By Kaveesha Fernando
WASHINGTON, D.C., USA (CWBN) – The people of the United States have spoken. I hereby offer my concession.
Every single US presidential candidate in recent history to come second in the election has made a public concession speech, delivering some variation of these words at a nationwide address. This includes the then US Vice President Al Gore, who arguably lost the 2000 election by court order rather than by votes. He accepted the decision of the US Supreme Court (which ended the recount of ballots in the state of Florida which might have found him victorious).
A concession speech was made by Gore – the “winner” of the election declared as then Texas Governor, George W. Bush. The concession speech has always allowed for a smooth transition of power from the incumbent US president to the president-elect in the period following the November election to the inauguration of the new US president in January. Unfortunately, all of this might change in 2020.
Concession Speech
Why is a concession speech so important? US attorney, political commentator and former a former White House official Van Jones feels that the concession speech is the main reason why the election is never followed by riots, bloodshed and strife.
In a Ted Talk outlining the loopholes of the US Constitution, he said that this one custom of delivering a concession speech allows supporters of the losing candidate (who would command a following of close to 50% of the nation at that time) to accept the result of the election without resorting to violence.
Concession speeches, however, are only given, when results of the popular vote and the vote of the Electoral College are decisive. What happens if it isn’t?
It may come as a shock to most Americans that it is entirely constitutional to disregard the popular vote and the vote of the Electoral College in the event that the result is ambiguous. “It’s like the election never happened,” says Jones.
The House of Representatives elects the president and the Senate elects the vice president (thus technically allowing Trump and Harris to be elected as president and vice president respectively). If the process fails to elect a president, the elected vice president takes over until the president is elected. If the vice president is not elected either, the Presidential Succession Act applies. The speaker of the House of Representatives, the Senate president or a Cabinet officer, in that order, would act as president until there’s a president or vice president.
With President Donald Trump having criticized the election process for months, repeatedly indicating that he will not accept the result of the election if he loses to Democratic Presidential candidate and former Vice President, Joe Biden, observers are vary of the aftermath of this election.
In this context, Trump requesting the violent far-right, neo-fascist group “Proud Boys” to “stand back and stand by” at the first US Presidential debate is even more alarming. Trump’s mental health may also play a role in his response. Clinical psychologist Dr. Mary Trump has publicly stated that her uncle fits the criteria required to diagnose him a narcissist, a diagnosis which (if true), renders the possibility that Trump will concede defeat even unlikelier.
Another problem presents itself due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of mail in votes has seen a drastic increase this year (when compared to 2016) due to concerns of contracting COVID-19 from voting centers.
Democratic voters are 3 – 4 times more likely to vote by mail and therefore Trump has attempted to invalidate them, even stating that it would be “nice” to have the result declared the morning after the election. The delays in counting caused by the record number of mail in votes this election may also spell disaster for the entire process as this gives Trump and his supporters ample time to create chaos and aim to have all of the mail in ballots cast aside, among other things.
Experts have been examining the possible scenarios where the election process descends into chaos. For instance, the Transition Integrity Project was launched in 2019 out of concern that a defeated Trump would refuse to accept the election results. A bipartisan group of over 100 current and former senior government, campaign leaders and other experts analysed the possible electoral and transition-related risks, which could undermine the process and made recommendations on how all actors who respect democracy and the rule of law should proceed.
The project considered four scenarios in which the results did not immediately indicate that President Trump had won. The scenarios are as follows:
– The winner is unknown the morning after the election and the outcome was too close to predict.
– Democratic candidate Joe Biden wins the popular vote and the Electoral College by a healthy margin
– President Trump wins the Electoral College vote but again loses the popular vote by a healthy margin
– Biden wins both the popular vote and the Electoral College by a narrow margin.
A post exercise report published by the project detailed the many tactics the two candidates (predicted mostly to be Trump) may resort to. This ranged from a disinformation campaigns (think “fake news”) undermining the entire election process to the intentional destruction of ballots believed to favour the opposition.
The report requests actors to expect a contested election and consider the remedies offered by the official framework to prevent chaos, with suggestions also detailed.
So what will happen if Trump refuses to concede?
The answer remains uncertain. An infinite number of scenarios could ensue (owing to the many factors to be considered), and experts seem convinced that none of them are reassuring. However, it’s clear that the Democratic Party’s faith that Trump will concede if he loses (and therefore failing to highlight the issue) is misplaced. For the first time in US history, we may have a presidential candidate who refuses to concede even if it is clear beyond any shred of doubt that he has lost the election.
Edited By Chathushka Perera
