What about those who won't concede?

[Archae]

The wack jobs and liars who will scream about "voter fraud" and "illegals voting?"

[murielm99]

1. It will happen.

Then we go to court.

[k8conant]

2. They still lose...

unless they win a recount.

[Grown2Hate]

3. They can fuck RIGHT the fuck off. Elections matter. :) I don't recall Roy Moore ever

"conceding", for all the good that did him.

[musicblind]

14. He never did.

To the best of my knowledge, he still insists he won.

[musicblind]

15. Just checked. He has not conceded and still wants donations for more investigations...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/roy-moore-still-asking-for-donations/

[David__77]

4. Needn't be important.

...

[RockRaven]

5. Conceding is an act of politeness, good-sportsmanship, and conciliation. It matters not if withheld.

Anyone who does not concede is still a loser.

[Generic Brad]

6. Like Roy Moore?

I guess they remain cranky losers.

[Ms. Toad]

7. No reason to even care.

Concesson has nothing to do with who wins, certifying the elections, etc.

Just ignore them.

[beachbum bob]

8. Doesn't matter, once vote is certified...

[diva77]

9. In past elections, I would have advised that candidates not concede until a

a forensic analysis of the machines had been done and/or hand count of paper ballots with public oversight. However, after witnessing the ongoing flagrant disregard for process by rethugs, I don't know what to advise. I still think if it's neck & neck, that the Dems should fight for this - but I don't have faith that these rethug elections officials and the dark forces behind them will allow fairness to prevail.

I can say without a doubt that no evidence will be found that voter fraud is to blame for a loss/win.

[DFW]

11. The machines are Republican-built, -owned, and -programmed

At least in one instance, they got a court order declaring the results to be public knowledge but the machines to be private property, and so no forensic examination was allowed without the owners' permission, which (surprise!) was not forthcoming.

I think this was the case in Ohio in 2004, where Bush "won" the state despite all polls and exit polls saying the opposite. There was ONE machine (and only one) that actually did get forensically examined in Ohio after the 2004 election. It was out in some area far away from the big cities, and it did get forensically examined before its hard drive was collected by the owners (Diebold or ESS, I forget). In a precinct with 600 registered voters, it gave 3000 votes to Bush. The Republicans "generously" deducted 2400 votes from Bush's "margin of victory" in Ohio, but still refused to let the other machines in Ohio be forensically examined.

My friends here in Europe hadn't understood my prediction before the 2004 election (Kerry wins, Bush stays in office). Afterward, they did. They said they never would have believed that a presidential election in the USA could be corrupted like that. I said before 2000, neither did I. After 2016, they asked, "how could you let this happen AGAIN after the two Bush "victories?" How, indeed?

[diva77]

12. +1,000,000 This!!!

Our CA SOS in 2003 tried to decertify Diebold voting machines and suffered threats and was forced to resign.

[DFW]

10. First listen why.

Al Franken didn't concede in 2008 either--with good reason. If it is too close to call, then everyone has to wait until the last vote is counted.

If it is for some phony "voter fraud," especially when they are the guilty party (Georgia and Florida come to mind), then ridicule in the press is the best medicine.

[blogslut]

13. I'm more concerned if a certain race is close.

A handsome young man is running against a walking blobfish in my state and (you won't believe this) the race is pretty even!

If the handsome young man gets more votes but less than 2500, will the blobfish demand a recount or whatever?

I honestly don't know. It's been so long since this sort of thing has happened here.

[malaise]

16. Ask that Moore predator from Alabama