let<u+2019>s try a thought experiment. suppose that during one of the october 2000 presidential debates, vice president al gore had been asked the following question: <u+201c>do you make the .<u+00a0>.<u+00a0>. commitment that you<u+2019>ll absolutely accept the result of the election?<u+201d> moderator chris wallace put that query to donald trump last night . now for the experimental part: imagine gore giving a completely truthful answer<u+2014>that is, an answer that not only reflected his honest intent but accurately anticipated how he would respond to various scenarios, including the one that actually obtained. it seems to us that gore<u+2019>s hypothetical answer would be similar to trump<u+2019>s actual one<u+2014>not the long back-and-forth in which trump enumerated complaints including media bias, fbi corruption and poorly maintained voter rolls, but the prospective bottom line, to wit: <u+201c>i will look at it at the time. i<u+2019>m not looking at anything now, i<u+2019>ll look at it at the time. .<u+00a0>.<u+00a0>. what i<u+2019>m saying is that i will tell you at the time. i<u+2019>ll keep you in suspense, ok?<u+201d> gore probably wouldn<u+2019>t have said <u+201c>i<u+2019>ll keep you in suspense, ok?<u+201d><u+2014>that<u+2019>s a distinctly trumpian bit of showmanship<u+2014>but if he were being completely truthful, he would say, as trump did, that he would keep his options open and respond to circumstances as they arose. and did they ever arise. true, gore delivered a gracious concession speech, but not until dec.<u+00a0>13, more than a month after election day. follow james on twitter it isn<u+2019>t hard to imagine a counterfactual scenario in which gore would have conceded on the normal schedule. if george w. bush<u+2019>s initial margin in florida had been, say, 60,000 votes (just over 1% of the total) instead of around 2,000, there would have been nothing to contest. but the narrow margin in a decisive state led to weeks of lawsuits and selective recounts<u+2014>and, even after gore<u+2019>s concession, to years of bitter claims that he wuz robbed. among those bitterly clinging to the myth of the stolen election<u+2014>or at least propagating it for political purposes<u+2014>was hillary clinton. in november 2002, howard fineman , then of newsweek, reported on a speech then-sen. clinton gave at a private fundraiser in los angeles for then-sen. jean carnahan of missouri: hotair<u+2019>s larry o<u+2019>connor notes that just last week mrs. clinton shared a stage with gore at a miami rally. <u+201c>take it from me, it was a very close election,<u+201d> gore said, referring to the one 16 years ago. in response, the crowd chanted <u+201c>you won! you won! you won!<u+201d> gore went on: <u+201c>here<u+2019>s my point. i don<u+2019>t want you to be in a position years from now where you welcome hillary clinton and say <u+2018>actually you did win, it just wasn<u+2019>t close enough to make sure that the votes were counted<u+2019> and whatever. elections have consequences.<u+201d> o<u+2019>connor: <u+201c>through this entire sequence, mrs. clinton continued to smile and nod in agreement.<u+201d> when trump said last night that he<u+2019>d keep his options open, mrs. clinton called it <u+201c>horrifying<u+201d> and said: it reminds us of otter<u+2019>s famous oration in <u+201c> animal house <u+201d>: and the merits of the argument aside, it<u+2019>s hard to see how all this does anything other than hurt trump, for two reasons. first, it is a loud and glaring distraction from his substantive arguments, which, by the way, he made more effectively in the third debate than in either of the other two. second, nobody likes a sore loser. trump<u+2019>s pre-emptive soreness probably is off-putting to those who are undecided or ambivalent. polls during the 2000 election dispute showed more voters siding with bush than with gore, notwithstanding that gore<u+2019>s gross vote total had been slightly greater than bush<u+2019>s. republicans, as usual, are divided, many as critical of trump as the democrats are, as the new york post reports: bramnick has a point, but if one party tends to adhere to democratic norms only when it<u+2019>s convenient, the party that consistently holds itself to them is at a disadvantage. the appeal of trump to many gop primary voters was that <u+201c>he fights<u+201d><u+2014>meaning, among other things, that he doesn<u+2019>t engage in self-defeating moralism. but as la rochefoucauld observed, hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. when trump goes low, voters may conclude mrs. clinton is more virtuous even though she is only pretending to go high. worst appeals to authority <u+201c>iran<u+2019>s supreme leader slams us election<u+201d><u+2014>headline, thehill.com, oct.<u+00a0>19 we blame george w. bush <u+201c>hillary clinton blames high-up russians for wikileaks releases<u+201d><u+2014>headline, politifact.com, oct.<u+00a0>19 what would we do without experts? <u+201c>hillary clinton<u+2019>s choice to wear white conveys struggle of suffragettes to gain right to vote, expert says<u+201d><u+2014>tweet, @abcpolitics, oct.<u+00a0>20 make that four make that 5 make that 26 question and answer everything seemingly is spinning out of control <u+201c>chris wallace widely praised for moderating third and final presidential debate<u+201d><u+2014>headline, telegraph (london), oct. 20 breaking news from 1993 <u+201c>some advice for president clinton<u+201d><u+2014>headline, nationalreview.com, oct.<u+00a0>20 bottom story of the day <u+201c>trump tweets at 3 a.m. that he won debate<u+201d><u+2014>headline, politico.com, oct.<u+00a0>20 some good news for a change vox<u+2019>s brad plumer notices something about the presidential debates: well, at least there<u+2019>s one bright spot in this dismal election. follow @jamestaranto on twitter. join fans of best of the web today on facebook. subscribe to the best of the web email with one click. (carol muller helps compile best of the web. thanks to gerard leary, michael smith, joel trotter, tony lima, irene deblasio, evan slatis, ethel fenig, gene shklar, chris paporuas, norman blanton, michele schiesser, wes van fleet, steve thompson, mike mcnamee, mordecai bobrowsky, noam dworman, ed lasky, miguel rakiewicz, macrena sailor, mark zoeller, mike singer, jay weiser and t.k. smyth. if you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com , and please include the url.)
trump vs. gore - wsj
james taranto