Donald Trump’s continuing refusal to commit to accepting the results of the upcoming election disqualifies him from holding the high office that he seeks. It is really that simple. There are a hundred issues on which one may agree or disagree with either presidential candidate. There are valid concerns about the character, honesty and even integrity that might be raised about either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. However, there is one issue on which there can be no debate and as to which there are not two sides: the duty of candidates for the office of president to accept the outcome of an election once the fanfare and the rhetorical fighting are all over. The acceptance of election results and the peaceful transfer of power are fundamental pillars that undergird our national democracy, our political life.
A candidate might question some aspect of the voting process as Al Gore did in 2000, perhaps take it to court for resolution. But even then, Mr. Gore was committed to accepting the election outcome once the Florida vote had been finally counted. There was no claim of a “rigged” system made weeks before the vote. There was no intimation that the candidate might object to the election results and the transfer of power to his opponent. There was no setting the stage for the candidate’s supporters to reject the election outcome, perhaps even take to the streets to express their outrage over having been “cheated” of a victory. Mr. Gore and his supporters were criticized then, perhaps rightly so, but they did not attack the process before it even got started. There is a fundamental difference between complaining about specific events that took place during an election after the vote is in and setting the stage for your supporters to reject the result before the votes have been cast.
