‘Accepting the results,’ Gore style

Bill Greener III

What feigned outrage over the comments from Donald Trump concerning “accepting the results” of the coming election! To harken back to the days of another Clinton, I guess it depends on what the definition of “accepting” is.

One can say a great many things about the election of 2000. What cannot be said, or at least cannot be said with a straight face, is that Al Gore and the Democrats “accepted” the results of Election Day in any ordinary sense of the term. They surely contested those results for weeks and weeks. It was not until mid-December when the Supreme Court of the United States rendered its judgment that Al Gore “accepted” the outcome.

Between Election Day and mid-December, Al Gore and the Democrats fought tooth and nail to overturn the outcome. Among other things, this entailed contesting the decision of the secretary of state of Florida to certify the results in that key and determinative state.

When Florida’s secretary of state said that George Bush had won, Al Gore and Democrats did more than just pursue legal avenues to reverse that situation. They attacked and did everything possible to demonize Katherine Harris as an evil partisan who would refuse to allow an honest count. Memory does not serve to recall any editorials in the New York Times or Washington Post criticizing Gore or his supporters for “undermining faith and confidence in our democratic institutions and its elected leaders.”

Quite the contrary. Earlier this month, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton nodded their heads in agreement at a rally in Florida to the chants of “you won.”

Of course this view that Gore actually won totally ignores that when the Times and Post went back and counted the ballots in question precisely as Gore desired, the result was...George W. Bush still the winner. You can probably count on your fingers the number of Americans who remember this one-day story versus the countless left-leaning partisans who maintain to this very day that Al Gore was cheated.

By what logic can Democrats contest the outcome of a presidential election to the point of it requiring a decision of the Supreme Court to get resolution but to demand that a Republican candidate promise that what happens on Election Day requires the Republican candidate to go along with the results that night? Even for liberals, this is a new level of hypocrisy and double standards.

Donald Trump, and any other Republican official of consequence, will extend the discussion of what happens on Election Day in 2016 no further than Al Gore did in 2000. If the situation goes to the point of a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, that decision will be accepted.

The mainstream media will likely continue to portray what Trump is saying on “accepting the results” as being something totally beyond what has ever been said or done at any other point in history. Of course, anyone with a memory or regard for an honest conversation knows quite differently.

Bill Greener is acting chairman of 60 Plus Association. This has been adapted from InsideSources.