I often wondered why Trump didn't take the opportunity to engage in a proverbial victory lap when decades old accusations of sexual misconduct against Moore began to surface. After all, Trump's never been shy about patting himself on the back, regardless if it's warranted. But had the Alabama GOP nominated Strange, as Trump preferred, it would've prevented a lot of the headaches we're experiencing now.
As it turns out, there's a reason President Trump was restrained in shouting "I TOLD YOU SO."
Democrats refusal to give even one vote for massive Tax Cuts is why we need Republican Roy Moore to win in Alabama. We need his vote on stopping crime, illegal immigration, Border Wall, Military, Pro Life, V.A., Judges 2nd Amendment and more. No to Jones, a Pelosi/Schumer Puppet!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 4, 2017
Welp....there you have it. Despite credible allegations of a then 30-something Moore propositioning teen aged girls back in the 1970s, there's an agenda that needs tending to. Apparently that supersedes common decency.
Back in the 1980s, Henry Kissinger once said of the Iran-Iraq conflict that "it's a pity they can't both lose." Given the Alabama senate race pits a former pedophile (allegedly) against a radical pro-abortion candidate, ol' Hank's sentiment is definitely applicable here.
---------------------------------------
Meanwhile, back in Realville, the people of Alabama have a binary choice. Somebody they KNOW will vote against them 94% of the time, or somebody that will vote WITH them 94% of the time but whom the opponents have tried so vigorously to slander, for purely political purposes.
ReplyDeleteSummed up brilliantly by Ben Howe on Twitter:
ReplyDelete“You must make a choice!”
“Ok, I choose to vote for someone other than these two.”
“No! It’s only these two!”
“Ok, then I choose not to vote.”
“Not voting is not an option!”
“...you seem very confused about what the word ‘choice’ means.”
OK, then realistically you have only one choice. To not vote is to give the victory to the other side. After all, you don't see Democrats refusing to vote for "sinful" people, do you?
ReplyDeleteTo not vote is to give the victory to the other side.
ReplyDeleteWhich is the excuse given by *both* sides. It rings hollow.
After all, you don't see Democrats refusing to vote for "sinful" people, do you?
In today's climate, it's becoming pretty apparent that anyone accused of sexual misconduct is toxic. And now that John Conyers has been successfully pressured into resigning (and Al Franken likely will do so tomorrow), our party absolutely cedes the moral high ground on this issue. Hardly seems worth it for a senate candidate who was wholly unqualified even *before* the allegations raised against him.
Who gets to decide "totally unqualified"? Are we required to believe unsubstantiated 40-year-old allegations that mysteriously pop up a few weeks before a major election?
ReplyDeleteYou do understand the obvious, don't you, that the only reason these Democrats are pressuring reprobates on their side to resign is so they can /claim/ the moral high ground and go after Roy Moore? Problem they have being that after the bulls have left the barn, the BS still stinks.
Who gets to decide "totally unqualified"?
ReplyDeleteUhhh....the voters of Alabama?
Are we required to believe unsubstantiated 40-year-old allegations that mysteriously pop up a few weeks before a major election?
Leave aside there was corroborating evidence, I also said in my previous comment that Moore was unfit even *before* the allegations. When someone says Muslims shouldn't serve in Congress or that sodomy should be a crime, that's batsh*t crazy territory.
If he was unfit "before," then you are substituting your judgment for the people of Alabama who gave him the primary victory and were overwhelmingly in favor of him, until this slander began. It isn't "proof" unless you can convince most people of it, and that has not been the intent of the slander campaign; it's all insinuation and about political dirty tricks. If you lived in Alabama and thought Doug Jones better suited your viewpoint, you should vote for him, or stay home and let Doug Jones win.
ReplyDeleteSlander? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, it's time to move on. Roy Moore lost, and that is definitely a good thing for the GOP's long term prospects.
slan·der noun: the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
ReplyDeleteJust because the slander worked as intended, does not make it a victory for common sense, rational politics or good government. And what do you want to bet that all of a sudden there will be a total lack of interest in these "poor, damaged women" and their stories?