I was wondering yesterday how things would be playing out if Doug Jones were a pro-life Democrat. And oddly enough, Chuck Todd brought that up on Meet the Press today, saying that he had no doubt the elections would already be over if Jones was pro-life. In the end, it looks like the whole thing is going to turn on the abortion issue, not the ethics issue. I guess that’s Alabama politics.
I’m reminded of a few months ago when the DNC chair said he’d be open to supporting pro-life candidates. I was surprised by the level of pushback he got on that.
It’s possible the Jones campaign would have quite a bit less money if he were pro-life. Of course, it’s also possible that he wouldn’t need it.
Strange to think about it, I’d be surprised if the issue of abortion ever even came up in the next three years in the Senate.
I wouldn’t be surprised at all. Seems like whenever the Republicans take over, some form or abortion restriction gets taken up. They can’t outlaw it, but they can make getting an abortion more difficult, and Republicans love doing that. It’s not such losing proposition, either, as there are some restrictions that most Americans favor, and if they can get Democrats to vote against the restriction, it can be used against them in the upcoming elections.
It might move a few votes but I bet it wouldn’t be all that significant in the end. It’s pretty easy to say you’d vote for a hypothetical candidate who doesn’t really exist - but if there was a pro-life Democrat running then most of the same people would say they’d be open to voting for him/her except for some other flaw the actual candidate would have.
Eh, the abortion thing is an convenient excuse. If it weren’t this, it would be guns, taxes, prayer in schools, etc.
To think abortion is deciding issue in this race is to think Alabama conservatives would ever vote for a Dem. The deciding issue is partisanship.
So why is the race as close as it is then? Moore should be ahead by quite a bit. In the 2016 election, Richard Shelby (R-AL) won his Senate seat 64% - 36%.
It’s close because Moore is a lunatic with fringe beliefs. He’s run surprisingly close elections before.
If true (I haven’t looked at his electoral success to date), that still would make the claim I was responding to suspect. Jones is obviously attracting voters in AL who normally vote Republican, otherwise Moore’s lead would be more in line with typical Republicans. And if Jones were pro-life, that just might tip the balance even moore. (pun intended)
It’s close because not everyone is blindly partisan. But there’s enough to make it a close race.
Moore is a nut case that I’m sure is scaring off a few voters who would otherwise go Republican.
(It’s not easy to get thrown off the Supreme Court, but I think he managed it twice)
Alabama’s other Republican Senator, Richard Shelby, has come out against Moore.
It’s child’s play compared to being banned from a mall.
Yes. If having strongly espoused pro-choice views were genuinely disqualifying, many who did vote for Trump wouldn’t have–‘being pro-life’ may be one of the items on their lists, but it’s clearly not the decisive factor.
Trump was VERY pro-choice:
Also, for those unaffected by the paywall, a lengthy article on 'Trump's ever shifting positions on abortion': https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/03/donald-trumps-ever-shifting-positions-on-abortion/?utm_term=.962dc6e0b767Sure, by his latest run he was claiming to be pro-life—but it was obvious, and still is, that he’s not a true believer.
I don’t see a convincing argument for the idea that a pro-life Democrat would be polling much better against Moore than is Doug Jones. I’m more convinced by the ‘doubling down on one vote for a morally-shaky guy, with another vote for a morally-shaky guy’ theory.
If only we ran a pro-gun, pro-life, pro-low taxes, anti-muslim, pro-christianity (in public places) democrat.
…who had some kind words for slavery.
It…could…work!!!
In 2012, when he ran for Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court following being thrown off the bench, he squeaked through the primary and won the general election with 51.8% of the vote. 51.8% is a win, sure, but any Republican in Alabama is seriously underperforming if they aren’t getting over 60% of the vote in a contested election. And that’s before the child molestation and charity fraud stuff came out. On the other hand, it’s a more important position, so partisans are maybe less likely to be willing to vote D or stay home, so the new stuff will probably need to swing it more than just 2%. In short, who the hell knows.
Cite?
I can think of perfectly legitimate reasons why she would have wanted to add those notations recently. If so, sure, she really should have used a Post-It. But having not done so just tells me that she is an ordinary person, and not someone steeped in the world of contemporary politics, where people on the right are liable to look through your window and critique your kitchen counters.
Not sure how, but whatever, dude.
We do? Which parts? I wasn’t aware of one part of it being a forgery, let alone multiple parts of it. By the way, Fuzzy_wuzzy: what do you think the word ‘forgery’ means?
So you proved this, did you? :dubious: You are your own cite? :rolleyes:
Last report from In-state by me prior to the election. The Democrats must think they have a real shot at it, they bought commercial time during the Sunday NFL telecasts (which costs $$$) to run Doug Jones commercials and I got a recorded call from some female representative supporting Jones, so some serious money is being spent.
Moore is doing almost nothing, do any campaigning in churches where he probably already has support, so either he thinks he has it in the bag or he’s been cut off from nearly all sources of contributions (I’d presume the latter).