Kerry Calls Bush to Concede

…says AP, via Fox.

Actually, forget Fox: AP says so directly.

Comments

[crimethink]

Link?

[Matthew Cromer]

Good for him.

Andrew Sullivan deserves kudos for his post last night / this morning too.

[Brinck]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137486,00.html

[Eric II]

Anyone running a pool on how long it takes for Powell to submit his resignation letter?

[Syd]

Kerry shouldn't have conceded. Those voters in Ohio had a right to have their votes counted.

[joe]

This is the man you snubbed.

A real man, a man of honor and dignity.

[eponymous]

there are down ballot matters and the record to think of, so all votes
will be counted as usual (even some typical dem fraud, like that which
gave kerry PA by a fifth of the margin by which bush won ohio

this just means that there won't be a media circus, market doubt and
drawn out fantasies on the part of kerry voters while we await the
inevitable with respect to the presidential race in ohio

[Jose Ortega y Gasset]

By "you," Joe, I expect you mean the over 58 million Americans who voted for Bush. Certainly, the modest number of regular H&R posters had no measurable effect on the election.

[Maurkov]

I read the headline as, "Kerry Calls on Bush to Concede." Time to take my reality pills.

[joe]

Yes, Jose, I don't attribute this error to Reason regulars, Reason writers, libertarians, or the like.

[Grummun]

there are down ballot matters and the record to think of, so all votes will be counted as usual (even some typical dem fraud, like that which gave kerry PA by a fifth of the margin by which bush won ohio

Speaking of fraud, what happened to the Drudge piece that asserted some electronic voting machines in Philly came 'pre-loaded' with Dem votes? All smoke, no fire?

G

[Jason Bourne]

Grummun,

Kerry cruised in Pennsylvania; a few pre-loaded votes (if that actually happened) didn't win the election there. Maybe they needed to pre-load some votes in Ohio. 🙂

[Hydroman]

Did ya hear Edwards consession speach----He`ll be back! Next time Hilary will serve him a heaping helping of wupass.

[joe]

I don't understand whey everyone assumes Hillary is the big power in the Democratic Party. She's certainly in the top tier, but no more so than a couple dozen other people.

You didn't see Democrats predicting the nomination of Jesse Helms or Trent Lott. It's a mistake to assume that, because a certain figure is the primary object of your side's hate, that she must be the other side's ideal.

[SR]

joe, people here are probably predicting that because so many vocal Democrats look favorably on a Hillary-in-'08 candidacy. If there's large scale opposition to her in the party, it's very quite.

[the bitter truth]

This is the man you snubbed.

A real man, a man of honor and dignity.

A man who realized a bit quicker than Al Gore that no one like a sore loser.

[Mark Bahner]

"A man who realized a bit quicker than Al Gore that no one like a sore loser."

A completely different situation. Al Gore could easily and with very good justification claim that, had everyone's vote been tallied according to what they *wanted,* he would have been elected President.

[joe]

Yes, Gore faced a very different situation.

This time, Bush won fair and square. A little dirty in his tactics, but a completely legitimate victory at the ballot box.

SR, I talk to and read quite a lot of Democrats. There is very little "large scale" opposition to Hillary, it's true. But there certainly isn't any overwhelming enthusiasm, either. For the most part, Democrats like her just fine, but in no way is she a shining star, or a presumptive anything. If she ran for the nomination in 08, she'd probably be starting off pretty even with Gore, Kerry, Bayh, and Ford, and behind Obama.

This idea that she's the presumptive Democratic nominee is an illusion from fevered Republican brains. The Clintons just plumb make those people crazy.