I think it’s pretty clear…
…that no one has a clue who will win the Alabama special election tomorrow. Polls have become rather useless, and in this case they’re contradictory anyway.
By the way, do you recall why Alabama has to choose a new senator? Because Jeff Sessions became Trump’s AG. A lot of people on the right have been very displeased with Sessions’ performance in that capacity, and if Moore ends up losing tomorrow my guess is that we’ll hear a lot more criticism of Sessions.
[ADDENDUM: More—much more—here.]
Your Alabama correspondent here, or one of them. I just now made up my mind. I’ve been agonizing over this but am definitely not voting for Moore. This piece by David French says it pretty well.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454542/comprehensive-conservative-case-against-roy-moore
And let’s curse former Gov. Bentley for helping to create this situation by (probably) giving the seat to Luther Strange in exchange for not being prosecuted. The very widespread perception that it was a corrupt deal helped create the opening for Moore.
I have no idea who’s going to win tomorrow. The polls are all over the place. In my immediate area the yard sign poll says Jones by a landslide. Not sure whether I’ll abstain or write in somebody.
I don’t mind if you don’t vote for Moore for his politics, but giving them a moral victory to the left will only encourage them to continue to weaponize hoax allegations to attack conservatives. next time, they would put a naked woman in Ted Cruz or Rand Paul or Mike Pence’s hotel room they are staying, instruct the woman to jump on the senator and take a snapshot of it. They will find 10 women making allegations against every male republican senator next time.
see no reason for anyone to announce what they are going to do on a conservative blog the night before the election other than to influence how other viewers of the blog will vote. pretty much you are a liberal troll, an online opinion influencer, in Chinese we call you 50 cents gangster.
I have no idea either, and I live far, far away from Alabama (although I lived there briefly in 1997). But, my gut says Moore will win comfortably. This is a very conservative state and Jones is not merely a Democrat, he is (from what I understand) a very liberal Democrat. Call it “yellow dog” politics in reverse but I would think most Alabamians would vote for anyone (even someone as morally questionable and annoyingly sanctimonious as Moore) over a liberal Democrat.
No offense to Mac, but I doubt most Alabama voters have ever heard of David French or care what NR or any establishment conservatives think about Roy Moore. This all strikes me as similar to the Evan McMullin phenomenon a year ago. Much discussion amongst establishment conservatives about how he was going to be a spoiler at least in Utah, but it came to naught. Yeah, he got a lot of votes there but didn’t come close to handing the state to Hillary. Likewise, Jones will do better, considerably better, against Moore than he would against a conventional, untainted, Republican. But it won’t be enough and really won’t be that close in the end
There’s also, at this point, a fairly strong spite factor. People are really pissed off that WaPo et. al. are trying to enforce their will on us. I know at least one person who detests Moore but is probably going to vote for him for that reason. Southerners in general are pretty region-patriotic and combative toward snotty outsiders, and we (Alabamians) have an extra big chip on our shoulders because we’re so often treated with contempt.
No, most Alabama voters don’t care about David French et.al. I just mentioned that piece because it helped me decide.
Dave, your charges that I’m a liberal troll etc. are hilarious. You should know better than to jump to conclusions like that. I invite you to click on my website address and spend as long as you like searching for evidence that I’m a “liberal troll.” As for why I would discuss my vote on the night before an election: the usual term for that is “conversation.”
I am sorry Mac, but there is a clear sentiment from the GOPe to try to influence the election by discouraging conservatives to vote. Ben Sharpio is a nevertrumper, we all know that, but does he need to emphasis that he will never vote for trump 2 days before the AL election? Why the suspicious timing? Let people decide for themselves, if you don’t like Moore than don’t vote for him and keep it to yourself, and tell everyone only after the election is over. This type of internal fighting is why conservatives will always lose (they didn’t just do it against Trump, they did it to every non establishment republican, Herman Cann, Ron Paul, Ted Cruz…), the racial and moderate wings of the left can collaborate and coexist, Bernie sanders still support Hillary even after she wronged him. Not the right, don’t know what their agendas is, but they don’t seem to care if Obamacare can’t be repealed or Trump and pence be impeached (Mitt Romney, don’t dream that Pence will replace Trump, if the dems impeach Trump they will impeach Pence together because he was also the beneficiary of Russian collusion) if they lose this seat. if the GOPe is so sure that Moore is guilty then just tell people to vote for Republicans and than throw him out with the disciplinary committee, why give the seat to the party who protected Bill Clinton from the allegations for 8 years?
Feels to me like Moore will win, Alabamians like to stick it to *them that deserve it!
Very true (he says, not necessarily with pride).
Further note on the yard-sign poll: it’s in fairly affluent neighborhoods that I see so many Jones yard signs. And mostly-black neighborhoods, to a somewhat lesser extent. I’m wondering if there could be a “shy Tory” thing going on. At any rate, I don’t think I’ll be surprised tomorrow no matter who wins, as I really don’t have any idea where things stand.
Dave, I am not fighting with anybody and have no connection to the Republican Party. The idea that my views on this race would influence anyone else’s vote is almost flattering, but mainly just ludicrous. Anyway, I haven’t attained the level of political consciousness that would cause me to shape my conversation with a view toward its effect on an election, and I’m pretty sure I never will.
I certainly hope that Judge Roy gets in. For two broad reasons:
1. We living at a time when the societies comprising “the West”, (by which I mean western Europe as well as the english-speaking nations which were built by Europeans and which are still largely maintained by their descendants), desperately need conservative men and women of conviction and the courage to stand up and speak out for common-sense, traditional values and policies that will put people back into work.
Judge Roy is no moral coward and has nailed his cultural and policy colours to the mast for all to see and they accord with Trump’s – a man who one must never forget occupies only one branch of government – the executive. The judicial and legislative branches are by and large his open enemies. I hope Alabama sends Trump a reliable ally in the guise of Judge Roy.
(Perhaps with enough tough and seasoned allies in congress and about him Pres Trump might finally feel secure enough to relegate Javanka to their proper role as family and fire them from the West Wing advisers).
2. Your Senate is the direct model for the Australian Senate so I am familiar with its role: an upper, “state’s house” where the unique cultural values of the individual states and regions is intended to be reflected so as to avoid perpetual rule by the much more populous and mono-cultural coastal corridors who sneer at their countrymen as “bitter clingers” and yokels.
Alabama ought to be true to itself and reject the current fads and frenzies occupying the elites on the coasts and send to the state’s house a character who, it seems to me, could be from nowhere else but Alabama.
The older I get the more I realise that the ancients had it right about government. Except in very limited exceptions such as defence, the more distant and remote it is from its people, the worse it is.
I live close enough to the state line to be in Alabama in 10 minutes from my front door, but I don’t live there and can’t vote there. If I could, I would vote for Roy Moore despite my misgivings, just because all of the usual suspects are telling me that I shouldn’t. When liberals and Never Trump individuals and outlets are all in pearl clutching high dudgeon about a candidate, that tells me all I need to know about them, and that is that I should support them at all costs.
Mac Says:
December 11th, 2017 at 7:28 pm
Your Alabama correspondent here, or one of them. I just now made up my mind. I’ve been agonizing over this but am definitely not voting for Moore. This piece by David French says it pretty well.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454542/comprehensive-conservative-case-against-roy-moore
* * *
With all due respect to Mr. French, whom I admire for many reasons, his objections to Judge Moore are indicative of exactly why the Basket of Deplorables voted for Donald Trump.
French: “There are multiple ways to lawfully protest federal court orders. There are even lawful ways to change or reverse odious Supreme Court precedents. But the very instant that we permit any judge to actively defy the constitutional order simply when he – in his subjective wisdom – believes a superior court has overstepped its bounds is the instant we begin to lose the rule of law. Ironically enough, those who support Moore because they hate “judicial supremacy” are endorsing the most dangerous form of judicial supremacy possible: a judge who actively defies controlling authority on the basis of his will alone.”
REPLY: After a decade or more of watching liberal/progressive/leftist judges defy superior court decisions, duly-enacted legislation, and popular voter initiatives, why shouldn’t conservatives stand up and cheer for a judge who appears to be on their side for a change? Moore did not create the judicial supremacy meme, but he is using it to reverse progressive rulings that are anathema to Red State voters.
French: “For a man who professes to be a student of the Constitution, he’d happily violate its express terms.”
REPLY: Democrat congresspersons have voted to repeal the First Amendment. Nancy Pelosi’s reaction to whether the ACA was Constitutional consisted of “Are you kidding?” Obama professed to be a professor of the Constitution, and violated it continuously.
It’s hard to gin up any conservative animosity against Moore on these grounds.
French: “The pattern is clear: When Moore is angry, feels cornered, or wants a scapegoat for his own political troubles, he lashes out at LGBT Americans without any sense of proportion or regard for the truth.”
REPLY: The examples French cites are too slim for me to have an opinion on proportion and truth, but you won’t get a lot of Red Staters objecting to one of Moore’s observation that he quotes: You could say” America is the “focus of evil in the modern world,” Moore opined earlier this year. The reason? “We promote a lot of bad things” like “same-sex marriage.”
French: “Yes, to no one’s surprise, Gloria Allred’s extraordinary incompetence helped complicate one accuser’s story, but the fact remains that now two women have come forward with remarkably similar inscriptions from Roy Moore that appear to date back to their teen years. Other evidence – like court dates, contemporaneous, corroborating witnesses, and widespread knowledge of Moore’s dating habits – bolsters the stories of Moore’s multiple accusers. Simply put, the evidence is so strong that no meaningful number of Republicans would give Moore the benefit of the doubt if he were a Democrat.”
French linked to this report, which is very interesting:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/12/05/new-woman-i-had-a-relationship-with-roy-moore-when-he-was-34-and-i-was-17-and-i-have-proof-n2418080
REPLY: The new evidence does not encompass sex abuse or even harassment, just a dating pattern that French doesn’t like (we’ve been over this before ad nauseum: dating younger women is not illegal or immoral or abusive per se); and, although it somewhat bolsters the Yearbook Signature claims, none of it has been adjudicated with experts, examination, witnesses, legal instructions, etc .
And Democrats threw away any realistic claims to “the benefit of the doubt” a long time ago.
Another reply to French’s concerns could be that they are so predictably lopsided: they only work against Republicans, never against Democrats.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/12/11/wapo-columnist-franken-resigning-could-be-bad-for-women-n2420705
“Yet, back to the Frankenstein fallout, eight women accused him of sexual harassment; there’s photographic evidence for one of the accusers. He took to the Senate floor, didn’t apologize, and called his accusers liars. Now, that he’s gone, some on the Left are worried that his exit could be bad for women. The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus noted that his exit could be bad for women. She said we could be seeing the excess of this sexual harassment reckoning with Franken’s resignation, adding there should be zero tolerance for such lewd behavior, but does every incident deserve the political death penalty. “
Stephen, the problem with Moore is that he’s an incompetent and downright harmful witness for those values. Common sense r not Roy Moore. I’m not talking about the sex stuff. I could ignore that, since there’s no allegation that he has done any of that for the past 30 years (and in passing–it really irks me that they keep using the word “pedophile” about him, as if there’s no difference between a 6-year-old and a 14-year-old). But he’s a flake. He is a self-writing, walking Democrat campaign ad.
This is really, really frustrating.
Moore will lose tomorrow, mark this down.
democrats are mobilized, the reason why Trump had double of Hillary’s votes in Alabama in 2016 is the same reason Hillary had double of Trump’s votes in CA, liberals in deep red simply just didn’t bother to vote. They gap between liberals and conservatives is a lot closer than people think. many conservatives are going sit out while the turn out for the democrats could be 100%.
To Mac, regarding the claim that (echoing French and others) “He is a self-writing, walking Democrat campaign ad.”
The long list of complaints about Moore outside the sex-related ones were well known long before the primary that put Moore into the general election, and the Alabama voters already made their wishes known about their weight.
He may indeed be “an incompetent and downright harmful witness for those values”, but the general election controversy is ONLY about the sex allegations, and it’s late-in-the-day to bring up the others as dispositive of the case.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2017/12/11/woke-conservatives-and-the-awesome-power-of-not-caring-n2420738?utm_source=TopBreakingNewsCarousel&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingNewsCarousel
“Have you noticed that if you fail to do, think, and vote exactly the way that the liberals and their Fredocon minions demand, you’re a racist, sexist, homophobic, child molesting, greedy, NRA terrorist determined to murder kids? Yeah, you probably have. And you’ve probably also realized that if you do everything that the liberals and their Never Trump minions demand, you’re still a racist, sexist, homophobic, child molesting, greedy, NRA terrorist determined to murder kids.
When you understand that, you’re on your way to being conservative woke.
…
No matter how you try to please them, regardless of whether or not you comply with their every command, that will never change.
They hate you. Govern yourself accordingly.
Don’t believe me? Then you are not yet fully conservative woke. Try spending about five minutes on social media listening to them
…
The liberal elite and their toadies screech, “If you don’t give us a critical Senate seat while we tread water on dealing with Dem icons like Al “Get Around To Resigning Someday Wink Wink” Franken and Bob “Brotherhood of the Traveling Pervs” Menendez, you totally support pedophiles!” Except we don’t support pedophiles — when’s the last time we gave one a primetime standing O? We just don’t think shaky claims from 40 years ago that include admitted fraud being pushed by our enemies morally mandates our ritual senatorial suicide.”
Mac, Your point is well taken.
I must defer to your local knowledge but I still have to say that any man who, as Chief Justice of a state, is willing to stand up and defend the Ten Commandments, knowing the flack he’ll take in this climate, is OK in my books.
I am quite invested in Judge Roy because I live in a country where the politicians and media recently purported to encourage “a respectful public conversation” on the subject of gay marriage leading up to a plebiscite on the subject.
The result: not only quite mild observant christian and jewish laymen, but clerics also, who attempted merely to state their church’s position on the subject were howled down violently as hateful bigots, (“deplorables” in the US lingo), by ugly mobs who filed numerous applications with courts and tribunals to have them censured and punished and fired for “hate crimes”. There was no public conversation.
The stakes are just too high now.
Your country may have Paul Ryan heading the so-called “conservatives” in the legislature, which is bad enough – but take heart, it could be worse. In mine, our “conservative” PM is really nothing more than an older, smarter,(but regrettably, not a wiser), Justin Trudeau.
“Cometh the hour, cometh the man”. I wish I could be an Alabaman for the next 24 hours or so.
An interesting article for background.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/11/roy-moore-trump-republicans-288769
How Trump came around to an accused child molester
The inside story of President Donald Trump’s full embrace of scandal-tarred Roy Moore.
By ELIANA JOHNSON and ALEX ISENSTADT 12/11/2017 05:00 AM EST
Other than the inflammatory headline that makes it sound like Trump was running a satanic Day Care Center, it’s a plausible analysis.
So far there is only ONE accuser under the age of consent (and still a teen), and even she doesn’t allege anything other than what we would have called “petting” back in the day.
I don’t think he should have done even that, but it’s not a capital crime.
The accusations coming from the Woodstock Generation have such an air of offended prurience that one wonders how they decide which way their head should face every morning.
As for the most recent accuser (see French’s link supra), she didn’t think there was anything wrong with her relationship with Moore at the time (nor was there, judging from her statements about her memorabilia: we are not talking about Weinstein’s power porn or Lauer’s Lecher Lair).
It didn’t bother her for 40 years, so why is it so terrible now?
Well, now she is woke, and realizes how awful it was that she dated an older man with status and money and tolerable good-looks, and was probably the envy of her class-mates for it.
We’ll see what the Alabama jury makes of the case.
This may look like a tangent, but the money quote is in the final graf, once you realize that he is explaining the MO of every progressive/leftist/Democrat organization (and not a few conservative/Republican ones).
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/12/11/half-a-worm/
“When the CEO of Apple, Inc., gave the keynote address last week at a conference in Wuzhen promoting the Chinese government’s style of Internet management, he added a line to what is now a long and dishonorable history of his industry’s engagement with China.
…
Or, the leaders of the tech industry are steeped in Progressivism, in whose value system any freedom other than sexual freedom ranks very low. These leaders also–to a greater extent than earlier generations of business titans–see themselves as an elite both qualified and entitled to determine the conditions under which millions will live their lives. They are therefore naturally sympathetic to the CCP, which likewise devalues freedom and conceives of itself as a paternalistic meritocracy.
Many years ago, a wise man told me that when an organization pursues a consistent policy, there are always three reasons for it. The first is the reason that is given as a matter of public relations. The second is the reason invoked in internal discussions. The third is the real reason.
There you have it.”
They still value sexual freedom, by the way, so long as it isn’t practiced by (a) Republicans; (b) Democrats who have fallen out of favor; (c) icky people in general.
Since you started with polls, you might be interested in this end-link from the FiveThirtyEight post.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/alabama-senate-race-a-poll-without-a-prediction/
“Recent punditry on Alabama’s upcoming special election for U.S. Senate has a distinct theme: The race between Republican Roy Moore and Democrat Doug Jones is “impossible to poll” because “nobody has any clue what turnout is going to look like.” That difficulty, combined with the controversies surrounding Moore, put Jones “just a normal polling error way from a win” in heavily-Republican Alabama, though “it’s all but impossible” to predict the winner.
Data collected by SurveyMonkey confirms these arguments. Minor differences in the methods used to model or select the likely electorate produce wildly varying estimates in Alabama. Data collected over the past week, with different models applied, show everything between an 8 eight percentage point margin favoring Jones and a 9 percentage point margin favoring Moore.
The same survey data also reveal the underlying tensions behind the volatile results: Alabama Democrats are angry and energized, while a significant but critical minority of Republicans are conflicted between a nominee they dislike and a President they support.
…
When we examined the data weighted using standard methods, however, we noted an anomaly absent from SurveyMonkey polling conducted in October in Virginia and New Jersey. The Alabama registered voters who reported voting in 2016 favored Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton by a 50 to 39 percentage point margin. Trump’s actual margin was significantly larger (62 to 34 percent).
As a result, we also tabulated alternative estimates where we also weighted by 2016 self-reported vote preference. SurveyMonkey has not previously released election data weighted by past vote, but other pollsters, including the CBS/YouGov survey in Alabama, do incorporate self-reported 2016 vote in their weighting.
Including 2016 vote in the weighting narrows Jones’ advantage among all registered voters to just 2 percentage points (49 to 47 percent). It results in an exact tie (49 to 49 percent) among both subgroups of self-reported likely voters, and gives Moore a 10-point lead (53 to 43 percent) when narrowing to those who report having voted in 2014 and an 8-point lead (52 to 44 percent) or when using the model that includes all registered voters but gives less weight to those who say they vote less often.
Thus, different approaches to estimating the likely electorate in Alabama produce widely varying results. The 2016 past vote anomaly is especially puzzling. It may indicate either a big underlying Democratic turnout advantage seeping into the response patterns of our respondents, or it may be a sign of sample bias in need of correction. Either way, when combined with the potential for purely random error inherent in all surveys, the findings make a projection of the outcome virtually impossible.”
Put yourself in an Alabaman’s shoes who is planning to vote for Moore, but is polled? With withering moral assault from the media, what are you likely to say to a pollster? That is what I thought.
The 538 piece tells me that Moore is likely to win surprisingly easily- conservatives in Alabama are just not responding to the pollsters- especially anyone polling who is out of state or who is identified with the national media, or a liberal in-state news organization. This really is an election where the polling is useless- you will do better to just look at the state’s partisan tilt here and make a guess- Moore wins by 10%.
I keep finding interesting tidbits down in the depths of the Webz.
https://conservativefiringline.com/uncovered-dnc-memo-promotes-sexual-assault-claims/
“A newly uncovered Democratic National Committee (DNC) memo purportedly was used to promote the use of emotional triggers for sexism, misogyny, and the sexual assault rape culture tactic claims against Republicans and President Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential election.
The memo, titled, “DNC Monday October 3, 2016 PA Strategic Operations- RESTRICTED” and the associated tactics were used in Pennsylvania, District 08
…
In the memo found here, it states:
Social Media Operations
The local/community-news site Topix has a significant footprint in the PA-08 area. We will be creating a user account in the identity of Katie Wagner-Fox (top 5% ‘whitest’ names), an upscale / aspirational white young woman (married) who will be a mouth-piece for pro-Clinton views.
[nothing says “grass roots” like making sock-puppets]
A CTR team will handle on-line engagements to disrupt Trump supporters and encourage potential pro-Clinton females. We are aware that there will be a major messaging drop coming in the next few days and need to promote emotional triggers for SEXISM, MISOGINY[Sic], and RAPE CULTURE. Please have female staffers on hand to help guide gender-targeted messaging and provide authentic voice.
[if you can fake authenticity, you have it made]
…
The memo strategic tactics [sic ??]used appears to be pretty significant if these same tactics are being used against those like Alabama Senate nominee, Judge Roy Moore and now, President Trump where Fox news reported that three women, who previously have accused President Trump of sexual misconduct, banded together Monday to call for a congressional investigation into the president — in what could be an opening effort to shift the sexual harassment spotlight from Congress to the White House.”
They aren’t really the exact same tactics, but they are feeding from the same trough.
https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/sexual-harassment-frenzy-madness-must-stop/?singlepage=true
The Sexual Harassment Frenzy is Madness and Must Stop
BY SARAH HOYT DECEMBER 11, 2017
“Here’s the thing, all this #metooism? It presumes that there is something fundamentally wrong with males. And that it’s up to males to stop all other males from behaving badly.
I have no clue where this kind of crazy comes from, except, of course, Marxism, who thinks of individuals as widgets, defined by one characteristic. You belong to all these “collectives” and you’re supposed to keep everyone else in your collective to certain behaviors.
So, say, for instance, I’m a woman, a writer, a mother and an owner of cats. So, by the power of belonging to those collectives, I should be able to prevent all women behaving like idiots, all of them. I should be able to prevent bad writing or plagiarism. I should be able to prevent child abuse and over-indulgent mothering. And I’m the speaker for crazy cat ladies.
Put that way, it doesn’t make any sense, does it?
And yet, good men, who have never thought of grabbing a woman or doing anything to a woman that is not fully consensual, are being harangued and screamed at because the world must be made safe for women! #Metoo is a badge of victimhood that demands that no woman should ever be sexually importuned without #allmen being responsible.
This is, in other words, a form of insanity.
..
Thing is, there is no way you can ensure every man in the world is properly socialized, empathetic, decent. It’s the same way you can’t ensure that every woman in the world is kind, gentle, and not
Hillary Clinton(sic) a bitch on wheels.Sure, you know what, guys like Weinstein, and apparently Al Franken, and who knows who else, committed criminal acts knowing they were criminal. There’s a good chance they held career advancement a hostage for women (and for some of these guys men) complying with their sexual desires. That’s criminal. And while it probably can’t ever be completely stopped (we haven’t been able to stop murder, have we?) it should be possible to mitigate it.
Let’s start with no one — male or female, left or right — is exempt from scrutiny. A friend says this was supposed to hit right, but it’s taking out mostly the powerful men on the left. There is a reason for that. The left has been exempt from scrutiny and censure for years. They thought they could do whatever they wanted with no bad repercussions.
That much we can do, that much makes sense. But the continuing clamor for every male everywhere to become an angel overnight? Insane.
…
Men can’t ensure that #allmen are well behaved. No, changing the patriarchy or capitalism, or privilege, or whatever other the crazy reason given today won’t change that.
Just like we women can’t ensure #allwomen aren’t skanky hos. Some women will be skanky hos trading on their bod for success. And some men will be sleazy and ill socialized.
This comes on account of being human and not perfect.
It’s not something we can change. And it’s stupid to demand that men try.
So when you come along with your #metoo and your #yesallmen and demand that every man in the world be made magically incredibly well behaved, we’re going to tell you #hushchildtheadultsaretalking.
Because solutions that start and end with “But everyone should be perfect in the way I want” is not a solution. <bIt’s a childish tantrum clad in virtue signaling. And it’s insane.”
https://libertyunyielding.com/2017/12/10/jerry-brown-trump-doesnt-fear-lord-disregards-existential-consequences/
“…We’re very, very good at pointing out the outlines of flaws. We can describe flaws, errors, sins, and wrongdoing like nobody’s business. If I went by the cultural tone of the last few years, I’d think we’d rather do that than be at peace or be happy. We’re so committed to it that we don’t care who gets hurt, or whether we might be wrong, especially about other people’s guilt: might not know everything as surely as we think we do, or see everything as clearly.
Is this getting us anywhere we want to go? Just something to think about. Think about this too: guilt and a sense of desperation are endlessly exploitable for political purposes; in particular, for getting us to agree to things we’re dubious about. Peace and hope are not exploitable that way.
There is nothing wrong with pointing out where assumptions or arguments about policy – or any political decision – are flawed. You can’t talk policy without doing that. Expressing opinions and saying one thing is right and another wrong are the meat and potatoes of talking policy. Doing that is not laying guilt on people.
But proclaiming that others have no fear of God, or that they’ve lost their moral compass, is laying guilt on people. And trying to provoke a sense of guilt in other people over public policy matters is political, not compassionate or altruistic.
As always, we could eliminate much of this dysfunctional dynamic by limiting government’s power. You’d have to worry far less about your neighbor’s moral compass on disputable matters, if his vote didn’t always carry huge implications for the future course of your life.“
The way things are going, the Democrats could unexpectedly lose a seat to a resignation and change things up again no matter what happens tomorrow.
Dave at 7:45 is right. And the Dems are already plainly stunts like that.
Some of these women are lying. Because there have been so many with Harvey, it would be easy to jump in. Hollywood is full of professional liars. Undoubtedly most of the claims are true.
I wouldn’t vote for Moore in the primary but I would in the general. He’s a lawless, nutty guy but his vote is needed in a Senate where every GOP vote counts.
The thing some of you don’t understand about this election is that most likely it would not even be close if almost any Republican other than Moore were the party’s nominee. This is what makes it so deeply frustrating. Most of you probably wouldn’t even know it was happening if, for instance, Congressman Mo Brooks, an ordinary Republican, had won the primary. The Democratic media would probably not have beaten the bushes for women willing to say the Republican candidate had in some way abused them, that being the exploitable panic du jour. It is Moore’s presence in the race alone that gave Doug Jones (the Democratic candidate) an opening in the first place. Argghh.
Here it is election morning and I’m actually thinking of changing my mind again. The Yellowhammer News, a conservative web publication, makes the case for voting for Moore:
http://yellowhammernews.com/featured/52964/
Stephen Ippolito, I guess you’re talking about Australia. Yeah, I’ve been reading about that. Nasty business.
Again we see the truly limiting scope of Trumps political skills. Why tap a sitting senator for a cabinet position (or congressman for that matter) unless you had no idea what your were doing?
At least picking Generals, you did not diminish your own parties share of the legislative votes. I’m sure there were plenty of conservative AG’s or others who would have met DT’s needs as US AG.
But they wouldn’t have been on the “shows” would they.
Art of the Deal? I don’t think much of it
Hope Moore wins, then resigns thereby allowing the Republican Governor to appoint Strange as Moore’s replacement. But whatever happens, I’ll be grateful this is over.
Mac:
It is the inaction of GOPe in the senate that caused Roy Moore to win in the primary because voters were frustrated that they refused to repeal obamacare thanks to Mccain. The only reason the allegations work because GOPe don’t come out to support Moore. Conservatives get accused of hoax allegations all the time, there are dozens of women accusing George Bush senior of sexual harassment the GOPe protected him so he was okay. They want Moore to lose as much as the left so they join in the fight to try to force Moore out of the race to put their chosen candidate in. Don’t reward the schemers who is willing to join forces with the opposing party to hurt the president and a member of their own team they are colluding with the democrats. Moore married a young girl, so they waited 30 years and only objected him having relationships with young girls to try to force him out just now? marring a young girl implied that he dated a young girl, that is basic logic reasoning right?
So, Neo, reading through the threads above at all this apologetics for child sexual assault, et al, how do you like the basket of deplorable that you’ve gathered and garish a living off of? I have to imagine this is all some decade-long social thesis that you’re doing as an educated woman to studying (and milk) the opposition.
TheOtherRandy, I think most of us here, and Neo as well, cannot be shamed by the likes of you.
At what court of law was Roy Moore convicted of molestation? If you don’t like child molestation then you should do everything to stop the Democrats as that is the party of chomo, letting men calling themselves transgenders to share bathroom with girls. Roy Moore never had to settle a case of any sexual misconduct, bill Clinton did. Bill Clinton was 50, Monica was like 20, don’t pretend to care about girls only when the accused is on the other side with allegations manufactured by left wing outlets
I’m sort of with mac on this. I don’t like Moore and I don’t swallow all those allegations either. This seems to be a reflection on Republicans and conservative voters in general There is a group that wants someone who will fight and another who is honorable. What we need is someone not too bad who can fight smartly. Moore didn’t do this while on the Alabama Supreme Court.
If the big issues this year for Moore supporters are abortion and gay marriage, how is one US Senate vote going to make a difference? These issues now need to be fought with arguments and measures that can change peoples’ minds. Foot stamping won’t work. Showing pictures of 20-week-old fetuses and talking about their pain may encourage more states to set date limits on abortion, then the Supreme Court will have to decide–the same Court that now has Gorsuch because of the frequently damned McConnell.
The freedom of religion (or personal belief) is the big issue WRT gay marriage right now. People need to be able to express their views about gay marriage, gay adoptions, etc. without being shut up. Right now the whole issue is an attempt to change all of our long-standing social norms. We desperately need people who can evaluate the broad picture and come up with a real battle plan.
I had similar misgivings about Trump as I do about Moore, but Trump has found some very good people to give him the background he needed on issues and present them to the public from different angles.
I watch Nikki Haley’s interview with Chris Wallace about Jerusalem. She knows when to stand her ground and mmake her point without needlessly alienating people. We need to bring more people like her onto our starting team. We don’t need people who can push buttons and stamp their feet.
Dave–“It is the inaction of GOPe in the senate that caused Roy Moore to win in the primary because voters were frustrated that they refused to repeal obamacare thanks to Mccain.”
No it wasn’t. Sorry, but you clearly aren’t knowledgeable about this situation.
Alleged chomo or pitchforks, I will always defend a man’ presumption of innocent and due process , slavery is over democrats put down your pitchforks, lynching is so 1800s, once the party that created kkk, always the party of kkk, Democrats.
You want a good disputation of honorable and fighters, the left has a good balance of it, the problem with conservatives is they either want all appeasers or all fighters
Donald J Trump saved the republican party, this is why:
A healthy political party cannot survive without a healthy dose of populism, because at its core democracy is still a popularity contest, you can’t mobilize a mass number of blue collar people to vote for you without resolving their grassroots problems and rely on idealistic ideas and principles only. For a long while Republicans controlled by the elitists had been disenfranchising these lower class conservatives, demonizing populism as some sort of ultimate evil, and isolating them, making them more and more extreme and angry because no one was willing to give them a voice or solve their problems.
What DJT did is he saw the opportunity to utilize this untapped force in the right wing for his own gain. in the process of using these people to put him in the white house he unintentionally brought this group of disfranchised people back to the republican party, giving them a healthy outlet to vent their anger while softening/moderating them. Have you noticed that anti-Semitic sentiment dramatically reduced since Trump won? Trump turned this group of supposedly anti-Semitic right wingers and turned them in to Israel supporters.
This all strikes me as similar to the Evan McMullin phenomenon a year ago. Much discussion amongst establishment conservatives about how he was going to be a spoiler at least in Utah, but it came to naught. Yeah, he got a lot of votes there but didn’t come close to handing the state to Hillary.
He did manage to give Minnesota to Hillary, though.
French is the most rabid NeverTrump at NR and, while he has an occasional good column, he is mostly unreadable.
Sorry, but you clearly aren’t knowledgeable about this situation.
How you get more Trump.
if you believe a group of people are deplorable, you do not isolate them, brush them under the rug, disenfranchising them and leave this ticking bomb of society lingering around while waiting for them to explode. You engage them, you help them resolve their problems, you bring them back to society and give them hope, you reform them, re-educate them not leaving them to die in the name of globalism, and that’s exactly what Trump did. Trump base didn’t become more violence after Trump won, there is no uptick of white supremacist violence because Trump empowering KKK or whatever the lie the left has been spreading, the fact is Trump put these people back to work and diffused this ticking time bomb unintentionally. When Trump declared that Jerusalem to be the capital of Israel, you see any objection from his base?
expat:
One Senate vote can make a difference between passing legislation and not, or between judge confirmation and not (the latter is very important for those issues). In 2018 it could even lead to a Democratic majority, which would make a huge difference on many conservative issues. One can assume the people whose big issue is abortion are probably conservative on other issues, as well.
TheOtherRandy:
Your rhetoric is boilerplate troll stuff.
I defend the right of a person not to be convicted by the mob without sufficient (or even any, in some cases, other than one other person’s word for it) evidence. I do that, by the way, whether a person is Democrat or Republican.
And child molestation has a definition. Look it up.
DirtyJobsGuy:
Actually, Trump had every reason to think Sessions’ seat was a safe one for the GOP. Moore was a wild card, as well as the allegations against Moore, that Trump could not have foreseen, IMHO.
“… child sexual assault, et al”? “garish a living off of?”
This is where Neo usually calls in Inigo Montoya.
I could tell you what words you probably meant to use … but I don’t think I will.
The trouble with adopting these condescending poses, Randy, is that they are prone to misfire and blow up in one’s face. As yours just did, multiple times. You affect an ironic tone. You fail. The irony redounds.
The Moore late hit is the reason why I think he will probably be elected. Obama was elected when a judge unsealed a divorce file with ugly accusations seen so often in child custody cases. Those were Illinois voters, though. They are not the same as Alabama voters who are always belittled by the northern left.
neo,
I agree that one vote is important, but that doesn’t seem to be what many Moore supporters are thinking of. Strange could have done that. The staunch supporters seem to want someone who will shove his finger into opponents’ eyes.
I have nothing against fighting for your principles, but I think some Moore people don’t care enough about which tactics are most likely to win the battle.
If I were in Alabama, I would probably vote for Moore for the reasons you gave, but I would try to look for stronger candidates in the future. We have had enough of I Am Not A Witch O’Donnells.
@Randy most people garnish a living not garish one. Lorett a Lynn had a baby at 14, child abuse.? Depends somewhat on the maturity of the young lady, working in a diner at 14 ????
Close to child abuse too.
MollyNH:
You’ve got your accusers mixed up. The 14-year-old did not work in a diner.
expat:
I agree that Moore is a bad candidate, even before the accusations.
DNW; TheOtherRandy:
Not only do I not garish a living off this blog (and I certainly don’t garish a garish living), although I do make some money from it, it’s not nearly enough to be called a living.
Actually I was just using THAT as a generic example of what one might consider, abusive having no your 14 old work in a diner, my mom would never have permitted it. Even just bussing and not taking orders. Sorry do any flub.
neo-neocon Says:
December 12th, 2017 at 2:57 pm
DNW; TheOtherRandy:
Not only do I not garish a living off this blog (and I certainly don’t garish a garish living), although I do make some money from it, it’s not nearly enough to be called a living.”
Nor, garner from the garish gathering.
Randy seems a foreigner, since he obviously has bigger grammatical problems than just a blundering vocabulary.
Yet look how impressively Sergey and Dave do.
Personally attacking and mocking others, seems to make one more prone to the kinds of excruciating errors to which Randy fell prey.
A reminder to us all. Me, included.
neo-neocon Says:
December 12th, 2017 at 12:47 pm
DirtyJobsGuy:
Actually, Trump had every reason to think Sessions’ seat was a safe one for the GOP. Moore was a wild card, as well as the allegations against Moore, that Trump could not have foreseen, IMHO.
* * *
My first thought was the classic military axiom: No plan survives first contact with the enemy.
In searching for a definitive answer to who said it (several famous generals are credited with it), I was presented with this site, which I recommend for several reasons, not least being the first cartoon on the page.
https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/military-and-outdoor-fitness-articles/no-plan-survives-contact-with-the-enemy/
“A perfect tactical plan is like a unicorn because anyone can tell you what one looks like, but no one has actually ever seen one.” (Unknown)
The axiom can also be subsumed under the rubric “the fog of war” defined as “the state of ignorance in which commanders frequently find themselves as regards the real strength and position, not only of their foes, but also of their friends.”
[The final phrase being especially appropos to the Moore situation.]
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” (Sun Tzu, 2009, p.10).
[Also seems relevant to the current political situation; I place the Democrats in sentence 2. President Trump is seen variously in sentences 1 & 3. YMMV.]
The author says: I also found this quotation by Mike Tyson (Berardino, 2012) which I think is quite amusing:
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”