Gore's Date of Conceeding....Dec 13th

[Bobber]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

 

[Speedwell]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

Well, the circumstances are vastly different, but why not? There is no legal requirement that he ever concede. It impedes the transition process unnecessarily, but he can look a fool if he wants.

 

[JosephZ]

The reason Trump needs to concede now is because he's trying to overturn election results in multiple states where he trails by tens of thousands of votes rather than a single state where only a few hundred votes was key to deciding the presidency. There's no comparison.

 

[Strathos]

The 2000 election came down to Florida and whoever won that state would win the presidency. There was a very narrow margin of votes and lots of errors with ballots so recounts were required, and in the end Bush won by only 537 votes.

Biden has leads of many tens of thousands of votes in half a dozen states that would have to be overturned to give Trump the victory. Hardly a reasonable comparison.

 

[gaara4158]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

Who’s saying his refusal to concede is unconstitutional? Pathetic, wrong, and ungentlemanly, no doubt, but I haven’t seen anyone seriously suggest it’s unconstitutional to withhold a concession speech at this point in time.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

That is a good point and there are lots of other stuff to the Bush vs. Gore worth noting. Like who the media was calling "President elect" at the time. The nature of the recounts that one sided wanted vs. the other and how it was framed in the media and so on.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

Didn't matter - Gore was not the POTUS and didn't have to conduct the transition over to Bush. I don't recall Bush having any problems with the transition from the Clinton administration, do you?

Plus Gore was waiting for a legitimate court decision - from the Supreme Court, not frivolous claims that get tossed out and laughed at and scolded by lower courts' judges for being frivolous and ridiculous like all of Trump's claims are.

 

[lasthero]

That is a good point and there are lots of other stuff to the Bush vs. Gore worth noting. Like who the media was calling "President elect" at the time.

Whom might that be? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't Gore. If someone told you that, they gave you bad information.

 

[trunks2k]

Whom might that be? Because I'm pretty sure it wasn't Gore. If someone told you that, they gave you bad information.

Especially considering, IIRC, Gore never had the lead. He initially conceded and then when it became apparent how close the results in FL actually were going to be, he took his concession back. Both candidates agreed a recount was necessary and because of how close the results were it made a huge difference if any given ballot was included or not included - that exposed a lot of issues with the FL ballots themselves, etc, etc.

But yeah, that's TOTALLY the same as needing to change tens of thousands of votes across several states and refusing to concede an election clearly, without question, lost and spreading unfounded claims of massive voter fraud and undermining the basic foundations of our democracy. Totally the same.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Help me out here will somebody.

Sure, the situations were very different. You're welcome.

 

[High Fidelity]

Totally different. The 2000 race was close and confined to a single state, the 2020 election saw Trump get annihilated.

 

[DaisyDay]

The date I'm doing this OP is November 22. Some are saying it's absolutely outrageous and almost UN-Constitutional that Trump won't concede.

Help me out here will somebody.

Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th 2000. Did people say at that time the Republic was going to collapse or the sky falling? Why do they make it seem like it is now? Shouldn't Trump have at least even 21 more days to be equal to what was afforded Gore in 2000?

Gore didn't accuse Bush and his team of fraud or tell his followers that the election was rigged, did he?

 

[SimplyMe]

One other difference, the Clinton White House gave many of the things Biden is asking for, in terms of transition, to GW Bush -- such as the security briefings. Gore, as sitting VP, had most of that available to him, as well. While neither Bush nor Gore were declared as the winners, they both were allowed to get started with transition, with the help of the government, until a victor could be determined.

 

[SarahsKnight]

Especially considering, IIRC, Gore never had the lead. He initially conceded and then when it became apparent how close the results in FL actually were going to be, he took his concession back. Both candidates agreed a recount was necessary

Basically, both candidates taking and handling it like gentlemen, it sounds like. .... Instead of someone just pitching a fit and refusing to concede solely on account of ego.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Gore had a case with some actual substance to it. Team Donald can't even whip up some smoke and mirrors.

 

[Bobber]

Well, the circumstances are vastly different, but why not? There is no legal requirement that he ever concede. It impedes the transition process unnecessarily, but he can look a fool if he wants.

If he has serious doubts the election was legit it's his Constitutional duty to not concede.

 

[Bobber]

The reason Trump needs to concede now is because he's trying to overturn election results in multiple states where he trails by tens of thousands of votes rather than a single state where only a few hundred votes was key to deciding the presidency. There's no comparison.

So your premise is that because there's no possible way massive voter fraud could ever take place from state to state the President needs to step down. Wouldn't that be the same as saying because the Mighty Ship Titanic is so big there's no way one should be concerned? There's no way it could possibly be in trouble and need investigated? Why is it that you could maybe believe whole elections in other countries of the world could take place but never in the U.S. of A?

I'm not saying there was...but how do you know?

There's no comparison.

There is a comparison if nothing else that one candidate feels he has a right to challenge the results and not concede.

 

[KCfromNC]

If he has serious doubts the election was legit it's his Constitutional duty to not concede.

There's zero evidence his doubts are legitimate. If they were, his team wouldn't consistently be laughed out of the courts in their attempts to undermine the outcome.

 

[KCfromNC]

So your premise is that because there's no possible way massive voter fraud could ever take place from state to state the President needs to step down.

 

[Bobber]

One other difference, the Clinton White House gave many of the things Biden is asking for, in terms of transition, to GW Bush -- such as the security briefings. Gore, as sitting VP, had most of that available to him, as well. While neither Bush nor Gore were declared as the winners, they both were allowed to get started with transition, with the help of the government, until a victor could be determined.

But that's not what we're talking about here though right? We're talking about actually conceding.

I can actually agree with you on your points though. I can see allowing security briefings but again that's not what we're talking about here. Gore initially conceded but took it back but officially conceded Dec 13th, 2000.