the sorest loser

via tdw, i see that wish-tv's jim shella is now saying what i've been saying since wednesday: that dickerson supporters are sore losers. in fact, shella goes a step further and crowns them "the sorest losers of 2006".

shella's blog doesn't have permalinks to individual posts, so i can't link to the entry itself. so i'll be a bastard and repost the whole entry.

A week has gone by since the election and we still don't have the ballots counted in Marion County. Outraged Democrats repeatedly suggest that Iraqi elections were more efficient than the one conducted here, and they may have a point.

One of the things we don't know is the final margin in the 7th District Congressional race between Democrat Julia Carson and Republican Eric Dickerson. It looks, however, like Carson will gather the same 54% of the vote she took in two years ago.

Nevertheless, based on talkradio and my e-mail inbox, the supporters of Dickerson deserve recognition for being sore losers, the sorest losers of 2006. They blame the Republican Party for a lack of support and the media for accurately predicting that Carson would win. They can't understand why anyone would vote for Julia Carson. (Please note that the candidate has not been heard from.)

They ignore the fact that the 7th is largely Democrat, that Carson has a long history of service, and her turnout operation may be unmatched in Indiana. The Congresswoman may be old, ill, and sometimes less than articulate.

But they held an election and she won, fair and square.

i'm reading that parenthetical note (that "the candidate has not been heard from") as an indication that, a week after election day, dickerson has still not conceded the election, despite the fact that it's been obvious since 10pm election night that he had lost. tdw agrees. it seems that inability to admit a mistake (or worse yet, defeat) is a trait dickerson shares with his supporters.¶