Winner and loser?

It is regrettable that settling the presidential race is being characterized as something that should be acceptable only to the candidates.

What of the interests of citizens and voters? What of the millions who voted for Gore and may have contributed time and money as well because they thought vitally important issues were at stake? Calls for Gore to concede ignore the will of voters who did not, and do not, want Bush to destroy their Social Security system, or take steps to eliminate abortion rights, or prevent campaign reform, or make the very rich enormously richer.

Candidate Gore should not turn his back on these voters and concede the election merely to appease those who have no stomach for conflict. Throwing in the towel cheapens the importance of voting. It would send the message that elections are merely light parlor games designed more to entertain than to decide important matters of rights, justice and opportunity. Yet, those who urge surrender are doing it in the name of what is good for the country. What rubbish.

Both candidates have a moral obligation to press the matter to its legal limits. Al Gore must appeal to the Florida Supreme Court if Florida’s secretary of state refuses to accept the results of recounts. Similarly, if candidate Bush prevails after the results of recounts are included, and after a new election in West Palm Beach County (the only fair way to resolve that matter), then he owes it to his millions of supporters to press his case as far as the laws allow.

If either candidate fails to use all lawful means to establish the victor, I think the American people should resent not only the winner, but the loser as well.

Clyde MacDonald

Hampden