Well done, John Kerry

[tar heel]

dmadman -- I think you're wrong about there being no division in 1992. I think that is exactly when the division started. There was a huge effort to "get" Clinton from practically the day he took office, and I'm talking way before Monica. These people, some of them serving in Congress, were not interested in the best interests of the nation -- they wanted to get this guy who had won with so few votes. Limbaugh types made fun of him like he was Michael Jackson. Americans stood by and let it happen. I think that whole experience opened up an "anything goes" attitude among many people that led to the nasty stuff from both sides -- not just from the campaigns but from regular folks on the DIS Boards.

I didn't vote for Bush, but he's the president of our country and I will respect him and his office. People who think it's appropriate to try to turn our president, whoever that person is, into a laughing stock don't get any respect from me.

 

[mallcat]

A hard fought campaign. I respect Kerry tremendously for not putting the country through more turmoil like in '00. No more name-calling and bashing now from either side. Let's end this with dignity and pull our country together as one nation. The world needs to know that we are all still Americans and just because we don't always agree, we are one strong unit. Dirty campaign, but classy behavior from both sides at the end.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by tar heel
dmadman -- I think you're wrong about there being no division in 1992. I think that is exactly when the division started. There was a huge effort to "get" Clinton from practically the day he took office, and I'm talking way before Monica. These people, some of them serving in Congress, were not interested in the best interests of the nation -- they wanted to get this guy who had won with so few votes. Limbaugh types made fun of him like he was Michael Jackson. Americans stood by and let it happen. I didn't vote for Bush, but he's the president of our country and I will respect him and his office. People who think it's appropriate to try to turn our president, whoever that person is, into a laughing stock don't get any respect from me.

I agree the division started back then. It started after GWH Bush screwed up his re-election. My point is, it seems some seem to think there is this great division and Bush doesn't have a mandate, when in 96 people were saying Clinton had a resounding victory. Bush has more support in 2004 than Clinton ever did, from a numbers perspective. I'm just saying, there is not a huge case for this great division argument.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by tar heel
Not quite. Several presidents have gotten much larger percentages of the votes -- that guy named Ronald Reagan, for example. Because of the increase in our population and the large voter turnout, John Kerry also got more votes than most of our previous presidents.

Which blows the "larger turn out/good for Dems" theory. And also blows the "youth vote" theory as well. Where were all these cell phone toting youths that supposedly falling through the polling cracks?

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by dmadman43
I also agree with Dawn on the divided country issue. Bush got more votes than any President in history and he got >50% of the popular vote. Hard to make the divided case. Sorry, but is seem that much of the nation DOES support Bush. As painful as it is for Kerry supporters to admit, sounds like a mandate to me.

It's important to remember that Bush received more votes than any other president in history, but John Kerry also received more votes than any other opposing candidate in history (and more than many presidents). Why? Because the US is more populated and there were more people voting than at any other time in history. So, goes to figure that the numbers would be higher across the board.

The important point is the percentage. Bush did receive more than 50% of the popular vote. While, by definition, this means that "most" of the voters did indeed vote for him, it's by no means a solid show of unbridaled support. Just because you have more than half the votes doesn't mean the country isn't divided.

 

[Laura]

Originally posted by dmadman43
Which blows the "larger turn out/good for Dems" theory. And also blows the "youth vote" theory as well. Where were all these cell phone toting youths that supposedly falling through the polling cracks?

Good question.

 

[snarfer1]

Originally posted by Cebhfhionn
ITA that it is very classy of John Kerry to concede the election. I DID vote for him and am sorry that he didn't win. However, I don't think that Bush getting the popular vote as much as he did is because people are crazy about him, I think that people were just unsure of Kerry and picked the lesser of 2 evils.

Actually, one of the exit polls (No I do not remember which one, and I am 'estimating' the numbers said something like:

Kerry voters were 60% in favor of Kerry and 39% against Bush, while Bush supporters were 85% for Bush and 14% against Kerry.

I am suprised and pleased that Kerry conceded so quickly. I really expected the Gore legacy to expand.

and of course hats off to jrydberg for saying it so well!

-Tony

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by dmadman43
Well, call me a crumudgeon, but it was just a much a statistical impossibility to win Ohio last night at midnight as it was today at noon. So, why didn't he concede last night?

OK ... you're a curmudgeon!

I don't know ... maybe it was late, they were tired, the totals were close, and without Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio in, everyone thought, "You know ... babies won't die if we don't concede tonight. Let's get some rest and check with Ohio in the morning, just to be sure." No one ever wants to admit defeat, and it must be significantly harder to do so after all the time, effort, money, passion and everything else that goes into a presidential campaign. I think the guy was tired and didn't want to call Bush until he was able to take the time to consider every option and then find the words to say, "Dude, you won ... congratulations" with sincerity as opposed to fatigue. The guy is, after all, human.

 

[Claudia1]

Excellent post!

In one classy act, he demonstrated a commitment to preserve our system of elections and also showed tremendous character. He put the American people above himself. Not many would do that.

My opinion of him skyrocketed when I heard the news.

Bravo, Mr. Kerry, bravo!

 

[rcyannacci]

Thanks jrydberg for the OP- well stated (as always).

I had my 2 hours of mourning, but now I'm over it and ready to move ahead. My political battles are about more than just one election.

Congratulations to President Bush and his supporters. As a true sign of concession, I should point out that this is the first time I've actually typed the word "president" in front of Bush's name. So that was a big step for me.

I would like to also thank those who've been so classy on the boards this morning. Those who are on the attack are really wreaking some emotional havoc, and I'm glad you all aren't a part of that.

 

[EsmeraldaX]

Originally posted by jrydberg
I appreciate the fact that John Kerry has chosen to concede the election when he had every right to put the nation through more indecision. He is a good and decent man. I didn't vote for him, but I have a great deal of respect for him for doing the honorable thing today.

To the Kerry supporters, sorry the election didn't meet your expectations. But you are still my neighbors and friends regardless of how you vote (yes, even those Dunkin Donuts supporters out there!). Don't hang your head. Stand up tall. Be proud of your vote and your candidate. Just because Kerry lost the election doesn't mean your vote didn't have an impact on the next four years.

To the Bush supporters, congratulations! But a word of caution -- don't read into this. This was a very close election. Much of the nation does not support President Bush. I hope President Bush follows John Kerry's lead in taking steps to bring the country together more.

My thoughts exactly. Thank you for posting this.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by WDSearcher
OK ... you're a curmudgeon!

I don't know ... maybe it was late, they were tired, the totals were close, and without Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio in, everyone thought, "You know ... babies won't die if we don't concede tonight. Let's get some rest and check with Ohio in the morning, just to be sure." No one ever wants to admit defeat, and it must be significantly harder to do so after all the time, effort, money, passion and everything else that goes into a presidential campaign. I think the guy was tired and didn't want to call Bush until he was able to take the time to consider every option and then find the words to say, "Dude, you won ... congratulations" with sincerity as opposed to fatigue. The guy is, after all, human.

I would buy that theory if he hadn't sent Edwards out to say they were comtemplating suing if the votes were really close in Ohio. (I know he didn't say that in so many words, but that's essentially what he was saying)