LittleFokker wrote:

Tomorrow night, we will discover if Alabama regains the top spot of "America's Dumbest State" list.

If they do elect this monster, I will never step foot in Alabama again.

I never have for now obvious reasons. I remember!!!

Tugger wrote:

I am meaning either a political pressure process by the Republican's alone or by more bad things being found about Moore. Once elected the Republican's will be free of the threat of shrinking their majority and will be more able to freely attack him.

I don't think that's gonna happen. If anything, Moore and his ilk will feel vindicated of how he's an outsider ready to disrupt "the Washington establishment". No matter how much McConnell and others pressure Moore, as long as there's a base of supporters both in AL and the White House, he'll feel no pressure to quit.

And heck, if it's found that Moore raped a girl, do you think Alabama will do anything? If they voted for a guy that boasted about groping women and are keen on voting for a pedophile, what makes you think such an action will change their minds? As long as there's an evangelical Christian patriot in the seat over an evil, liberal Democrat, they feel vindicated.

You're assuming that Alabamians will eventually see reason. But across the South, reason is not in their vocabulary, so long as they can get their way.

Tomorrow we'll know if there is such a thing as too much or whether the double standards reign supreme.

Polling is all over the place. An Emerson poll has Moore up by 9 while a Fox News poll has Jones up by 10.

None of the big political predictors (Cook, Rothenberg, and Sabato) have strayed from Tossup (Sabato had the race Lean Democrat but has since brought it back to Tossup).

Should be an interesting Tuesday night.

I'm looking forward to the speeches in the Senate from Alabama Senator, Roy Moore !!

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Alabama has several problems with this election. The GOP there has enacted a photo ID law ensuring far more black and brown voters will be blocked from voting than whites. This is going to hurt as the country will be watching so closely.

Next problem is that Toyota is looking at both Alabama and South Carolina for a new plant. If Moore wins and Toyota goes to SC the racists in Alabama might finally wake up. And Toyota isn't the only large company who will be looking at Alabama for expansion. I guess that Moore voters are just too dumb to care.

einsteinboricua wrote:

Polling is all over the place. An Emerson poll has Moore up by 9 while a Fox News poll has Jones up by 10.

Here's Nate Silver's (of 538 fame) analysis of all the polling that has taken place (including this morning's polls):

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... ama-polls/

To summarize...there's a lot to be learned, and nothing at the same time. The live voice polls tend to favor Jones (which historically have been more relevant) but there are emerging flaws to this method, whereas the Robocalls (favoring Moore) tend to be more inaccurate, but not enough to think that Jones has a clear advantage. The polling industry has had a difficult time getting good samples in the face of new technologies, and greater margins of error have to be taken into account.

The last I heard last night or today was they expected a 25 % turnout of eligible voters. That is pathetic. We wonder where our Democracy has gone? All should be ashamed of themselves in such a turbulent political atmosphere as we have now.

LittleFokker wrote:

einsteinboricua wrote:

Polling is all over the place. An Emerson poll has Moore up by 9 while a Fox News poll has Jones up by 10.

Here's Nate Silver's (of 538 fame) analysis of all the polling that has taken place (including this morning's polls):

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... ama-polls/

To summarize...there's a lot to be learned, and nothing at the same time. The live voice polls tend to favor Jones (which historically have been more relevant) but there are emerging flaws to this method, whereas the Robocalls (favoring Moore) tend to be more inaccurate, but not enough to think that Jones has a clear advantage. The polling industry has had a difficult time getting good samples in the face of new technologies, and greater margins of error have to be taken into account.

I read that, but the main issue at hand is that in a state like Alabama, where polling is not really needed due to the nature of the politics, the pollsters have not yet been able to grasp how to poll folks there. Complicating things are things like the law about robocalls not reaching cellphones.

Swing states are usually better polled than a state whose circumstances changed overnight: do polls attempt to minimize what is a sure win or do they expose the big upset that goes against the political paradigm of the state?

seahawk wrote:

Do you really believe facts matter in the vote? It is a matter of belief. And it seems that you can get away with a lot if you are a Republican and lip service evangelist. Trump was right, when he said his supporters would still support him, if he would shoot a random person on the street. This is typical for a group that is united by a common hate for persons outside of the group. It is early 1930ies in Europe....

Boy do you make my eyes go crossed every time I read any one of your posts. For every post decrying 1930s Europe, there’s one saying Trump was delivered by God. Then you respond that you’re only paraphrasing how other people are thinking. While authoring threads called “The Success of President Donald Trump.” Maybe you’re not a real fan since he prefers to go by Donald J ...

einsteinboricua wrote:

Polling is all over the place. An Emerson poll has Moore up by 9 while a Fox News poll has Jones up by 10.

Fox is probably faking its numbers to get more people to go vote for Moore.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Lower the age of consent, parents consent is enough and downgrading rape to a misdemeanor?

Best regards
Thomas

IF Roy Moore was this serial teenage sexual predator, then I think it would be reasonable to assume, that even after he married, that he would still "go after" the teen acquaintances of his children, when they became teens.

Now, I ask you, have any of those allegations come out?

Let the witch hunt from 40 years ago please end.

Roy Moore has been happily married, raising four children, for over 30 years!

seahawk wrote:

Do you really believe facts matter in the vote? It is a matter of belief. And it seems that you can get away with a lot if you are a Republican and lip service evangelist. Trump was right, when he said his supporters would still support him, if he would shoot a random person on the street. This is typical for a group that is united by a common hate for persons outside of the group. It is early 1930ies in Europe....

Well, let's see...

After the SS leadership, with Hitler's blessing, detached the pre-Nazi police detective forces from state administrative and judicial oversight in the years 1933-1936, only the centralized SS and police authorities could determine who was a danger to the German “race” and order the incarceration of such persons in a concentration camp. For persons perceived to be political and racial opponents of the Reich, the Gestapo issued “protective custody” (Schutzhaft) orders, which authorized the incarceration in the camps of Jews, Social Democrats, Communists, liberals, Freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, clergy who opposed the Nazis, members of national opposition movements, non-Germans in general after Germany began to occupy Europe, and any others whose behavior—real or perceived—could be interpreted as politically motivated opposition.

For persons whose real or perceived behavior or actions were considered criminal but non-political in nature, or socially deviant so as to create a so-called danger to German society, the Criminal Police office issued “preventative arrest” (Vorbeugungshaft) orders. Under these orders, which were often motivated more by racial and social prejudice than by actual criminal violations, Roma and Sinti (Gypsies), so-called asocials, repeat criminal offenders, homosexuals, and so-called security suspects were incarcerated in the concentration camps. Although the language of these arrest orders contained limits on the time during which a prisoner could be incarcerated, in practice incarcerations were routinely extended indefinitely. After World War II began, Himmler forbade in general the release of concentration camp prisoners for the duration of the war.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.ph ... d=10007387

Hmm, I don't see why former President Obama (and you) would infer that Trump is like Hitler...

DIRECTFLT wrote:

IF Roy Moore was this serial teenage sexual predator, then I think it would be reasonable to assume, that even after he married, that he would still "go after" the teen acquaintances of his children, when they became teens.

Now, I ask you, have any of those allegations come out?

Let the witch hunt from 40 years ago please end.

Roy Moore has been happily married, raising four children, for over 30 years!

And what about his opinion that the Constitutional Amendments after 10 need to be taken away? No equality for Blacks, no voting or anything for women, poll taxes, Senators being selected rather than elected by We The People....

DIRECTFLT wrote:

IF Roy Moore was this serial teenage sexual predator, then I think it would be reasonable to assume, that even after he married, that he would still "go after" the teen acquaintances of his children, when they became teens.

Now, I ask you, have any of those allegations come out?

Let the witch hunt from 40 years ago please end.

Roy Moore has been happily married, raising four children, for over 30 years!

He’s been happily married to someone he was first attracted to (his own words) when she was 14.

The behavior has exhibited itself again in court decisions. The guy is a friggin slimeball. I really don’t understand how anyone but the “Rah-rah-rah, Do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do Christian men” (of which I have no doubt you’re one of them) can support him.

And if you’re so concerned with “witch hunts,” DF, how about the ones that he has conducted against honest, law-abiding Americans?

Give me a friggin break.

But sure, let him win. Law says let people vote, I don’t begrudge people of voting knowing what they’re doing.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Do you really believe facts matter in the vote? It is a matter of belief. And it seems that you can get away with a lot if you are a Republican and lip service evangelist. Trump was right, when he said his supporters would still support him, if he would shoot a random person on the street. This is typical for a group that is united by a common hate for persons outside of the group. It is early 1930ies in Europe....

Well, let's see...

After the SS leadership, with Hitler's blessing, detached the pre-Nazi police detective forces from state administrative and judicial oversight in the years 1933-1936, only the centralized SS and police authorities could determine who was a danger to the German “race” and order the incarceration of such persons in a concentration camp. For persons perceived to be political and racial opponents of the Reich, the Gestapo issued “protective custody” (Schutzhaft) orders, which authorized the incarceration in the camps of Jews, Social Democrats, Communists, liberals, Freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, clergy who opposed the Nazis, members of national opposition movements, non-Germans in general after Germany began to occupy Europe, and any others whose behavior—real or perceived—could be interpreted as politically motivated opposition.

For persons whose real or perceived behavior or actions were considered criminal but non-political in nature, or socially deviant so as to create a so-called danger to German society, the Criminal Police office issued “preventative arrest” (Vorbeugungshaft) orders. Under these orders, which were often motivated more by racial and social prejudice than by actual criminal violations, Roma and Sinti (Gypsies), so-called asocials, repeat criminal offenders, homosexuals, and so-called security suspects were incarcerated in the concentration camps. Although the language of these arrest orders contained limits on the time during which a prisoner could be incarcerated, in practice incarcerations were routinely extended indefinitely. After World War II began, Himmler forbade in general the release of concentration camp prisoners for the duration of the war.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.ph ... d=10007387

Hmm, I don't see why former President Obama (and you) would infer that Trump is like Hitler...

Interesting that you draw a connection between Europe in the 1930ies, Hitler and Trump from that post, when it was actually about society failing to find compromise.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

IF Roy Moore was this serial teenage sexual predator, then I think it would be reasonable to assume, that even after he married, that he would still "go after" the teen acquaintances of his children, when they became teens.

"IF" .. hahaha

Now, I ask you, have any of those allegations come out?

Of course not. It would be surprising if they did. If it is all fake, i am sure there would be some current Teenagers complaining as well. He has Daughters, he doesn´t need other peoples kids anymore.....

Pedophiles usually go after kids in their personal network, hunting for them at malls is more unusual, at some point he didn´t need to do that anymore.

Let the witch hunt from 40 years ago please end.

rapist hunt, being a witch is neither illegal nor immoral. Without the statute of limitation he´d be in prison. That is why he isn´t suing anyone for libel, he knows at the end of that trial everybody would know he is a rapist. Everybody but rape sympathizers knows that.

best regards
Thomas

So Moore does an interview with a 12 year old girl. Not the best optics!

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/1 ... rt_m-rpt-2

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Legalizing pedophelia?

bgm wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Legalizing pedophelia?

He’s already got a legal record to the such.

He really looked handsome today with his new hairdo.

DF, you just don’t get it.

For people like me who just happen to be homosexual and have been with their partner for 15 years (husband for 10), only because I was lucky enough in my personal circumstances to live in San Francisco for a very brief period of time when it was allowed. (It was even better when they put it to a vote, which is why we got married quickly ... after 5 years of being together, nevermind having to move to Mexico and Canada because we didn’t have a friggin choice.)

So it’s just great to hear that you’re rooting for a guy for someone who is convinced (and believes that God is talking to him, and he is a man of God) that what I’ve had to do for 15 years is the work of the devil.

(You’re a family values guy, right?)

It’s not the first time I’ve called you this, but you’re an arrogant jerk. Do you not have any sense of empathy?

jetero wrote:

(and believes that God is talking to him, and he is a man of God) .

usually people hearing voices are referred to a mental health professional, unless their delusion happens to be "God"...

Rule of Thumb: If your "god" tells you "f*ck her!" when you sneaked a 14 year old from her mother, that is probably just wishful thinking.

best regards
Thomas

jetero wrote:

bgm wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Legalizing pedophelia?

He’s already got a legal record to the such.

He really looked handsome today with his new hairdo.

DF, you just don’t get it.

For people like me who just happen to be homosexual and have been with their partner for 15 years (husband for 10), only because I was lucky enough in my personal circumstances to live in San Francisco for a very brief period of time when it was allowed. (It was even better when they put it to a vote, which is why we got married quickly ... after 5 years of being together, nevermind having to move to Mexico and Canada because we didn’t have a friggin choice.)

So it’s just great to hear that you’re rooting for a guy for someone who is convinced (and believes that God is talking to him, and he is a man of God) that what I’ve had to do for 15 years is the work of the devil.

(You’re a family values guy, right?)

It’s not the first time I’ve called you this, but you’re an arrogant jerk. Do you not have any sense of empathy?

I shall also add that you’re not a proper Texan.

Maria was about the same age when the holy ghost gave her Jesus.

seahawk wrote:

Maria was about the same age when the holy ghost gave her Jesus.

that only means that the holy ghost is a rapist that prefers teens....

best regards
Thomas

What’s your friggin deal, seahawk?

(That’s exactly what you said on prior post, which you defended, then not defended, then defended. I hope your salary is good ... there is an exit for people who do this so well)

jetero wrote:

What’s your friggin deal, seahawk?

(That’s exactly what you said on prior post, which you defended, then not defended, then defended. I hope your salary is good ... there is an exit for people who do this so well)

He either writes his opinion, or makes a pretty good advocatus diaboli, often using phrasing picked up from other forums and comment sections.

best regards
Thomas

I suspect there is a bit of a trollfest with Seahawk, DIRECTFLT, et al...

One fear I have with this election is where the difference in the final count is a few 1000 votes or less. If that happens there will be a political war we haven't seen since the 2000 Presidential election with massive challenges, recounts, court challenges, review of voter rolls and millions poured into it by both parties. It will delay the seating of the winner for months. Look as an example at Sen. Al Franken's last election where it took over a month to settle the vote count as the margin was so thin. This could get very ugly. Overall turnout will be critical.
Yes, too many will be hypocrites and ignore the improper sexual behaviors of Moore years ago with minor women, and reject Jones who actually achieved finally getting justice for the terror murder of children in the early 1960's. To me more critical are Moore's extreme anti-GBLTQ, racist, sexist, anti-abortion, anti-Muslim and religious views that many White voters there share. This will likely be the most over-covered special election in years, made even more into a frenzy by the internet and cable news looking for ratings. I'll be glad when it is over. I hope in the end the people of AL choose Jones.

ltbewr wrote:

To me more critical are Moore's extreme anti-GBLTQ, racist, sexist, anti-abortion, anti-Muslim

Add anti-constitution, Moore hates America and wants it be like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Best regards
Thomas

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I'm looking forward to the speeches in the Senate from Alabama Senator, Roy Moore !!

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Raising the age of non-consent to 35?



David

So, in a few hours we will come to know who becomes a senator. I am really interested in this, this a perfect example of party loyalty vs. all other values and norms we share. And if Moore does lose, I would be really eager in reading some tweets from that clown who happens to be sitting in the oval.

Eyad89 wrote:

So, in a few hours we will come to know who becomes a senator. I am really interested in this, this a perfect example of party loyalty vs. all other values and norms we share. And if Moore does lose, I would be really eager in reading some tweets from that clown who happens to be sitting in the oval.

Here's what the first one would probably look like.

jetero wrote:

What’s your friggin deal, seahawk?

(That’s exactly what you said on prior post, which you defended, then not defended, then defended. I hope your salary is good ... there is an exit for people who do this so well)

My point is quite simple, the allegations about Moore dating are nothing but a sideshow. Moore has made quite a few statements that are way more unsuitable for a senator that should honour the constitution.

But one must understand that if a person still supports him nevertheless you can not convince them with rational arguments, because once you talk about faith all rational arguments go out of the window. What i wrote is something that went through the news as a statement by an evangelist preacher on why Moore did nothing wrong. I am way to far away from Alabama to have any interest in defending or supporting any candidate, however I find it quite interesting to see the reasoning for the voters there and follow the arguments of both sides. Sometimes when reading discussions between Americans it looks like they are not even talking about the same problem much less be living in the same country.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I'm looking forward to the speeches in the Senate from Alabama Senator, Roy Moore !!

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Most likely another discriminatory policy that will seek to damage and harm the most vulnerable people of this nation, which is typical for men like him.

seahawk wrote:

jetero wrote:

What’s your friggin deal, seahawk?

(That’s exactly what you said on prior post, which you defended, then not defended, then defended. I hope your salary is good ... there is an exit for people who do this so well)

My point is quite simple, the allegations about Moore dating are nothing but a sideshow. Moore has made quite a few statements that are way more unsuitable for a senator that should honour the constitution.

It’s a sideshow only because right-wing media (“fake news,” remember?) make it as such, nevermind the other sh*t he’s done, which as you say is way more disqualifying.

[quote=“seahawk”]But one must understand that if a person still supports him nevertheless you can not convince them with rational arguments, because once you talk about faith all rational arguments go out of the window.[/quote]

That’s a great standard, Seahawk. Good on you! Might as well just call it a day and find a river to drown in.

[quote=“seahawk”]What i wrote is something that went through the news as a statement by an evangelist preacher on why Moore did nothing wrong. I am way to far away from Alabama to have any interest in defending or supporting any candidate, however I find it quite interesting to see the reasoning for the voters there and follow the arguments of both sides. Sometimes when reading discussions between Americans it looks like they are not even talking about the same problem much less be living in the same country.[/quote]

And what, exactly, is your personal view? I’d say whichever way the wind blows but I think Tommy summarized it much better.

The right is turning on Reagan now

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1 ... ion-Needed

I find it hugely interesting to understand why people are voting for Moore, especially in a country that is so proud of freedom and democracy.

However I think I understand it better now. There seem to be 3 basic points that overrule any objective decisions for many voters in the AL.

1. Moore is a Republican
2. he is an evangelical Christian and has the support of many Christian parishes
3. he is strongly pro-life

Being at least one of those, seems to make all other problems tolerable for a lot of his supporters. Which imho is kind of scary because those people would probably be fine with a theocratic regime and would not be willing to defend the freedom of people that do not share their believes.

seahawk wrote:

I find it hugely interesting to understand why people are voting for Moore, especially in a country that is so proud of freedom and democracy.

However I think I understand it better now. There seem to be 3 basic points that overrule any objective decisions for many voters in the AL.

1. Moore is a Republican
2. he is an evangelical Christian and has the support of many Christian parishes
3. he is strongly pro-life

Being at least one of those, seems to make all other problems tolerable for a lot of his supporters. Which imho is kind of scary because those people would probably be fine with a theocratic regime and would not be willing to defend the freedom of people that do not share their believes.

There he goes again saying a whole bunch of nothing.

Insert your personal beliefs [HERE], Russell HemHaw Wilson.

Again, it seems that these so-called Christians put their political beliefs before their moral and religious beliefs.

Says it all really.

bgm wrote:

Again, it seems that these so-called Christians put their political beliefs before their moral and religious beliefs.

Says it all really.

Idunno...I think these are christian values now. If you're not a sexual predator, and you favor helping the poor, disabled, sick, elderly, etc., today's christians will toss you out of office faster than Jesus kicked the money changers out of the temple. Moore speaks of bringing christian values to DC--what could those possibly be? Molesting children, reinstituting Jim Crow, jailing Muslims/LGBT? That's synonymous with today's GOP and evangelical voter today. Who are we to disbelieve them when they've been crystal clear what they stand for?

Moore must be eager to meet his interns. I hope McConnell had a line item in the budget for Moore settlements.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Moore must be eager to meet his interns. I hope McConnell had a line item in the budget for Moore settlements.

Kayla “Some of our Best Friends Are Black and BTW We Got a Jew Attorney” will convince them they’re doing God’s work I’m sure. Liberty University and the Trump Organization will surely send by the truckload. And she has a great incentive—means all the more time Ol Roy isnt hitting her up!

LittleFokker wrote:

Tomorrow night, we will discover if Alabama regains the top spot of "America's Dumbest State" list.

If they do elect this monster, I will never step foot in Alabama again.

If they elect him? This is Alabama, where no matter what you've done, no matter who you are, having a (D) next to your name is a bigger sin than pedophilia. He will absolutely win.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Idunno...I think these are christian values now. If you're not a sexual predator, and you favor helping the poor, disabled, sick, elderly, etc., today's christians will toss you out of office faster than Jesus kicked the money changers out of the temple. Moore speaks of bringing christian values to DC--what could those possibly be? Molesting children, reinstituting Jim Crow, jailing Muslims/LGBT? That's synonymous with today's GOP and evangelical voter today. Who are we to disbelieve them when they've been crystal clear what they stand for?

Indeed! Here's one of the "christian" right's most intellectually dishonest scumbags talking about how the government helping the poor is just an excuse for socialism and Jesus never intended that blah, blah, blah. But you know, he's young and has a blog, and tattoos, so he's uber cool...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24284/tax-matt-walsh#

jetero wrote:

seahawk wrote:

I find it hugely interesting to understand why people are voting for Moore, especially in a country that is so proud of freedom and democracy.

However I think I understand it better now. There seem to be 3 basic points that overrule any objective decisions for many voters in the AL.

1. Moore is a Republican
2. he is an evangelical Christian and has the support of many Christian parishes
3. he is strongly pro-life

Being at least one of those, seems to make all other problems tolerable for a lot of his supporters. Which imho is kind of scary because those people would probably be fine with a theocratic regime and would not be willing to defend the freedom of people that do not share their believes.

There he goes again saying a whole bunch of nothing.

Insert your personal beliefs [HERE], Russell HemHaw Wilson.

As a European the Moore point of view seems strange to me, but that makes it interesting. If you want my viewpoint on internal politics in the USA, sorry I do not have an opinion because I do not care, except from being fascinated by some stand points that seem so 17th century. Well add a bit of humour when Tea Party Republicans talk about the evil state Iran and the bad theocracy there.

OA412 wrote:

they elect him? This is Alabama, where no matter what you've done, no matter who you are, having a (D) next to your name is a bigger sin than pedophilia. He will absolutely win.

Yep I figure he wins by 4-6 points. Al Franken will be watching. I am still not convinced he will step down and if McConnell is not successful in removing Moore this could get interesting.

seahawk wrote:

If you want my viewpoint on internal politics in the USA, sorry I do not have an opinion because I do not care, except from being fascinated by some stand points that seem so 17th century.

You flood this forum day in and day out with posts concerning US-topics, including US politics, most of the time showing strong support for even the most extreme of Trump's positions. And now you all of a sudden don't care and are fascinated by the backwardness of some of it? You gotta admit there's some pretty ridiculous irony in that...

einsteinboricua wrote:

Tugger wrote:

As I have said before, the main goal/hope for Republican's tomorrow is to elect Moore, then remove him and replace him with another Republican.

To remove him from the Senate, they'll need Democrat votes (67 votes). And if Democrats are smart, they'll let the GOP stick with Moore for the reasons I mentioned in another post.

Just think of the political ads against the GOP: "Roy Moore won a fair election in Alabama*, yet the GOP leadership wants him out because he vowed to not follow the party line. Is this the kind of party we want running the Senate? Don't let Republicans deny your voice in the Senate."

And it doesn't have to be a DNC or a DSCC ad; it can be a PAC allied with Democrats or against Republicans.

Again, two things:
1. Why would Democrats help bail out Republicans?
2. Why would Democrats vote to expel a duly elected Senator?** No matter his behavior, Alabamians were given a choice and if they preferred the pedophile over the attorney, then that's their selection. The Democrats from CA or NY will now have their chance to show that they don't meddle with other state affairs.

*No matter what you may think, the race so far seems to be an ordinary one under the same rules as the 2016 election. We may hate the guy or think he's unqualified, but ethical behavior is (unfortunately) not a precondition for Senate candidacy.

**Don't think Republicans will be forever grateful. I can see ads running all over the country denouncing Democrats for voting to remove a duly elected Senator and how that's pure tyranny (even though everyone knows that Democrats alone can't do zip without GOP votes...but in a country where the unemployment rate was fake under Obama but real under Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the math the GOP makes everyone else believe).

I am not convinced the Democrats would be benefit politically by not helping McConnell and the RSCC out here. If they believe he is a child molester, and then vote to allow such a man to continue to serve then they lose their own credibility on this issue and don't have any claim to the moral ground here. If they (the senate republicans) do want to expel Moore for what he did, and his comment about the Statue of Limitations (for lack of a better term) shielding him from such an event to me is quite telling as there would be no need to make such a comment if he was not guilty, and the Democats want to try to score political points by keeping him, then you could see GOP nominees who don't like Moore turning that vote against them. MA for example is one of the Bluest states, but it is not as Liberal as people think it is and Warren is not as popular there as people think. If a Charlie Baker or Scott Brown type candidate gets the GOP nomination, Warren voting to keep Moore around could work against her. Not saying it will play out this way, but the Dems need to be careful.

As far as the Election in Alabama itself goes here are my thoughts.

1. I would be writing in a candidate if I lived in AL. Moore is not qualified to serve whether he was guilty or not of the allegations based on what he did as a Judge. (Suspended twice) Jones in my opinion is too socially Liberal to represent a state like AL.

2. Pat Caddell hit the nail on the head in a Newsmax piece that came out. Doug Jones having socially liberal positions is the only reason in my opinion a lot of AL voters would even think of pulling the lever for Moore. Enough has been said about Moore. If either party nominated someone different, this race would be over. Here is the article:
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/pat-cadell-alabama-doug-jones-senate/2017/12/11/id/831155/

3. If Moore does win, one thing I think the Democrats should take a close look at was Gloria Allred's involvement. The women mentioned in the Washington Post article are credible and no one outside of Moore and a few people who believe the Post should be on the fiction shelf at Barnes and Noble. By trotting out another victim later, she was looking for an opportunity to make a splash here as she usually does. But Allred does not have a good reputation outside the coasts, and when the handwriting mess came to past it shot her own clients credibility and overshadowed the other victims who are very credible and are now having that questioned because of what Allred did with the other lady.

4. I am not sure why Trump chose to involve himself late in this race. He did not support Moore in the primary, and really gains nothing politically with a Moore victory. Furthermore this also handed Democrats a campaign poster for 2018, even though most of the republicans have denounced Moore and want nothing to do with him.

5. Richard Shelby interestingly enough was the last Democrat to win a Senate Race in Alabama when he was reelected in 1992. He switched parties two years later after Gingrich and the republican party came to power in 1994. I think it says a lot about his character to cast a write in vote and put principle over party.

6. If Moore wins...do they even give him committee assignments? And would Moore even stay in the republican party as a Senator? Given that he does not get along with anyone in the Senate I don't think its unreasonable for him to become an independent caucusing with the GOP, much like Sanders and Angus King do on the Democratic side.

7. This is yet another political race in this country where there are no good choices. In the presidential Election Hillary and Trump were the nominees and neither one deserved the job. In this race, you have a guy that imo would not represent the same values of AL voters, and a guy who is not qualified for the job. In the 1994 VA senate race, you had a Dem in a scandal over an affair with a beauty pageant contestant taking on a republican who lied a senate Committee under oath and was seeking election to that very body. You get candidates like these because good selfless people wont run because of the emotional abuse they would take from all the negative ads and publicity that comes with the Job. So you get races with no one qualified for the office and no other choices. IMO this is why, as WarRIi put it earlier in this thread, we have a 20 percent voter turnout. And both political parties designed it that way intentionally IMO.

apodino wrote:

I am not convinced the Democrats would be benefit politically by not helping McConnell and the RSCC out here. If they believe he is a child molester, and then vote to allow such a man to continue to serve then they lose their own credibility on this issue and don't have any claim to the moral ground here. If they (the senate republicans) do want to expel Moore for what he did, and his comment about the Statue of Limitations (for lack of a better term) shielding him from such an event to me is quite telling as there would be no need to make such a comment if he was not guilty, and the Democats want to try to score political points by keeping him, then you could see GOP nominees who don't like Moore turning that vote against them. MA for example is one of the Bluest states, but it is not as Liberal as people think it is and Warren is not as popular there as people think. If a Charlie Baker or Scott Brown type candidate gets the GOP nomination, Warren voting to keep Moore around could work against her. Not saying it will play out this way, but the Dems need to be careful.

See, this is a double-edged sword. Like I said, if Democrats help Republicans pull the lever, expect more Moore-like candidates (they're calling them Roypublicans) to primary out incumbents and run in the general election. They could use the message of "the establishment and Democrats just denied Alabama their voice in the Senate, let's vote them out". And the GOP will happily jump aboard and promote the message of how Democrats were the ones who voted to expel Moore (you know...just as Senator X or Y was the deciding vote on the ACA back in 2010). And whatever statement McConnell and others put out...they're fake because reasons.

apodino wrote:

6. If Moore wins...do they even give him committee assignments? And would Moore even stay in the republican party as a Senator? Given that he does not get along with anyone in the Senate I don't think its unreasonable for him to become an independent caucusing with the GOP, much like Sanders and Angus King do on the Democratic side.

Moore can be seated as a Republican but denied membership in the GOP caucus. That means he is his own brand of Senator (a 3rd party if you will) and no committee assignments (just a regular rank-and-file member). Not akin to King and Sanders who ARE members of the Democratic caucus and are given committee assignments.

apodino wrote:

7. This is yet another political race in this country where there are no good choices. In the presidential Election Hillary and Trump were the nominees and neither one deserved the job. In this race, you have a guy that imo would not represent the same values of AL voters, and a guy who is not qualified for the job. In the 1994 VA senate race, you had a Dem in a scandal over an affair with a beauty pageant contestant taking on a republican who lied a senate Committee under oath and was seeking election to that very body. You get candidates like these because good selfless people wont run because of the emotional abuse they would take from all the negative ads and publicity that comes with the Job. So you get races with no one qualified for the office and no other choices. IMO this is why, as WarRIi put it earlier in this thread, we have a 20 percent voter turnout. And both political parties designed it that way intentionally IMO.

I kinda take issue with this. What is it about Jones that makes him "unqualified" for the office other than being a Democrat in a ruby-red state or a bad candidate? If he had been his own brand of Democrat (pro-life, Christian, heterosexual marriage), there would still be complaints on how he doesn't fit the national mold or he doesn't fit the AL brand of politicians.

Unlike the presidential primaries, this primary was as straightforward as could be. Round one: if no ones reaches 50%, a run-off round happens with the top two. Moore won fair and square. Same on the Democrats' side. The whole thing about politics is that you'll seldom get the perfect candidate so you either go with the 70-90% you can get or you lose. It's likely the reason why Republicans hold a tight grip on a lot of seats: GOP voters know that even though their preferred candidate lost in the primary, they can get around the winner who will get them more than 50% of what the want as opposed to Democrats who if their preferred candidate loses, they'll sit out or vote against the winner.

seahawk wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Do you really believe facts matter in the vote? It is a matter of belief. And it seems that you can get away with a lot if you are a Republican and lip service evangelist. Trump was right, when he said his supporters would still support him, if he would shoot a random person on the street. This is typical for a group that is united by a common hate for persons outside of the group. It is early 1930ies in Europe....

Well, let's see...

After the SS leadership, with Hitler's blessing, detached the pre-Nazi police detective forces from state administrative and judicial oversight in the years 1933-1936, only the centralized SS and police authorities could determine who was a danger to the German “race” and order the incarceration of such persons in a concentration camp. For persons perceived to be political and racial opponents of the Reich, the Gestapo issued “protective custody” (Schutzhaft) orders, which authorized the incarceration in the camps of Jews, Social Democrats, Communists, liberals, Freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, clergy who opposed the Nazis, members of national opposition movements, non-Germans in general after Germany began to occupy Europe, and any others whose behavior—real or perceived—could be interpreted as politically motivated opposition.

For persons whose real or perceived behavior or actions were considered criminal but non-political in nature, or socially deviant so as to create a so-called danger to German society, the Criminal Police office issued “preventative arrest” (Vorbeugungshaft) orders. Under these orders, which were often motivated more by racial and social prejudice than by actual criminal violations, Roma and Sinti (Gypsies), so-called asocials, repeat criminal offenders, homosexuals, and so-called security suspects were incarcerated in the concentration camps. Although the language of these arrest orders contained limits on the time during which a prisoner could be incarcerated, in practice incarcerations were routinely extended indefinitely. After World War II began, Himmler forbade in general the release of concentration camp prisoners for the duration of the war.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.ph ... d=10007387

Hmm, I don't see why former President Obama (and you) would infer that Trump is like Hitler...

Interesting that you draw a connection between Europe in the 1930ies, Hitler and Trump from that post, when it was actually about society failing to find compromise.

I was elaborating on what Mr. Obama was implying. But I guess my emphasis is not yours.
You can Google Obama's remarks from last Tuesday. That's what I was bouncing my comment against.

http://www.alabamanews.net/election-results/

Early returns with 3% of precincts reporting have Moore behind by 9 points.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/live-updat ... ve-stream/

bgm wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I wonder what his first bill will be to introduce on the floor of the US Senate ???

Legalizing pedophilia?

Now, I always thought that pedophilia was the ultimate goal of "the movement," to normalize sexual relationships between young boys and men.... Hearkening back to the "Classical" Greek and Roman Civilization models. But to do it like they did, you'd need a slave class to boink.

Based on Roy Moore's record, I've never put him in the camp that would want these man-boy relationships. But, it was all the rage in Classical Greek, Roman, and Islamic civilizations, among others...