Moore wins Alabama GOP primary
Roy Moore has won the GOP Senate primary in Alabama.
There’s lots of coverage of the result that characterizes it as a defeat for Trump, who backed Moore’s opponent, Strange. And on that level, it is a defeat for Trump. But Moore’s history and personality indicates that, as the anti-establishment candidate, he is also a more natural ally of Trump. It seemed to me—and I did not follow this race all that closely—that Trump only supported Strange out of some sense of duty, and he is more temperamentally and even somewhat philosophically allied with Moore.
So I’m not sure what the results mean, except that (a) the right in Alabama is sick and tired of the GOP senators who aren’t doing what they want them to do; and (b) Moore himself is a very popular and idiosyncratic figure in Alabama.
The real question, for me, is who will win the general election. The impression I get from reading the MSM is that Strange would have had an easy go of it and for Moore it will be somewhat harder. That’s concerning to me, if in fact it’s true.
It’s the old old question as to whether candidates who are further to the right, who tend to appeal to party members in the primary, can appeal to the broader public in the general. In that last link I offered, it calls Democratic nominee Doug Jones’ chances of victory “newly competitive” now that Moore rather than Strange is his opponent. I haven’t seen any polls on this yet, but since polls have become more and more untrustworthy lately, I probably wouldn’t give them all that much weight, particularly this early in the game.
Well, that last link points at National Propaganda Radio so I wouldn’t give too much weight on “newly competitive.” Just whistling through the graveyard.
grammar question:
which of the following sentences is grammatically correct:
Democrats and Republicans are both doing bad jobs
or
Democrats and Republicans are both doing a bad job?
In Chinese there is no concept of plural and singular so we never run into a problem like this. how do you correctly express a concept that a group of people collectively doing a bad job individually.
Love listening to the lefties “shoulds” or anyones actually
it should turn out this way
teachers should make more
men and women should be equal
this politicion should win
funny, but its a interesting way to say
Reality is wrong, i am right and smarter than reality, now nod in agreement so i can sound erudite instead of petulant.
makes one smile watching it..
Dave:
That’s a good question. I’m not sure I know the answer.
My first guess would be this:
Democrats and Republicans are both doing…
In that sentence, because it says “both,” which means the two together, I think it probably should be the plural “bad jobs,” although that construction sounds somewhat awkward.
So I would prefer the singular, which you can get to by saying “each” instead of “both.” This is what I mean:
Democrats and Republicans are each doing a bad job…
But that’s awkward, too, because “Democrats” and “Republicans” are both plural words.
I think in the final analysis it falls on the definition of the word “job” versus the word “jobs.” A job can be a single action OR it can be a generalized job composed of many actions. In that latter sense, Democrats or Republicans can do “a job.” So it would be okay to say, “Democrats and Republicans are both doing a bad job,” even though the subject is plural and the job they are doing sounds singular. The whole sentence flows better than the alternatives, in my opinion.
Hope that helps. I’m not so sure it did. 🙂
He ran twice for governor and lost, yet won re-election to the state supreme court after being removed, so it’s a mixed bag.
Since, unlike a governor, senators don’t manage anything but their mouths, I would think he has a good chance of winning, what with the anti-Washington sentiment running high. It’s harder for a democrat to run against the Washington establishment.
I voted for him because he has a history of fighting the removal of unpopular monuments.
It’s sad that this is actually an issue these days, but I know which side of it I’m on, and it’s not the side that will one day dismantle the Statue of Liberty for blaspheming Islam.
“I did not follow this race all that closely–that Trump only supported Strange out of some sense of duty” neo
I wasn’t following this story either until very recently. Breitbart claims that Jared Kushner was the primary influence in advising Trump to support Strange. That may be true. I haven’t made up my mind about Kushner but Breitbart is claiming that Kushner is developing a history of giving Trump bad advice.
I suspect Moore will win easily in Alabama but many are predicting this to precede an avalanche of GOP establishment rejections in 2018. I’d welcome that but I’m somewhat doubtful that it will manifest.
GB:
I wouldn’t trust Breitbart at all to report on what Kushner did or didn’t do.
Perhaps djt was being a crafty fox in endorsing the GOPe candidate, but expecting Moore to win, Which would allow him to tell McConnel and crew I endorsed your candidate and he lost by 10 points so what do you know?
No way will a Dem win in Bama.
neo,
I certainly take anything I read on Breitbart with a grain of salt. Which is why I said their claim of Kushner being the primary one to influence Trump in backing Strange… “may be true”.
That said, I find them not infrequently reporting aspects of issues others may have missed.
parker,
Perhaps… that thought had previously occured to me as well. No way to know of course.
Neo, to your (a) and (b) in your third paragraph, there’s a (c): Moore is a passionate, committed, unapologetic, militant fundamentalist Christian, and that’s a big constituency in Alabama.
Maybe add a (d): the circumstantial evidence is very strong that Strange, as attorney general, was given the Senate seat by disgraced former governor Robert Bentley in return for Strange not investigating and possibly prosecuting Bentley. This really tarnished him. I myself (Alabamian) sat out the vote because I didn’t want to reward Strange and am sick of grandstanders like Moore embarrassing the state. Couldn’t even pick one to vote against.
Jones, the Democrat, is actually, from what little I’ve seen, a very appealing candidate, probably a decent man, but his campaign web site makes it pretty clear that he is a party man on all the social issues that a big majority of people here disagree with the Dems on. I suppose even if he disagreed he would not be allowed to say so and run as a Dem. So, purely on the basis of my personal judgment, having seen no polls, I doubt that he can win. But I will say that I’ve seen more Jones yard signs than is usual around here (I live in one of the most solidly Republican parts of a solidly Republican state.) A lot of people are pretty disgusted with the Moore-Strange (yes, we’ve had a lot of jokes about that) choice.
parker: “Perhaps djt was being a crafty fox in endorsing the GOPe candidate, but expecting Moore to win, Which would allow him to tell McConnel and crew I endorsed your candidate and he lost by 10 points so what do you know?”
Well, McConnel is more unpopular with non-establishment GOPers than almost anyone. Somehow the Breitbart/Trump wing of the party has been – purposefully it seems to me – making the GOP congress the enemy, not the democrats.
It could be a brilliant strategy (disastrous, but brilliant) if it results in more anti-establishment Republicans elected. But it’s got huge, huge risks. Such as losing the congress. But with the hate for the GOP congress right now, that may be more of a feature than a bug).
I don’t like Ryan or McConnell, but I’ve found the hatred for McConnell a little over the top. If not for him Obama would have nominated and confirmed a SC justice. If “but Gorsuch” is someone’s main reason for supporting Trump (and it’s certainly – in my mind – his main accomplishment as President) McConnell deserves the credit for pushing the nuclear option button.
Finally – regarding Trump’s 4D chess “craftiness” – he deleted his Strange supporting tweets after the election. I think he actually wanted Luther to win and figured his political influence would carry him over the line. It’s a loss for Trump. Worse, if Moore loses (I will defer to the Alabamians on that one)
neo: “I wouldn’t trust Breitbart at all to report on what Kushner did or didn’t do.”
Amen. Bannon hates Kushner.
For all the talk about the propaganda in the MSM, we’re absolutely covered with it on the right. The fact that people think Breitbart is a good source is a good indication.
Propaganda is everywhere, bill, because it works on anyone that doesn’t have psychic superpowers.
And nobody has psychic superpowers. Not even the propagandists.
Tatterdemalian
You’re right, it’s everywhere. That’s kind of my point.
Who’s better prepared against it? People who are actively alerted to it, who pull from multiple sources in an attempt to triangulate the truth? Or those who assume their favored sources are pure and the other guys are all “fake news”?
Propaganda works on all of us, sure. But to lesser or greater extents, based on things like discernment, wisdom, exposure to varied news sources, ability to recognize it, ability to understand that your “side” isn’t always right, that we don’t live in a white hats/black hats world, and other less-favored traits like grace, humility, kindness.
We’ve had this conversation before and you dismissed me as hopelessly deluded, if memory serves. I’m also, I’ve been informed, “willfully blind”. So probably not worth continuing.