The Graceful Loser

"It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game." -- Grantland Rice

"Winning isn't everything. It's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi

"I keep whining until I win." -- Donald Trump

Nobody likes a sore loser -- Pug Mahoney

   Before the year is out, voters will choose, electors will meet and a new President of the United States will be selected.
   But from the warnings of one of the major candidates, if he doesn't win he will launch a challenge. He has already been claiming that the system is "rigged" against him and the election will be "stolen" from him. It's certainly true that a candidate who comes in second may challenge the results, but that will require separate challenges in perhaps each of the 50 states as well as the District of Columbia, and it assumes that the results are close enough to justify plausible challenges, if not in every state but in some few states that could leverage a change.
   The Florida recount in 2000 was triggered automatically because the popular vote was so close. Meanwhile, the nationwide electoral tally was also close enough so that a change in a single state -- in this case, Florida -- would be enough to sway the national result.
   This year, however, indications are that the results will not be close, neither in the popular vote nor in the electoral count. Moreover, the one that really matters is the electoral vote.
   One candidate, Republican nominee Donald Trump, has said repeatedly that he may not concede, but will likely challenge the result.
   Fact: It matters not whether he concedes, or even admits defeat. If the tally is clear, there will be little chance of success for a legal challenge.
   The Constitution stipulates that each state gets as many electors as it has members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, plus three for the District of Columbia, and a simple majority is enough to decide a winner.
   Since there are 435  Representatives and 100 Senators, that's a total of 538 electors, including the DC three. Therefore, a simple majority of 270 electoral votes will decide the winner. If the vote is close, it's not clear what, if any, legal precedents could be cited to justify a challenge.
   A tie is possible, and that has happened before, in the 19th Century, and the task of choosing a President went to the House of Representatives. That, however, is provided for in the Constitution, so no legal challenge would be needed.
   Even so, if Trump were to file one or several lawsuits, depending on which state results were challenged, the Democratic Party would surely oppose all of them, and the nation could be left without a President for an unknown length of time.
   Historically, several losing candidates have conceded election results, even when there was some doubt over the results and methods in key states, most noticeably Richard Nixon in 1960 and Al Gore in the 2000 election.
   This year, however, Trump has already served notice that he will challenge the election result. Unless, of course, he wins.
   But what if he doesn't?
   Considering his past record in business and in politics, the term "graceful loser" is an oxymoron.