Letter: Why doesn’t Bush concede the election?

Saturday, Nov. 11, 2000 | 3:49 a.m.

I've been watching the coverage regarding the Palm Beach voters. Why is it that most commentators believe that if the count in Florida does not change, that it is up to Al Gore to step forward and concede the election to George W. Bush. Why isn't anybody addressing the possibility that Bush should step up and concede to Gore?

Let's assume for a moment that there are enough Palm Beach voters who mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan, while intending to vote for Gore, to change the outcome in Florida. Nobody is arguing that these people, mostly seniors, are lying about their confusion. Why would anybody who voted for Buchanan want to change their mind and swing the election to Gore? This would mean that Gore had both the popular vote and the majority of voters in Florida.

How can Bush, in good conscience, accept the presidency knowing that he only won because a group of seniors made a mistake? Shouldn't he come forward and say that he accepts the will of the people and he wants the people's votes to be correctly reflected in the final analysis?

Obviously I am a Gore supporter. But it boils down to this: If Gore is elected it would be an accurate reflection of what the people wanted; if Bush is elected it would be simply on a technicality.

If the vote of the Palm Beach voters would not change the outcome in Florida, I say let the Electoral College stand.

ELLIOTT DAVIS