Iowa Democrat will challenge election results with House

[AleksS]

51. Yeah, people LOOOOVE quitters.

Fighting to the end only helps this candidate and Democrats in general, whether or not it ends up seating them. It certainly doesn't give them a worse chance of winning now, and absolutely does help the brands of this candidate and D's in general in the future and elsewhere; any help in the "strength" department is desperately needed.

Quitting, giving up, wimping out: A) never won anybody anything, and B) never gained anyone any support, admiration or followers.

There is literally no downside to fighting, and significant upside--win or lose.

Looking like a fighter never hurt a candidate.
People love a pugilist.

Best way to end a political career: be perceived as weak, a wimp, a quitter, and make sure your constituency knows you're always ready to roll over and give up for them.

Still haven't seen the downside to this candidate fighting to the very end. You've alleged it will give "trump a field day" which he would have anyways, so no loss there. You've alleged it's bad optics, which is certainly untrue, given that the optics of strength are always better than the optics of being a quitter.

To bring up Al Gore again, some folks say that it was a doggone sigh that killed his chances. That's even neglecting his early concession in 2000. How about the infamous George HW "wimp factor," the damaging attacks on Kerry as less than heroic, and the attacks on Hillary's health as a proxy for weakness? Perceived weakness kills.

There's no downside to people seeing you and saying: Yup! That's my guy! (Or girl!) S/He'll fight for me every way s/he can!

Which one's a famous motto:

Never give up!

or:

Give up, it's not that important anyways...