that I have advocated the losing side accepting defeat gracefully, even if it was my side. Kerry supporters are still angry about the 2000 election. I am in the (I guess) rare position of having voted for Al Gore, but consider the 2000 election result fair. The first, automatic, recount in 2000 was a good idea. Bush won the first and he won the second. It should have been over at that time, butit wasn’t. I can understand the frustration. The 2000 election was truly too close to call. This one is not. The way our system is set up, no good can come from dragging this out. It will create more, not less doubt. John Kerry defended our country as a young man, he can do so again today.

jack, you are overlooking something. Kerry has received 100’s of millions of dollars from supporters and received a quarter million or more manhours volunteered gratis from his supporters. Kerry has an obligation to his 50 million supporters and it would be dishonorable indeed and damaging to the Democratic Party in the next election cycle if Kerry conceded before those supporters were sure the votes were not there.

In light of that, would you, in his place, concede before it was clear to your supporters that no chance of winning was left, even if you knew the chance had passed?

If you would, it speaks volumes of Kerry’s leadership style over yours.

[Comment deleted for calling Bush supporters derogatory names. -WatchBlog Manager]

Misha, the overseas vote needs to be added in to this equation as well. While it is not probable by any means that Kerry will carry Ohio when all the votes are counted, it is still theoretically possible he won Ohio, and he owes 50 million Americans who supported him to not concede their election until the remote chance of winning is eliminated.

The stakes could not be higher. If Kerry has Ohio, Kerry has the oval office. THat too is a hard cold fact. Kerry owes his 50 million supporters a greater debt and burden of proof than he owes Bush supporters. So, show a little class, and be patient.

David, I am sorry to hear you think I am being classless about this. I said:
“I understand that John Kerry fought long and hard, and it must be difficult to lose. As a fellow human being, I can understand that and will not knock him if it takes him a day or two to adjust to this before conceeding.”

I think this shows respect for the frustration of people who worked hard for our vote, while articulating my hope that once it becomes obvious that Kerry will not win (which I think will be clear in a day or two), we should not drag this out. Every vote WILL still be counted, but the question is when it is reasonable to say “it seems that we lost.” Richard Nixon in 1960 gave us a great model, Gorei n 2000 showed us the other extreme. True CLASS is what Nixon did- lets hope Kerry can show this much class.

Misha, what is this rush to judgement? What if the Kerry crew has information that contradicts the Republican election commissioner regarding the actual number of provisional ballots and absentee ballots? Let the system of laws work to resolve this. If the law provides Kerry’s team a recount or a delay until the provisional ballots are actually counted, why subvert the law by launching character assasinations against the candidate, regardless of party, their rights under those laws?

You conceded for Kerry last night in your article. I am simply suggesting that in America, we value the vote over polls, counting votes over estimating them. Let the system work. The worst thing for America is Kerry conceding before the count is in, only to find out later something was amiss and then fight about the election for another 4 years. Let the counts take place, let the laws work. Impatience is a small price to pay for democracy guided by the rule of law, not political expedience or pressure.

David, I am just one person with his personal opinion. My personal opinion is that John Kerry has lost- which is why I made the post that I did. I am rather sure of my prediction on this one, but of course everyone who disagrees with me is free to show me the flaw in my reasoning.

I do not think anyone is suggesting that we do not count these ballots, I am just “projecting” based on rather reasonable assumptions, I think.

I’d rather not see lawyers or judges get involved in this election, either, but let’s face it — if the positions were reversed Bush would not be conceding right now and his lawyers would be out in full force as well. It’s just the way it is and we’re going to have to get used to it.

Alejo:
You are just making an idle supposition that isnt based on anything more than your opinion.

Florida in 2000 was far closer than Ohio is at this point. I’ve even heard Alan Dershowitz, scion of the Democratic left, suggesting that if Kerry is pinning his hopes on winning Ohio, he is badly misguided.

They need to get on with the counts, get them done and move on. Even with the most generous numbers, I don’t see how Kerry wins Ohio, and without Ohio, he doesnt win the election.

David:

I’ve rarely seen you so mischaracterize comments, especially from someone rational like Misha. Misha suggested giving a couple days to allow Kerry to review his options, and you call him classless for suggesting that we resolve this thing quickly.

For the good of the country, this election needs to be resolved quickly and without giving people the viewpoint that it is somehow tainted. Along with that goes the right of Kerry to make sure the election isnt tainted. Bot candidates need to be aware of the opposition viewpoints, but nonetheless, it needs to be done swiftly.

Misha, I apologize if I mistook your position. I agree it is only theoretically possible the Ohio count will favor Kerry: very, very remote based on the information we have so far. All over WB right now however, are comments degrading Kerry’s character if he just doesn’t up and quit, and that kind of impatience with the laws and rights of our electoral system potentially threaten it. The system will work.

There is as much grace to winning as their is to losing, and I am seeing a large lack of it in all three columns this morning. The worlds eyes are upon us, I would like to see Americans respond with confidence and pride in their election system and its laws, and show a bit of grace on all sides of the win/lose spectrum. It would certainly would not hurt our foreign relations in the world, right now.

Well, Kerry has conceded. The numbers weren’t there, and he contacted the President to concede and congratulate the President and suggested we all do something about the divided America that Bush and Kerry both agreed exists.

I do not think Kerry should concede until all the votes are counted. David is right, he owes it to those who voted for him, but have yet to have thier votes counted.

america’s divided because people disagree. kerry is a fool for not taking on voter fraud, we’ve known ohio would get it in the ass all week.