Why did both Gore and Kerry think fighting for the

[saracat]

Presidency would be "bad for the nation'? Kerry also cited "a protracted court battle " as a negative. How is either of those scenarios worse for the nation than Bush? Explain that someone please. It appears that nothing in this nation is worth fighting for by any of our standard bearers! The repugs thought the WH was worth going to court over. What is wrong with the Democrats? 200,00 Lawyers and we can't make something up if necessary?

[LynzM]

1. I have to wonder

:tinfoilhat: If some sort of 'gun was at his back' scenario is playing out... that there is some sort of pressure that we are not privy to. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense that he promised to fight so hard for us, to raise all that money, organize all those lawyers, and then just back down from the fight...

[Career Prole]

4. I myself have been wondering if perhaps he didn't get inside info from

a disgruntled ex-CIAer or something that if bushco got in that he was going down and going down hard. Maybe Plamegate? The war?

[BeatleBoot]

2. In 2000, the vote was so close that...

a recount was automatic according to Fla law.

This time it wasn't as close in OH...

[splat]

3. Iraq election?

Just speculating, but maybe he was persuaded it would be a "bad example" for Iraq if we had a messy election.

[saracat]

11. Kerry sacrifice the US for Iraq? Don't be silly.

[Mira]

5. Why did both Gore and Kerry think fighting for the

To me, Kerry today made a wise choice. I think he knows the corruption and probably serious and widespread voter fraud that was perpetrated can't be found while the country is again in limbo. It was 32 days of it with Gore, when the fact that evildoings happened were way more obvious than they are this time.

In limbo people are on edge and markets and the dollar get hurt. We are at war, our kids are dying.

I hope they can find the proof of what happened this time behind the scenes.

We need to stay glued, our organizations and commitment is strong.
We are up against serious well organized fraud, I think.

[saracat]

8. I still don't see how it is worse than Bush.

[luaneryder]

10. Because it isn't.

[diamondsoul]

9. I'm hanging on to ONE thing-

Just one. That the Congressional Black Caucus will again challenge the results of this election in Congress and this time Senator Kerry, or one of the others will actually SIGN the fuckin' thing!

That was what made me lose any and ALL respect for Gore, the fact that he personally advised the Senators not to sign.

At the moment my feeling is that both of these men have plainly shown that the integrity of the founding concept "One person, one vote" is meaningless to them and, by extension, so are the wrongfully disenfranchised voters.

[CrashBurnRepeat]

6. I heard via CNN

that he was under pressure from party leaders to concede, especially kennedy who's own brother was the victor in an election where nixon conceded early when he had a good case for an appeal.....

just what I heard...

[alvis]

7. You know what's bad for the nation?

dubya. I can't imagine how fighting this would be worse than dubya.

[JFW]

12. yep

..

[Trillo]

13. My answers:

A Civil War history buff once told me that war was primarily fought to keep the (U)union 'whole'. The word "Union" is meant here in both a capitalized and non-capitalized sense.

To me, this is what the phrase "bad for the nation" has always implied: severe division. With the American public's fascination with the latest celebrity court case, a "protracted court battle" could easily inflame divisions at home and break many things we hold dear.

I suppose the next answer is one based ultimately in fear--a powerful motivator. How is this is worse than GWB being in office? It's clear when the alternative potential is for the public "division" to reach critical mass.

Of course there are dangers aplenty anyway, not the least of which is when habitually conceding becomes a pattern the corrupt notice then exploit.

[saracat]

14. I would rather Division than Dubya!

But it isn't up to me.