[Real Cynic No More]

However, I do not wish to put the people of South Dakota through this process unless it is absolutely necessary. Therefore, if there is no change in the vote totals or any irregularities after the official canvass, we will pursue no further action and the results will stand...No one would be happier than I to see those numbers change as the process continues. However, if the numbers stand, I am prepared to accept the outcome and know that my supporters and all those who have stood with me during this process will accept the outcome as well.

If Al Gore had taken this approach in 2000, the Democrats might not have lost the Senate this year, and Jeb! may have had a tougher time to win his second term. But when Al Gore declared war against the Republicans in 2000, the parameters in the equation changed.

If the Senate leadership hung in the balance, Thune's approach might need to be different. But, with things the way they are, the Republicans could lose more by fighting than by accepting the results, unless, of course, irregularities can be conclusively proven.

[afraidfortherepublic]

If the Senate leadership hung in the balance...

It does. Can you say John McCain and Lincoln Chafee?

[Bigg Red]

...when Al Gore declared war against the Republicans in 2000

Gore and the Rat party declared war on more than the Republicans. They declared war on America and our system of peacefully electing our leaders. They declared war on the American notion of fair play and losing gracefully. I, for one, will never forgive them for their ruthless grasping for power at the expense of the well being of this nation.

[fifteendogs]

Every seat the republicans win is two less votes for the dems when they want to filibuster. The republicans need every seat that they can win.

[TankerKC]

You took the words right out of my mouth...er...keyboard.