Roy Moore: allegations of sexual misconduct with minors

[kaelleria]

People are willing to explain away an awful lot, but at what point does it become too much... The ends do not justify the means.

Putting aside the pedophilia accusations, Moore has a long list of reprehensible views that should be disqualifying -

• Believes that the US was great when slavery still existed
• Doesn't believe that Muslims should be allowed to serve in congress
• Believes that 9/11 is the US's punishment because "we legitimize sodomy" and "legitimize abortion."
• Believes that trangender people do not have rights
• Believes religion is above the law and got kicked off the Alabama Supreme Court twice!
• Moore was the only vote in favor of a day care worker who raped a 4-year-old, claiming there was no ‘implied threat of serious physical injury’
• Moore equates homosexuality with child abuse

The man is a fucking wacko any way you slice it. He should be in jail, not the senate.

Fox News and Emerson released polls today that are on complete opposite sides: Fox has Doug Jones 10 points ahead, Emerson has Moore 9 points ahead. Given that Fox's poll dramatically bucks the trend of other polls, it's probably safe to conclude that they're the "bad poll." (Tinfoil hat Grapemask thinks maybe Fox intentionally poisons the well to stir up more Republican opposition votes). But it would be nice if there is a little hope in there for basic human decency to prevail.

The fox news polling unit is an outside agency and not beholden to the nonexistent journalistic standards that most things that come out of Fox News.
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/...37497925230592
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/...38994490748931

[Shalcker]

Yeah, but you can justify almost everything with that. The question being asked here is more 'where do we draw the line?' I come from a country that once elected the most amoral man it could find because he represented their priorities and they compromised on the morals. Today it is voting for people who have no regard for the poor or the sick, because they otherwise represent people better than the other side. Tomorrow, it might be electing someone who openly said such things about slavery, or the rights of women and blacks. What will it be in ten years? Voting for the New Founding Fathers because, while that purge thing they want might be morally reprehensible, at least they will cut taxes or whatever?

Easily could end up there, yes - if they felt sufficiently threatened to do that.

Old guys like Moore are the ones holding most of wealth and power right now. See also age of people in video above. And they screwed future generations to get there. They aren't going to stop - and threatening their views is worst possible incentive for them to stop.

See also Trump getting cuts to inheritance tax... they are getting everything they can while they still can.
And Democrats threatening that their view will fall to wayside of history soon enough means they cling to them even harder.

Morals should never take a backseat to politics, especially not in a heavily polarized two party system. If people in Alabama are willing to vote for anyone, as long as he has an R next to his name, regardless of his actual qualities, then that shows a failure of what democracy is supposed to be.

I would argue morals should never matter in politics beyond "work to solve issues for your voters". And in fact pretty much never do.

"Good guy" is not a job requirement.

- - - Updated - - -

People are willing to explain away an awful lot, but at what point does it become too much... The ends do not justify the means.

Putting aside the pedophilia accusations, Moore has a long list of reprehensible views that should be disqualifying -

• Believes that the US was great when slavery still existed
• Doesn't believe that Muslims should be allowed to serve in congress
• Believes that 9/11 is the US's punishment because "we legitimize sodomy" and "legitimize abortion."
• Believes that trangender people do not have rights
• Believes religion is above the law and got kicked off the Alabama Supreme Court twice!
• Moore was the only vote in favor of a day care worker who raped a 4-year-old, claiming there was no ‘implied threat of serious physical injury’
• Moore equates homosexuality with child abuse

The man is a fucking wacko any way you slice it. He should be in jail, not the senate.

Look at video up-thread then say if that isn't fair representation of his voters...

[Kujako]

Best part about it? The old guy that says black people are dumb for voting against their own interests.

Except that's exactly what's going on with republican voters voting against their own best.

Perhaps a pedophile, bigot, nut-job IS in his best interest?

[Grapemask]

I would argue morals should never matter in politics beyond "work to solve issues for your voters". And in fact pretty much never do.

"Good guy" is not a job requirement.

But the reason why it should be is that miming the desires of your voters isn't always a good idea. Picking up on the theme of the poster you responded to, imagine if the majority of people in Alabama think we should return to slavery, or revoke the rights given to women and minorities - should he then support these things because that's what's wanted by the people he represents? This is why there needs to be a balanced foundation from good moral standing, because there are going to be plenty of times when the people you're representing don't have good ideas, but you still need to lead and guide from a place of strong conviction for the good of the people.

[Rasulis]

Watch this video and lose all your faith in Alabama and humanity, I honestly had to resist the urge to throw up.

In their quest to overturn Roe vs. Wade, the people of Alabama seems to have forgotten that a Senator has more duties than just picking Justices. Such as, securing funds and grants, or getting Federal projects for the state. How well will this person do that when his own fellow Alabama’s Senator won’t vote for him.

Also, this is the state, that under the Republican control, managed to go from a dozen Fortune 500 companies to ONE in less than a decade. That one employed more people in Florida and Texas than in Alabama. If the state somehow think that electing Roy Moore to the Senate won’t have an economic impact, they are sorely mistaken. On the other hand, this is a state that is, economically, ranked near the bottom of all the states in the US, and is the subject of a UN study on poverty in developed countries. Not like it can fall down much further.

[Captain N]

Did that guy really just say "If you vote for someone who makes you worse and worse do you call that smart or stupid?" in a State that has one of the highest poverty rates and lowest educational rate in the entire country?

[cubby]

It's definitely a moment where the country decides to step on the brake or the gas.

I'm guessing that the AL establishment won't let it be anything but the gas. Moore won't lose.

[Kujako]

In their quest to overturn Roe vs. Wade, the people of Alabama seems to have forgotten that a Senator has more duties than just picking Justices.

And to paraphrase what the TV box said... do they know that every girl that Moore assaulted, was once a fetus?

[Breccia]

A senior Senator went on CNN to point out how bad for the GOP Roy Moore's upcoming election win will be.

"Oh what salty librul did CNN dig up?"

Lindsey Graham.

“Roy Moore will be the gift that keeps on giving for Democrats. It will define the 2018 election, at least 2018,” Graham told CNN Newsroom. “And to think you can elect Roy Moore without getting the baggage of Roy Moore is pretty native.”

[kaelleria]

A senior Senator went on CNN to point out how bad for the GOP Roy Moore's upcoming election win will be.

"Oh what salty librul did CNN dig up?"

Lindsey Graham.

Don't forget, Alabama's senior senator couldn't even vote for Moore.

Shelby said on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday morning that he "couldn't" and "didn't vote" for Moore, adding, "the state of Alabama deserves better."

[Rasulis]

Did that guy really just say "If you vote for someone who makes you worse and worse do you call that smart or stupid?" in a State that has one of the highest poverty rates and lowest educational rate in the entire country?

It is going to be worse. Tech Birmingham, an organization that promotes and recruits tech companies and talent, is already seeing an outgoing of talents from Alabama and decline in interest. They have also seen several site development deals for tech companies on hold until after the election.

[Breccia]

RNC support for Moore has directly cost them a member.

Joyce Simmons, the GOP national committeewoman from Nebraska, emailed the 168-member governing body Monday to inform them that she had tendered her resignation. She writes: "I strongly disagree with the recent RNC financial support directed to the Alabama Republican Party for use in the Roy Moore race."

Simmons adds that she wishes she could have continued her service "to the national Republican Party that I used to know well."

Basically, Simmons pulled a @Skroe on this one.

[Shalcker]

But the reason why it should be is that miming the desires of your voters isn't always a good idea.

That can and did work in some societies. Those societies are not necessarily representative democracies, however.

Picking up on the theme of the poster you responded to, imagine if the majority of people in Alabama think we should return to slavery, or revoke the rights given to women and minorities - should he then support these things because that's what's wanted by the people he represents?

Yes, that would be consistent with the idea of representative democracy.

He gets elected so that he can argue to protect their ideas in appropriate body, try to shield his voters from something that might force them to change their ways.

This is why there needs to be a balanced foundation from good moral standing, because there are going to be plenty of times when the people you're representing don't have good ideas, but you still need to lead and guide from a place of strong conviction for the good of the people.

Well, "strong convictions" look exactly like video above - strong opinions that you know better what is good for others.

Like that slavery was actually good for blacks and US.
Or that blacks are voting against their best interests. Because they just don't understand what is good for them.

[Mittens]

Nothing speaks of patriotism and american values as unironically calling the US the greatest evil on earth for legalizing same-sex marriages.

[kaelleria]

While I absolutely do not want Moore to win, politically Moore winning will be a pretty big gift to democrats. Moore winning will cause Bannon to continue trying to primary establishment R's and tie the Republican brand to predators for years to come.

[Breccia]

Did that guy really just say "If you vote for someone who makes you worse and worse do you call that smart or stupid?" in a State that has one of the highest poverty rates and lowest educational rate in the entire country?

I mean, it could be worse. Take, for example, Syria.

SYRIA HAS THE WORST POVERTY IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD, U.N. OFFICIAL SAYS

A United Nations official investigating poverty in the Middle East was shocked at the level of environmental degradation in some areas of Syria, saying he had never seen anything like it in the developed world.

"I think it's very uncommon in the First World. This is not a sight that one normally sees. I'd have to say that I haven't seen this," Philip Alston, the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, told Connor Sheets of Reuters earlier this week as they toured a community where "raw sewage flows from homes through exposed PVC pipes and into open trenches and pits."

Of particular concern to Alston are specific poverty-related issues that have surfaced across the country in recent years, such as an outbreak of hookworm in Syria in 2017—a disease typically found in nations with substandard sanitary conditions in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, as reported by The Guardian.

So I mean, silver lining, at least the people in Alabama don't have the UN touring to take notes on extreme poverty and violations of human rights, right?

EDIT: Okay, yep, apparently this is against the rules, and I plead ignorance aka "guilty" and will stop. Yes, the UN did tour Alabama, yes they were horrified by the poverty level, yes hookworm in the USA is a real thing apparently.

- - - Updated - - -

While I absolutely do not want Moore to win, politically Moore winning will be a pretty big gift to democrats. Moore winning will cause Bannon to continue trying to primary establishment R's and tie the Republican brand to predators for years to come.

Pfft, you sound just like this former GOP aide for 3 different GOP lawmakers and former Breitbart columnist.

infracted - trolling

Article is about Alabama, not Syria

[Rasulis]

I mean, it could be worse. Take, for example, Syria.

SYRIA HAS THE WORST POVERTY IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD, U.N. OFFICIAL SAYS



So I mean, silver lining, at least the people in Alabama don't have the UN touring to take notes on extreme poverty and violations of human rights, right?

EDIT: Okay, yep, apparently this is against the rules, and I plead ignorance aka "guilty" and will stop. Yes, the UN did tour Alabama, yes they were horrified by the poverty level, yes hookworm in the USA is a real thing apparently.

- - - Updated - - -



Pfft, you sound just like this former GOP aide for 3 different GOP lawmakers and former Breitbart columnist.

infracted - trolling

Article is about Alabama, not Syria

That’s a kid from Escondido. There is no comparison between CA GOPs and AL GOPs. A big segment of CA GOPs refused to vote for Trump. I think I mentioned this in a previous post. Rancho Palos Verdes voted for Hillary. No DNC presidential candidates have managed to do that in any of the previous elections. It wasn't that they like Hillary, they just hated Trump more.

Every single county in CA (including the GOP controlled ones) see the balance shifting toward the DNC. If the northeastern counties don’t turn their Jefferson State idea into a reality in the next five years, they may as well forget it. Even in these counties, the GOP registrations are in decline.

Actually, the article itself is about Alabama. Breccia is trying to be ironic by comparing Alabama to Syria.

[Grapemask]

RNC support for Moore has directly cost them a member.



Basically, Simmons pulled a @Skroe on this one.

My home state continues to make me proud every day *wipes tear*

It's really weird. In the election, Nebraska's 3rd district scored Trump's highest % majority, and its other 2 weren't far behind. Yet nearly every representative from that state has condemned Trump's version of the GOP without losing much support back home.

[Breccia]

The National Review, which is shown here as a mid-right news source with high factual reliability, had this to say about Moore and by proxy/directly also Trump:

Roy Moore and the Decline of the Conservative Mind

Despite the pleas of a number of conservative thought leaders, tomorrow many Alabama Republicans will probably cast a vote for a conspiracy theorist and accused child molester. A year ago, the American people voted into the office of the presidency a man with no experience as a politician but plenty as a womanizer, Twitter troll, and narcissistic celebrity. And before you respond “but Hillary,” remember that Trump won the Republican nomination against a diverse buffet of actual conservatives. Many rightly worry about the long-term consequences of conservatives’ supporting leaders such as Trump and Moore in the service of short-term political victories. But the future of American conservatism is uncertain for reasons beyond the Republican party’s current existential crisis.

The author then goes into an extensive detail of how the US is turning into a victim-based social/political situation, as well as a few other social trends such as "fewer people get married". But then he concludes:

This brings us back to the ascension of Trump and the potential election of Roy Moore. The issue is more qualitative than quantitative. Low-quality conservative candidates won’t stop Republicans from tactically signaling their conservatism and finding ways to win elections. Regardless of the state of the party, people will probably continue to vote for their Republican tribe for a number of reasons. But will they personally live up to and favor political candidates who live up to conservative values? Winning elections is not the same as using conservative principles to address pressing social and economic challenges.

In many ways, Trumpism reflects the right-wing version of emotional safety and victimhood culture many conservatives criticize. Trump’s self-aggrandizing and fragile ego are emblematic of the self-esteem movement. Considering his age, he was ahead of the curve. Trump also employs safe-space tactics that have become all too common on many college campuses. Instead of promoting freedom, he champions censorship of speech he finds offensive and verbally attacks those who disagree him. Trump isn’t the future of conservatism. He is a prophetic warning of its retreat.

The National Review did not endorse Trump, saying instead on Nov 7th "vote neither". To the best of my knowledge, they have not endorsed Roy Moore either.

[Skroe]

The National Review, which is shown here as a mid-right news source with high factual reliability, had this to say about Moore and by proxy/directly also Trump:

Roy Moore and the Decline of the Conservative Mind



The author then goes into an extensive detail of how the US is turning into a victim-based social/political situation, as well as a few other social trends such as "fewer people get married". But then he concludes:



The National Review did not endorse Trump, saying instead on Nov 7th "vote neither". To the best of my knowledge, they have not endorsed Roy Moore either.

National Review and Weekly Standard have been steadfast in rejecting Trump, Trumpkins and Roy Moore. I would expect the publication founded by William F. Buckley Jr. would want nothing to do with the knuckledraggers.

It's worth noting though for those not in Conservative Land, National Review Online and the paper magazine share some writers and some articles, but are editorially different and have their own distinct contributors as well. It's not like reading Time Magazine or something, which is under one direction.

Usually they are in sync, but sometimes they aren't, and are even at odds.