An observation

[StoryTeller]

First, I'm so thrilled about how things went with this election. I'm bummed that none of the Nebraska house races went Democrat, especially the one I worked on. But on the other hand, there was only a 10 percent distance between Terry and Esch, and Esch ran a completely grass-roots campaign with NO funding from the Democratic party and no special interest money. And he made Lee Terry sweat--a LOT. So I'm pretty pleased. And it sounds like Esch is planning to try it again in two years, which is great news.

Now, for my observation--I notice a strange double-mindedness, or dare I call it "hypocrisy" wafting from the general direction of the GD board. People are talking about how Burns and Allen should just concede, and that they're being sore losers for wanting recounts, especially when the numbers aren't there and in the case of Montana, the gap is too large for a state-funded recount.

Hmmm...I would I thought that they would have wanted these fine folks to make sure every vote was counted, and to fight. Why give up so easily? I mean, after all, that's what all those lawyers and extra campaign money is for, right? Despite the futility. It's the principle of the matter, darn it!

(Not, of course, that I want these two guys to actually do this. I'm thrilled that they lost. I just find the scorn over their refusals to concede rather annoying.)

:eyes:

[Inuca]

1. I agree with you, but..

.. I think that many of these comments are just childish exuberant gloating in bitter remembrance of Florida 2000. I am not a child and I seldom gloat, but as I was reading/watching/etc. today, the words that somebody here used recently in I do not remember what context le[t popping in my mind, "isn't karma a bitch?". Well.... isn't it :-) :-)? Speaking of which: so many comments and speculations about the impact JK's misspoken words "will have" or "may have" or "had", etc. Anybody stopped to think whether things may have different today had the decider decided to let Rummy go a week ago instead of scaring the sh.t out of the whole wide world that we are stuck with him for another 2 years? Had he announced this earlier, it MAY have had an impact, who knows how relevant (Tester & Webb anyone?), but fortunately he decided not to decide until later. What about that bitchy karma?

[MH1]

2. Yes, but that goes both ways.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/8/121127/066

MT-Sen, VA-Sen: Allen and Burns don't believe in recounts
by kos
Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 12:11:27 PM EST

Both Allen and Burns will have the right to call for a recount, it seems. Yet given their prior public comments on recounts, we should expect them to pass.

Burns press release, 11/28/2000:

On November 28, 2000, when the Florida election results were certified, Conrad Burns said Gore "appears more and more like a man who wants to win at any cost." Burns added, "It is time, as some have said, for Vice President Gore to stop being a litigant and start being a Patriot. The good of our nation is greater than any one man, and it is time for Mr. Gore to end these challenges and bow out gracefully."

More Burns in the 11/30/2000 Great Falls Tribune:

At the end of November 2000, Conrad Burns said he would like to see an end to Gore's legal efforts in Florida. Burns said, "Mr. Gore should step aside and let the Bush team begin its orderly transition to the presidency."

And Allen on the Today show 11/8/2000:

The morning after Election Day 2000, when Florida was counting absentee ballots, George Allen said, "we'll need to move America forward as soon as those votes are cast."

I'm sure these former Senators will stand by their words, and not develop a double standard now. Right?

Right?

:rofl:

Well, okay maybe not. I think that they should have the option to call for a recount, particularly if they can show some "probable cause" (not proof) that there might be errors in the results, and are willing to pay the cost themselves.

[Inuca]

3. Once again

Isn't karma a bitch? :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[ProSense]

6. Uh!

:rofl:

[WildEyedLiberal]

4. Someone on GD who I have seen scorn Kerry for conceding...

... said that it would be stupid for Allen to fight the election because the margin was 7,000.

Yet when Kerry's margin is over 100,000 he's "spineless" for not "fighting."

:eyes:

[beachmom]

5. Since I always felt that Kerry rightly conceded in 2004

I think these people are finally talking common sense!! I'm tired of "he conceded too soon" -- 120,000 votes? This shoe on the other foot scenario will be fantastic to throw back at them all at a later date.

[sandnsea]

7. Hypocrisy!! In GD?!?

Nooo!! Say it isn't so! :)

I think it's a what's good for the goose is good for the gander sort of thing. I don't have a problem with Burns and Allen waiting for the canvassing to finish. Concessions aren't necessary when votes are this close. That's what the laws are there for. Still, I'd rub it in the face of someone if I knew they had gone on a Sore Loserman rant in 2000. Some people don't get it otherwise.

The result will be the same... Good Night Gracie!