Also a mite curious that when it involves Russian operatives flooding social media with targeted propaganda and an avalanche of lies about Hillary Clinton, the sacrosanct right of free speech must be defended tooth-and-nail at all costs, but when the (real) US press publishes the accounts of American women who say they were personally harmed by a Republican candidate, suddenly it’s way out of line… irresponsible… character assassination of the highest order…
This late in the game, they’re stuck with Roy Moore or losing. Sticking with Moore after the allegations SHOULD be akin to arguing that Weinstein was misunderstood or Weiner didn’t realize what he was doing.
As our resident cephalopod has shown, however, nothing is too much for the magic (R).
Can Moore be forced to step down from the race, or does he personally have to agree to step down?
If the latter, I don’t see him doing that.
I don’t find the timing suspicious at all, for two reasons:
-
Lots of women are feeling empowered by actually being believed for once. I don’t need to make a list of the high-profile cases right now.
-
This is Moore’s first time running as a federal-level candidate, which means lots of out-of-state reporters, who are more likely to rock boats and less likely to wave it away, especially if this is something that’s been known for a long time (which I find likely). IOW, lots of reporters in Alabama likely heard rumors, but they didn’t follow it up years ago, and as time passed it became less and less likely they would. Bring in some outsiders and there’s no reason for them not to follow it up. Inertia is a powerful force.
I find that one a hard sell. And I’m from Alabama. A write-in for Strange seems like it would just be more likely to split the vote, and get a Dem in the position. Would McConnell rather have a Dem than Moore? But I’m not sure how a write in works if Moore were to step down. Would that pretty much mean a runoff (good for Republicans) or would it still be the one with the most votes of those participating wins.
As much sense as you make in physics I’m surprised politics and reading perplexes you. Letting a woman drown, allegedly, didn’t sink Ted Kennedy’s career. Why is that? Is it because people think actual proof should matter or was it pure partisanship?
It’s truly sad the low standards people have on this board with regards to making a decision based on allegations. Allegations that anyone can make. Why didn’t these ladies make these allegations when he was a judge or running for other office?
That’s the strawman that Left Hand of Dorkness was looking for. Who said people can’t say what they wish? I’m saying people need to make decisions based on evidence. Funny the hypocrisy in this thread from the left.
That’s ridiculous and disingenuous.
Let’s get one little tidbit of horseshit out of the way: Moore hasn’t had a character worth assassination for years. This is the Birther that’s been removed as a Supreme Court Justice for contempt TWICE. He’s the guy who refused visitation to a child’s mother because she was a lesbian. He advocates for the Christian version of Sharia law, skimmed more than a million dollars from a charity that didn’t even report that much in donations while using it to further political ambitions. He recently called the US an “evil empire” and praises Putin, arguing that Russian interference in the 2016 elections was the "providential hand of God”.
Fuck Roy Moore.
So you’re not defending Moore while failing to defend evil libruls like Weinstein and Weiner? Maybe you could point to your posts defending them.
At least one woman seriously considered speaking out when he was a judge. But in an age where the 2 major candidates had a bad history on this (Trump with his endless allegations of sex crimes, Hillary and her allegations of helping to cover up the Juanita Brodderick rape) a lot of people are feeling enraged and helpless about how dismissive society is about sexual abuse at the highest levels.
So people are coming forward. Good for them. Thats why people are coming forward now because as a society we showed we don’t take these issues seriously.
In a way its like the Rodney King riots. People felt there’d be justice after decades of police brutality. Nope. So when people realized the system failed them they took to the streets.
Okay, so you’re attacking the women.
That’s never okay, unless you have good evidence they’re lying. It’s always okay for someone who was mistreated to come forward and tell their story, and it’s never okay to attack them for it (even to say they should have picked a different time – yes, that’s an implicit attack). It’s their story, and they can come forward with it any time they like.
It doesn’t mean you have to believe them 100% of the time. It doesn’t mean that you have to do anything. But attacking them is wrong, always, unless you have any evidence that they’re lying (which you don’t).
Your reaction shows why women often don’t come forward – because, 100% of the time, someone will say “why didn’t you speak up earlier?” or “why did you go to his hotel?” or “why did you wear that skirt?”, etc. Every woman who comes forward with such a story is attacked for it. It’s never okay to do this.
In a small but real way, shame on you.
How are those two people relevant to voting based on allegations?
Are all these women just making unfounded allegations?
Also, considering that ~50% of the GOP think Obama is a muslim born in Kenya, this sudden demand for evidence before making accusations on their part is pretty offensive.
We’ve had to listen to the right lie their asses off for years about the most absurd, easy to disprove things. And now you guys want to make legitimate issues look like baseless accusations. It is odious.
How in the hell does anyone posting in this thread have any power to tell anyone how they should or shouldn’t vote. We are discussing how this news will affect the vote. That is the point of this discussion. You keep missing that.
Nobody has advocated that he should be charged, found guilty, or sentenced. Nobody is talking about his potential legal issues over this. We are talking about the politics of this and how it will affect the election that is coming up soon.
We are observing this story unfold and discussing whether and how much it may affect the results, we are not telling anyone what to do or talking anything to do with the criminal law side of this.
You are arguing against nobody.
Actually, he seems to be arguing against a whole bunch of people, and effectively derailing the thread in the process. The ignore list is your friend, people.
Attacking the women? That’s nonsense and more hypocrisy. And even if I were attacking the women it’s perfectly ok. Remember, all that matters is that someone alleges something. Facts obviously don’t.
And what’s this nonsense about accusers of a crime being given the benefit of the doubt? The presumption is one of innocence until evidence is brought forth. Why are women given special treatment?
Now, if Moore is guilty of this, that’s a pretty big strike against his character. But I think the time to have dealt with this is when there was evidence of the crime and the when the police could have done something about it.
People make false allegations all the time. Look at that nonsense at the Air Force academy with the false hate speech. This is why evidence is necessary before action. Moore can be judged based on his positions now. Stuff that happened or may not have happened 40 years ago and is conveniently being discussed now doesn’t seem that relevant.
TLDR version: the women may very well be telling the truth of events from 40 years ago. We don’t know if they are and it will be very difficult to confirm. Wanting proof or evidence is not an attack. And where were you iiandyiiii when James Carville was attacking the women accusing Bill Clinton?
~50% of the GOP are stupid then. Then again ~50% of the US has an IQ of 100 or less so that’s not surprising.
The version of the GOP that we have today believe that there is nothing wrong with what Roy Moore did. Nothing whatsoever.
They believe he was in a position of authority, and this gives him the complete right to do whatever he wishes with any woman or girl he chooses.
They have been given this authority by none other than the Supreme Leader of the GOP, the President of the United States. This is now the moral underpinning of the GOP: “When you’re a star, you can do anything. Whatever you want. Grab them by the pussy.”
This is acceptable behavior by the GOP. Why would they get upset at Moore for following their leader’s advice and moral compass?
Fair enough. I’m pretty sure I remember him posting on the board his agreement with Carville at the time, but my memory could be mistaken. Bazinga, octopus, bazinga!
And even if it’s wrong, so what?