wow. I thought no one would stick their neck out to defend such an obnoxious person against some horrendous allegations. I’m impressed.
McConnell and Cornyn’s reactions sound pretty weasely to me. The Post story certainly seems credible to me; multiple interviewees, none of them with any obvious political motive to attack Moore, have given consistent stories over multiple interviews. But at the end of the day, it’s people telling stories about stuff that happened decades ago. If the Post story isn’t convincing enough for some people, it’s hard to imagine what more substantial evidence might emerge in the future.
You know quite well the difference between this and a trial.
This story, which includes details such as the acts and names of the people involved, was published by the Washington Post. This story wasn’t published by a left wing equivalent of The American Spectator. Even if the right thinks a bogeyman such as George Soros was involved, it is much harder to believe that a left wing group would put this much effort into a Senate race in Alabama.
Here’s a 1994 NYT editorial about the role of The American Spectator in the anti-Clinton stories such as Paula Jones
It’s already too late to substitute another candidate even if Moore were somehow arm-twisted into stepping aside – the deadline has passed and the absentee ballots have started going out.
What’s your point? That these women shouldn’t have come forward? That they should be ignored? And what’s with the nonsense about a trial? There’s no trial here – just people discussing whether a politician should be supported or not.
I’m not surprised that people on this forum are quick to jump on allegations and ignore due process if it suits their political goals. I think Moore has problematic positions on certain issues but that’s irrelevant with regards to convicting a person of a crime without a trial.
It’s also interesting that this story hasn’t come out before.
The difference is one is the proper way to handle allegations of crime.
I just checked PredictIt markets, and “octopus read the article carefully” is down to $0.12.
In that case, the response makes no sense. They should have gone straight to no, no, thousand times no! Dunno, WTF?
There is no “due process” in politics. He would get that in court (although I assume the statute of limitations has long since passed)
He is not being convicted of anything. He might be rejected as the next US Senator from Alabama because of these allegations. You would agree the voters should be free to consider what these woman are saying, wouldn’t you?
I’m sure octopus would be taking the same stance on this if the allegations were against the Democratic candidate. Right, octopus?
People can say what they wish iiandyiiii. Are you saying I shouldn’t advocate people be tried and convicted in a court of law instead of by a partisan mob? Obviously, you don’t see it as problematic because you think in terms of (D) vs (R). You are missing the point that serious accusations like this can ruin people’s lives and careers. If I expect a certain standard of proof concerning felony accusations what’s the problem?
Moore supporter and Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler is
[quoted in the Montgomery newspaper]
(Woman says Roy Moore had sexual contact with her when she was 14) saying
So according to this guy, forced sexual contact with a 14 year old is nothing to get worked up about. Isn’t Alabama a delightful place?
What are you talking about? Who is being “tried and convicted” of anything?
People are talking about a candidate, and whether to support them.
What are you suggesting should happen? Should we ignore these women? Should they have stayed silent? Are you saying there’s any reason to believe they are lying? I don’t understand your point. What am I, or anyone in this thread, or these women, doing wrong?
I don’t know if the allegations are true, but WaPo is a reputable source, in general. Timing is still suspicious, but then I can understand why now would be a time for people to speak out. But then, had high profile positions twice before. And runs for Governor. I wasn’t voting for him and won’t now and think it ridiculous he was allowed to run after being removed from his previous office twice, but innocent until proven guilty.
That said, there is some talk of a write in campaign for Luther Strange - if it actually picked up, that could split the conservative vote a bit.
Hold up. SHOW OF HANDS EVERYONE: Who is suggesting that based solely on this article specific criminal charges should be brought against Roy Moore, and that he should be convicted of these specific charges based on mob rule and sentenced accordingly? C’mon, raise hands!
octopus, I’m interested in how many hands you’re counting, and of those, how many are made of straw.
I disagree that the timing is suspicious:
The timeline is:
-Roy wins the primary on September 26–about six weeks ago.
-Reporters go down to Alabama to talk with his supporters.
-They catch the scent of a real corker of a story.
-They spend three weeks investigating the story.
-They write it up.
-They publish it.
This seems a perfectly reasonable timeline.
GOP GOOD, DEMS BAD! octopus SMASH!
I’m trying to think of a case where I skipped from accusation to punishment without trial. If you can find me advocating that I’d be surprised. I’m pretty consistent about being opposed to extrajudicial punishment and opposed to ignoring due process.
It’s sad that people on this board insinuate that there is something wrong for respecting the proper process.
Not really, no. If there’s anything to be learned from the last couple years of regrettable news stories, it’s that there’s a deep well of unreported sexual abuses by powerful men still to be uncovered.
That said, we’re talking about the GOP and partisan politics. I’d be very surprised if Moore doesn’t stay in the race and win it. Sure, maybe he felt up 14 year old girls in his 30s but at least he doesn’t support gay marriage!