As the nation concludes its third week of The Great Indecision, we offer a sampling of recent editorial opinion from some little-heard-from places around the country.
Give it up, Al. A man you clearly have little respect for will be the next president, like it or not. All your knowledge, your experience, your two decades of preparing for the most powerful job on earth were not enough. Half the country didn't want a know-it-all, despite the record prosperity for which you could have taken a contributory bow, had you not tried to distance yourself from Bill Clinton.
Yes, more Americans voted for you than for George W. Bush. Yes, you might have carried Florida, if some voters hadn't been confused by their ballots. To lose by 500-odd votes out of more than 6 million cast in the Sunshine State has to be heartbreaking.
But let's be honest. If you drag the country through another round of court challenges over the Florida process or count, the sore loser label Republicans are applying to you - inappropriately at this point - will stick.
MIAMI COUNTY REPUBLIC
Paola, Kansas
Both candidates, and the nation, would be better off in the long run if they kept their mouths shut or found themselves capable of expressing a little humanity, humility, or generosity of spirit.
The uncertain isn't the problem. The problem is what the politicians and commentators are doing to fill up news space and air time while the contest plays itself out.
BOONE NEWS-REPUBLICAN
Boone, Iowa
It's time.
Vice President Al Gore had good reason to seek recounts in certain Florida counties where the initial ballot count just wasn't right. That process was allowed and was carried out as completely as possible, considering the time constraints at hand. Now it's time for Gore to concede. ...
If he and George W. Bush continue to duke it out in courts, ranging from district to Supreme, its true the pendulum could eventually swing the other way considering the relative handful of votes that separate the two at present.
But that process could drag on well past the Electoral College voting date of Dec. 18, and even well past Inauguration Day, Jan. 20. As wise old Walter Mears, a 40-year political observer, pointed out in a column last week, the weeks between Election Day and Inauguration Day are important ones for a president-elect. There is crucial work to be done - choosing a cabinet, familiarizing oneself with the public at large ...
It is to the point now where the nation may suffer if this stalemate continues. Not to mention the fact that it's getting embarrassing. The longer it goes on, the less respect we, and the world, are likely to have for either man. And respect for the presidency is something we need to restore at this point in American history.
This is not to say that the events of the past two weeks haven't had their value. We've learned our good - but flawed - election process needs streamlining, new technology, better supervision. Not just in Florida, but across the land. And what a remarkable turn of events this has been to watch. It is understandably extremely difficult for Gore to consider concession with aides, Democratic heavyweights, and a bevy of lawyers urging him to fight on. It will mean turning his back on many years - and hundreds of millions of dollars worth - of work, preparation, and campaigning.
But as any good poker player will tell you, knowing when to walk away from the game is as important as knowing when to ante up and stay in the hand - for, most importantly, the sake of one's reputation. It's time for Gore to walk away.
LaPORTE HERALD-ARGUS
</i>LaPorte, Ind.
Idaho voted about 69 percent for George W. Bush, the highest in the nation. Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or an ugly thing?
State Democrats, whatever their virtues, have to deal with carrying the enormous burden of the Clinton/Gore administration, with its associated scandals, broken promises, and skewed perspective on American values. And they have to deal with the platform and policies of the national Democratic Party, most of which is of little or no interest to North Idaho residents, if not outright repellent.
Nationally, Democrats have made it no secret that they've written off places like Kansas, Montana, and yes, Idaho. ... We just don't have enough electoral votes to interest them. Their disdain for rural voters shows in the programs they push and the priorities they assign. It's mostly urban issues and foreign affairs, with a smattering of favors thrown to various racial and ethnic voting blocs.
This is a sad state of affairs for the Democratic Party, once the home of progressive populists who rose from the Farm Belt, the Bible Belt, and the Rust Belt to champion the welfare of the average citizen.
The national Dems justdon't get it. They no longer seem to understand rural Americans, preferring instead to chase votes in heavily populated urban city-states and put one group against another, siding with whoever can deliver the most ballots.
BONNER COUNTY DAILY BEE
Sand Point, Idaho
The closeness of the presidential race between Vice President Al Gore and Texas Governor George W. Bush for Florida's 25 electoral votes warranted a recount pending the outcome of the absentee ballots, in particular the ''overseas military ballots.''
But, the problem is stickier than that. In any election, if I told you that the counting of the votes was under the supervision of one of the candidates' brothers, which candidate would you bet on?
George W.'s brother Jeb happens to be the governor of Florida. Because of this, Jeb Bush has taken a back seat in his state's election process this time around. It's a rather easy move because, similar to Nebraska, Florida's secretary of state normally presides over the state's election process. Trouble is, Florida's secretary of state, Katherine Harris, also happens to be cochairman of George W.'s campaign. Wow! And when she attempted to block the inclusion of hand-counted ballots during the recounting process, the Supreme Court stepped in and overturned her decision.
It must be assumed that the entire supervision of Florida's voting process is doing its utmost to attain complete accuracy. Still, it is the appearance of legitimacy that has to be maintained. And Florida must assure the rest of the nation of this, if the next president is going to have the sort of credibility needed to govern properly.
TIMES-HERALD
</i>Alliance, Nebraska
So we don't know, for sure, who will be the 43rd President of the United States. It doesn't really matter; our vaunted American economy seems to find gridlock in Washington pretty benign - much more benign than if ahead were an activist, mandated administration with an itch to spend all that surplus. Whether it's President George W. Bush or President Al Gore, the Congress will be so split politically that nothing radical is likely to happen on the big-spending front, and that always is beneficially viewed by the financial movers and shakers. (Except, maybe, the social democrats always seeking more federal funds.)
RUIDOSA NEWS
</i>Ruidoso, N.M.
Bottom line: This too will pass. The people really heated up about this thing are the hard-core Republicans on one side and the hard-core Democrats on the other side.
I don't want to spoil anybody's pity and whine party, but most of us are somewhere in the middle. Whoever is shacking up on Pennsylvania Avenue in DC will not greatly affect your life.
Why? Because this is America, made up of extremely strong individuals who, for the most part, do things for themselves. The vast majority of us don't depend on men or political parties to lead us into the future. We depend on us.
OSGOOD JOURNAL
</i>Versailles, Ind.
Why is it ... that banks can transfer billions of dollars from Hong Kong to New York overnight without overlooking a single dime, but we apparently can't count the far smaller number of votes in a presidential election with any kind of accuracy?
Is the explanation something as simple as the fact that money is important, while votes are not? Ballots appear, ballots vanish, ballots are miscounted and recounted - whose interest does it serve to have elections calculated by ''fuzzy math''?
I do know one thing. It's not in the interest of the citizens. ...
Does anyone at all doubt that, were the positions of George W. Bush and Al Gore to be reversed, each side would immediately adopt the arguments of the other - all the while claiming to be interested only in selfless service to the public good? What unmitigated hogwash.
As the politicians and their lackey pundits preen and posture and spout moralistic nonsense, its useful to keep a Nietzsche quote in mind: ''The party man is of necessity a liar.''
THE NEWS PROGRESSIVE
</i>Sullivan, Ill.
