Allen Concedes In Virginia
Senator George Allen, displaying a class and grace that should shame Al Gore, has conceded defeat rather than subject the state of Virginia to endless recount and recriminations.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Republican Sen. George Allen has conceded defeat to Democrat Jim Webb, sealing the Democrats' control of both houses of Congress and concluding a dramatic fall for a one-time top-tier presidential contender.
Webb, a former Republican and Navy secretary under President Reagan, claimed victory early Wednesday after election returns showed him with a narrow lead of about 7,200 votes out of 2.37 million ballots cast.
Allen chose not to demand a recount after initial canvassing of the results failed to significantly alter Webb's lead, the adviser said. Virginia has had two statewide recounts in modern history, resulting in changes of only 37 votes last year and 113 votes in 1989.
Thank you, Senator Allen. Well done.
UPDATE:
Allen said the "owners of government have spoken and I respect their decision."
"The Bible teaches us there is a time and place for everything, and today I called and congratulated Jim Webb," he said.
UPDATE: John McIntyre concurs, calling Allen and Burns examples of statesmanship and patriotism. He has some harsh words for those lawyer up to retain power (recognize anyone, Algore?)
Politicians who deliberately and cynically undermine the faith in our elective process do great damage to this country for cheap short-term political gain. Respect for the rule of law and the willingness to live with heartbreaking defeats is critical to the long-term well being of our democratic system of government.
UPDATE: Allah has the video. Despite the mendaciousness of the left, Allen could have called the recount, the state, by law would have paid for it and yet he did the right thing. Links are in comments to Virginia election law.
By Kathy, November 9, 2006 @ 5:35 pm
Politicians who deliberately and cynically undermine the faith in our elective process do great damage to this country for cheap short-term political gain. Respect for the rule of law and the willingness to live with heartbreaking defeats is critical to the long-term well being of our democratic system of government.
Really. Even if the elective process is being manipulated? Candidates should accept defeat even if there is evidence of massive fraud?
Are you really suggesting with this quote what you appear to be suggesting — that faith in a process is more important than whether that faith is misplaced?
In the Virginia Senate race there were no significant allegations of fraud on either side, even though the results were so close. Allen conceded defeat because the number of votes between him and Webb was not within the percentage needed to have the state pay for a recount. Allen would have had to pay for it himself. And given that in the past, such recounts only came up with a few hundred votes difference, not somewhere between 7,000 and 8,000, Allen wisely decided to concede.
By Gaius, November 9, 2006 @ 5:49 pm
Thanks for dropping by with a talking point that is soooooo easily proven to be a lie.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+24.2-802
E. Costs of the recount shall be assessed against the counties and cities comprising the election district when (i) the candidate petitioning for the recount is declared the winner; (ii) the petitioners in a recount of a referendum win the recount; or (iii) there was between the candidate apparently nominated or elected and the candidate petitioning for the recount a difference of not more than one-half of one percent of the total vote cast for the two such candidates as determined by the State Board or electoral board prior to the recount.
Vote total shows 0.38%. Have a really nice day there, Kathy.
By Kathy, November 9, 2006 @ 6:19 pm
From AP:
“Allen chose not to demand a recount when initial canvassing of the results failed to significantly alter Webb’s lead.”
From the WaPo:
“As of this morning, Allen trailed Webb by 7,484 votes. Republican sources said Allen had concluded that no amount of recounting would change the outcome, but members of the senator’s campaign staff would not publicly confirm his intentions.
[...]
With the vote tally so close, Allen noted that he had the legal right to ask for a recount, a procedure he said could drag on until Christmas.”
So you’re right that the state would have paid; my bad on that.
Since you did not dispute my other “talking points,” I assume you realized they were correct. Those other “talking points” were: (1) that Allen decided against the recount because he knew he would lose it — meaning he was not being statesmanlike, just pragmatic; and (2) that you were indeed suggesting that candidates should not dispute the results of elections when there is evidence of massive fraud, because it’s more important for the public to “have faith” in the process than it is for the process itself to deserving of that faith.
By Kathy, November 9, 2006 @ 6:20 pm
Last line above should have been: “…than it is for the process itself to BE deserving of that faith.”
By Gaius, November 9, 2006 @ 6:24 pm
No I don’t concede your talking points. It was quite enough to nail the one, thanks.
By Kathy, November 9, 2006 @ 7:04 pm
It was the only one you *could* nail. You *can’t* nail the other two; you can only refuse to concede them. And that’s fine with me.
By Gaius, November 9, 2006 @ 7:10 pm
Allen did the right thing. But that is not enough. You have to trash the man and cheapen it. You have to engage in belittling what he did, because that makes you feel like you won something. Your “evidence” is made up of regurgitated talking ponits from other people regurgitating someone’s talking points. and quite frankly, this is the last time I bother to answer one of your tedious, long-winded and tiresome comments.
By syn, November 9, 2006 @ 8:08 pm
Gaius, even when they’re winning they still must move the goalpost.
By Quilly Mammoth, November 9, 2006 @ 8:17 pm
As opposed to Al Gore? Clip Clop, Clip Clop.
By Pug, November 9, 2006 @ 8:44 pm
Gore was behind by just over 500 votes or so in a state with three times as many ballots cast as in Virginia amid allegations of massive irregularities in the voting. It was a different situation.
Perhaps, given the doubt about what really happened in Florida and the fact that Gore won the popular vote, the dignified thing to do would have been for George W. Bush to concede and allow the popularly elected candidate to take the office.
Anyway, despite your unfounded bashing of Al Gore, it was a gracious exit by former Senator George Allen.
By Arlo, November 10, 2006 @ 10:36 am
Nobody thinks Allen would have conceded if the number was 537, right?
By mokus, November 10, 2006 @ 1:55 pm
Let’s not forget Algore called GWB and conceded the election.
Then, after he had second thoughts, he took his concession back and called for selective recounts in areas where he expected to do well. Then he sent in his teams of lawyers to invalidate military votes and try to steal the election.
It can’t be disputed, Algore was in favor of concession before he was against it.