Need some understanding/information

[politicasista]

I have a habit of being repetitive at times so please forgive me.

I was reading Goldeneye's strategy thread (very nice) about ideas on how to debunk Anti-Kerry stuff here.

One thing that stood out was the concession. I know pirhana and Island Blue were talking about the concession and how Kerry should explain why he conceced so fast, etc.

I remember when Kerry was on the Tom Joyner Morning Show (urban talk radio)twice and during election morning talking about the victory plans. At the end of the first inverview interview, JK was letting listeners know how important the election was and how much he needed everyone's vote, then said he wasn't going to take no vote for granted and that "I am asking for your vote."

On election morning, Tom asked JK if he thought Bush, Rove, and the RNC was going to do anything sneaky. JK's response was that he was holding his breath just in case. Part of me thinks Tom was somewhat disappointed in Kerry's answer beacuse of what happened in 2000. I guess he was expecting him to stand up and fight like Gore did (we all know what happened there).

I posted this as a reply to pirhana and IB in Goldeneye's thread, but sometimes I wish that Kerry could explain the quick concession.

I know he didn't want to put the country through any more drama (and I understand), but some say he owes it to those who stood in line and voted for him to follow through. I feel that it would quiet down the "He caved, didn't count every vote, broke his promise, doesn't care about the fraud, coward, threw the election, ________ is getting my vote in 2008, I want a fighter, and so on" talk.

I also think that explaining the concession would help in the long run, you think? Am I missing something?

:shrug:

[JI7]

1. there was no quick concession

he waited until the next day. people usually concede as soon as results are announced such as Paul Hackett did.

also, Gore conceded to BUsh on the phone also. it was only after the numbers started changing and getting closer that he retracted it.

[jillan]

2. I wish I would have seen this before I started a new thread!

Maybe the first thing that we need to do in our new mission in defending/supporting Kerry is to figure out a way to get the message to him on how this is still a hot topic. Maybe he doesn't know???

I feel like I'm :banghead:

[JI7]

3. Hillary is hated on DU by many

but she has a very good shot at winning the Primary if she wins. if you want Kerry to get support you would focus on those who support Hillary rather than DU. since DU was never big on Kerry or Edwards either and they did well also.

[MH1]

4. [rant alert!] Following through

can be done in many ways.

Please don't take the following rant personally. I am a little tired of saying this so I found myself incapable of writing it without strong seasoning:

<rant>
1. There is no freaking way in hell that the result was going to be overturned and John Kerry inaugurated on January 20th. What was not conceding going to buy anyone?

2. Okay some of the people who refuse to get over this say stuff like, "if Kerry had made a deal out of it, it would have gotten the attention in the media and we could have gotten the American people to see how they were being ripped off."

To those people I have to say:
Wake the fuck up!!! Where WERE you in Nov-Dec 2000? The fraud was FUCKING BLATANT in 2000 and what happened?? And now some of these people are saying Gore should run again? The guy who couldn't overcome blatant fraud for a mere 600 votes in 2000, and yet these same people think Kerry is a "wuss" for not kicking and screaming when he was down by 3 million in the popular vote and 120,000 in the contested state??

</rant>

Okay calmer now....

3. As said in a post above, it was NOT a "quick" concession.

4. A military analogy. A crack sniper is separated from his unit and his position is about to be overrun by a large force of the enemy. If he doesn't move, he dies. Sure, he'll take out a few of them on the way - hell, maybe even a lot - but if he survives he'll be able to do much more from a safer position. He has one chance to escape and get to that safer position. Does he escape, with the expectation - but not a sure thing - of being able to take out many more of the enemy in the future? Or does he stay and go down fighting right there?

I say he escapes to a safer position so he can continue to fight. And I think that is what JK did. He needed to retain his credibility as a Senator and that wouldn't have happened if he had held out.

5. The wheels of justice grind very slowly and JK the former prosecutor would know this all too well. Short of something cataclysmic which could never have gone in his favor, no legal effort would have come to resolution by Jan 20, therefore nothing could have changed who got inaugurated on Jan 20. (or did a S.C. justice get swapped out between 2000 and 2004 when I wasn't looking?)

Okay, that's all I can come up with for now. To me the real thing that sticks in my craw when people bring this up is the context of the 2000 election. For me, September 11th really happened on December 12, 2000 - not only because if Gore was President, the World Trade Center would still be standing, but because that is the day U.S. democracy died. And people blaming John Kerry for 2004 will not do one fucking thing to change that.

He did everything he could that made sense to do, and kept his powder dry to follow through in other ways, which he is doing.

Some people just will never get it though. No explanation he could ever give will change their minds. And you know what? I don't think it matters a whole lot to people who aren't politically active. Outside of political blogs and occasional mentions in political meetings, I have heard NO ONE complain about Kerry conceding. In fact, I heard one prior Dean supporter at work (a non-politically active person, mind you) who actually complained about my mentioning the election protest on Jan. 6th. "Aw, it's over. Just let it go" was the attitude. So no, based on my little view of the world, there would be nothing to gain by Kerry trying to reach the public generally with any explanation of his concession. They.Just.Don't.Care. Really.

So there's my thoughts, since you brought it up. Sorry for the incoherence, I just thought for a change I would just let the words flow. (Now you can see why I normally don't do that.)

[politicasista]

5. No problem. I feel better and positive after reading that.

:hi:

[MH1]

7. I'm glad. I did, too, after writing it!

:hi:

[fedupinBushcountry]

6. Excellent summation

You can rant away anytime. I love hearing common sense. :yourock:

[MH1]

8. Thanks.

That rant was building up for awhile.

I really suffered during the Gore thing in 2000. I followed every detail that I could get my hands on from Election Day until well into 2001. I couldn't believe how the media played it, how people let them get away with it, and what the Supreme Court did.

I don't see how anybody who lived through that like I did, could expect Kerry to try to play it the way Gore did - it obviously wouldn't work and would gain little in terms of public awareness or action. But then, I don't know anyone personally who lived through it like I did. Most people seemed to think I was a little nuts for even caring. Maye some of the people who are taking it so hard now are people who were late to the party - they didn't act in 2000 (we had marches and everything) so they wanted Kerry to be their standard bearer so they could be part of it this time. Sorry guys. Too fucking late.

[fedupinBushcountry]

9. You hit the nail on the head

This is more about 2000, than Kerry. Back then at least we had the Senate, and Gore was the one that put the hammer down, to me that was a chance we had. Kerry had no chance this time.

[ginnyinWI]

10. on the concession

Remember Larissa (lala-rawraw?) from Raw Story coming here and saying some mysterious things, like "cut Kerry some slack, you don't know the whole story"?
I always remembered her saying that, and I'm sure there is more that we don't know, that would explain a whole lot. So I trust that he did what was best, because he has the good of the country in mind (and heart). Nobody wanted him to win more than he did, himself.

[fedupinBushcountry]

11. He did

He so wanted to unite this country and have it respected in the world again, he loves it so much and his fellow citizens. Damn :cry: