No need to worry

On Nov. 8, a Boston Globe editorial read, “If Ralph Nader had not been in the race, Al Gore would today be preparing for the presidency.” It might also have read, “If Bill Clinton had not so disappointed us with his personal behavior…” or “If the vice president had been more convincing, and less condescending…” or “If bipartisan designers of the Palm Beach ballot had been more thoughtful…” There are many factors which have contributed to the confusion surrounding our recent presidential election. Nader was a significant element in the equation, but by no means the only one.

The Constitution, and cooler heads, will prevail. Meanwhile, let’s remember that both Gore and George W. Bush received more popular votes than did Clinton in 1992 and 1996. Whatever the outcome, there is no need to worry about an election tainted by absence of mandate.

Now that our wonderful but cumbersome system has delivered this unusual situation, there is no need to worry that a few weeks’ delay in the selection of our chief executive will damage the Republic, or its capacity to exercise leadership in the international community. The outside world never understood why Watergate was such a big deal for us, and it didn’t understand the crisis of confidence surrounding Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky. We eventually will have a president and he will work nicely into the challenges of leading this country, within the context of the powers and limitations of that office. Robert Sargent Sargentville