It does sound like him; it just doesn't say what people think it does. Reread it word by word very carefully. He uses misdirection in his use of conjunctions to give it the slight flavor of concession, but there is no concession there. Feel free to pour through all US elections since 1789 and find the ones where the concession contained no reference to the victor. Perhaps there are a few, but I highly doubt it. Imagine a two term president from decades ago being interviewed about his second term: "What was the transition like between your first term and your second?" "The transition was challenging due to changes in the house and senate and the economy that year, but..." Nothing about the word transition is out of place there; however, the president serves two terms.

It does sound like him; it just doesn't say what people think it does. Reread it word by word very carefully. He uses misdirection in his use of conjunctions to give it the slight flavor of concession, but there is no concession there. Feel free to pour through all US elections since 1789 and find the ones where the concession contained no reference to the victor. Perhaps there are a few, but I highly doubt it.