Â鶹´«Ã½

News — Mo Udall reputedly said, "The voters have spoken—the bastards!"

Davy Crockett told his constituents they could go to hell—he'd go to Texas. Political winners, on the other hand, are always magnanimous. In triumph, Jefferson proclaimed, "We are all Republicans—we are all Federalists!"

Unlike Udall, most losing candidates unlock their jaws just long enough to strain a grin and make a stab at being gracious in their concession speech, says Dr. John Vile, political science chair at Middle Tennessee State University and constitutional scholar.

Vile's book, "Presidential Winners & Losers: Words of Victory and Concession," is a collection of more than 500 such speeches and documents that spans the Georges—Washington to Dubya—and relates not only to the outcome of elections but adds to our understanding of the opponents.

Vile provides commentary that sets the context for the speeches of the victor and the vanquished, and he begins the volume with an essay that describes the evolution of victory and concession speeches. If we study them carefully, they can help us understand the American political system, Vile says.

"Winners and losers almost always thank their supporters and families, with the losers trying to assure their supporters that the fight has not been in vain," Vile points out. "As in 2000, the winner almost always lets the loser go first. Bush canceled his initial victory speech after Gore canceled his concession."

Losers often use humor, Vile notes. In 2000, Gore said he had called to congratulate Bush, but that this time around he didn't plan to call back. Adlai Stevenson observed that it hurt too much to laugh but that he was too old to cry.

An extremely partisan Nixon used his victory speech to echo what he had seen on a placard—"Bring Us Together."

Vile draws parallels between both kinds of speeches and other presidential rhetoric. He illustrates how the words and tone of statements serve to heal wounds, to set a new agenda, and to rally everyone on all sides.

In addition to speeches, Vile examines candidates' private letters, diary entries, interviews and newspaper articles that reveal their state of mind and define the American political system at particular points in time.