Ads are not an endorsement by the blog author.

The Other Shoe

Public Journal
 Back to Journal Archives | Subscribe to Alerts Alerts Subscribe to Alerts | Feeds
< On Tuesday, Don't
Monday, November 1, 2004
Wolcott? Isn't th >
Wednesday, November 3, 2004
November 2004
Boo!
Nsuo Raspberry Cola: Tastes great...
Without Feathers
Dodging bullets left and right
Must be somethin' in the wolfbane
Everything old is blown up again
Rock this vote
Cats & dogs, living together?
This day in history: November 24, 1963
It looks more like Mae West to me
I got yer courage right here
This day in history: November 22, 1963
What the...?
Fighting the Battle of Fallujah
Avert your eyes...quick!
This day in history: November 17, 1973
Count every vote!
No good deed goes unpunished
Rice to State Now Official!
On a personal note
Humbled and honored
The nutcracker
Funny, he doesn't look all that ol' to me
Interesting times
Fascinating
Good riddance
Veterans Day, 2004
Arafat dead
Can't we all just get along, 2004 edition
Goodbye John Ashcroft; Hello Larry Thompson?
The Night of Broken Glass
Intolerance, brought to you by Powder Milk Biscuits
He, Pee-Wee
Next: The Battle of Fallujah Begins in Earnest
Hurray for Captain Spaulding
The 2004 electoral map
Welly, welly well
Wolcott? Isn't that the Old English word for "ponce"?
I thought this guy wanted to be the next President...
On Tuesday, Don't Forget to...darn it...what was it?
Last Call!
« November 2004 Archive
Wednesday, November 3, 2004

I thought this guy wanted to be the next President...


Democratic Presidential Nominee John Kerry (R) walks with his wife Teresa Heinz Kerry to cast his vote at the state house in Boston, Massachusetts on November 2, 2004. Ending an 'amazing' journey, Democratic challenger John Kerry cast his own vote on Tuesday, urged Americans to go to the polls and said he was very confident he had made the case for new U.S. leadership. (Brian Snyder/Reuters)

...but now he's looking more like the next Al Gore...

...without the added charm of having won the popular vote.

Perhaps by 2008 the Democratic Party will have figured out one of two things. How to win a presidential election...or how to lose one with a little grace and at least a shred of dignity.

Perhaps.

UPDATE: Written Wednesday night; I agree with one of the comments below that Kerry's concession speech was handled gracefully. Indeed, the decision to concede was a wise and dignified gesture. Senator Edwards' remarks, on the other hand, were in my view neither graceful nor diginified. It is my opinion that is is very good for our country that, come January, we will not have John Edwards to kick around anymore.

 

-posted by Charlie Eklund 



ceklundesq at 7:14:00 AM CST Blog about this entry
This entry has 2 comments: (Add your own)
  • #2 Comment from sharkie412 
    11/3/04 2:22 PM Permalink
    I must have been watching a different channel. I thought that yes the democrats leaned heavily on the exit polls, but a Kerry aide did confess that yes they were extremely wrong with that. In his speech to concede victory to Bush, Kerry talked of how the votes were binding and there was no possible way to win and is now conceding victory to Bush.
    This country is so divided right now. Kerry has urged his supporters to find common ground with our President. I don't see how this doesn't have a little grace and diginity to it. There were some mistakes made on both campaigns. This year the popular vote reflected the electoral college results. Remember if we didn't have an electoral college and went just with a popular vote, Bush wouldn't have won in 2000.
    If people are going to continue to point fingers and be sore losers and winners...there isn't going to be any hope of uniting a divided country. I hope that everyone republican or democrat or whatever they may be will be working to unite the country...not push away the chance because they are too stupid to see that we are divided and need everyone to take a step to find that common ground.
  • #1 Comment from imposterx8 
    11/3/04 9:47 AM Permalink
    I'm astounded by the Dems reaction to the voting numbers not matching with the exit polls.  They seem to think that the exit polls should be a more accurate predictor of the vote than the actual votes themselves.  There's already conspiracy theories cropping up.  How's this for a simple explanation?  The exit polls were wrong.   That's probably due to faulty methodology, but I suppose some people might have not told the truth to the pollsters.  Whatever the reason, it shouldn't be that hard to understand that the votes themselves are binding, not the exit polls.