Lets say I’m an Alabama Republican (I’m not, on either count), and lets concede that everything about Moore is true, for purposes of argument…he creeped on all the young girls when he was in his 30s.
Why should it matter? I mean, it matters, I guess that he’s a horrible human being, but if he’s Senator, he’s still going to vote the “right” way, while if Jones comes in, he’s not, dropping the Republican majority down to 51-49, and given the Senate’s voting record this term, losing a seat hurts. So why not vote for the pedophile creep who’ll vote to cut taxes on the rich and keep gays from having abortions, and give guns to babies and all the other stuff Republicans like (Note: I may be misrepresenting Republican positions here), instead of the Democrat who wants to Keep America from Becoming Great Again?
Isn’t there an argument to be made that the party is more important than the man, and that whatever a mess his personal life is, if he does what he’s told and votes the right way, he’s an asset?
eta: Please note, I meant to put this in GD. I’ve notified the mods and asked them to move it.
From a strictly tactical point of view it would only be a short term victory. Having Roy Moore in office will increase the likelihood that purple seats will be more likely to go blue rather than red in the 2018 midterms.
I think you’re oversimplifying and maybe inadvertently disparaging GOP voters. “ANYTHING is better than a Democrat” is certainly the view of Donald Trump and the GOP leadership. But if I were an Alabama voter, I’d have to ask myself how low I want to set the bar here. Can I stomach the idea of a child-molesting sleezeball representing my state? If so, what does that say about me? About my state? And about the standards we’re willing to set for years to come?
The OP has a point, IMO; voting for Moore is only hypocritical if you’re a self proclaimed Christian or ever used morals as a reason to vote for or against someone, and not all R voters, even in Alabama, are or have.
If politicians are only going to be walking party platforms, then no you don’t require a person of character, judgement or intellect. Representative democracies require something a little more substantial, current times not withstanding.
Well if you turned it around and had one candidate that was nostalgic for slavery, wanted to execute gay people, and was part of a party that was working hard to remove healthcare from the poorest quarter of the country, destroy the country’s reputation, and funnel millions from working people into the hands of the 1% … and it was THE OTHER candidate who tried to rape 16-year-olds, to be honest, I’d be conflicted.
Roy Moore is a terrible human being who promotes awful policies - but shouldn’t it be the awful policies that make you vote against him, not the terrible human being?
The problem with Alabama Republicans is not that they’d vote for Moore despite him being a sexual predator, it’s that they’d vote for him EVER. Once you’ve got over that hump, a little thing like groping teenagers isn’t going to stop you…
Of if you’ve ever claimed to be a supporter of the Constitution. Moore was, after all, removed from the bench twice for defying it. I’m kind of peeved that nobody seems to be talking about that.
Most of the Republicans in favor of Moore aren’t saying that, I don’t think, at least not publically. They’re saying the women are lying or were set up by the Washington Post or Mitch McConnell or whoever as part of a conspiracy to bring Moore down because they’re afraid of his Christian values.
I guess the question is, is character overrated in politics? If Moore wins, it certainly takes this to a new level, but there have been people in Congress before who have sexually harassed, as the events of the past couple months have made clear, and even those who who have done so to minors, and gotten themselves reelected…Garry Studds had a relationship with a 17 year old page. Fred Richmond solicited a 16 year old. I mean, we have a President who, when he was a candidate, bragged on tape that women let him grab their private parts because he was rich and famous, and got elected anyway.
Character matters because it is how we predict how someone will act. The reason we think of certain actions as evil is that it is a way to predict what actions they will perform in the future.
In this case, we have a guy who, if elected, has been told that even being a threat to people’s daughters is not disqualifying. We have a guy who has fucked up ideas of right and wrong, and likely impulse control problems. We have someone who can’t judge the rightness and wrongness of actions.
Do you really think you can trust him to toe the line? Do you really think you can trust him to put Alabama’s concerns first, when he himself was unwilling to help the party by dropping out?
Character is always important. It’s how we know we can trust people. And we need to be able to trust our representatives. They are, in effect, a proxy for us and our decision making. We want them to vote the way we would vote.
This guy is an Alabama Democrat. He’s still rather conservative. He should be a closer match to their values than someone who thinks it’s okay to hit on and molest children.
Edit: you mention Trump. And who is exactly the guy Republicans seem unable to control? His character matters a lot.
This is of course exactly the same argument that was made about the presidential election last November.
So the second question that should be asked is, if the policies you favor are inextricably associated with sexual predators and uninformed, immoral degenerates, what does that say about your policies? What does it portend for the future of your country?
Most Alabamans are issue voters, and the biggest issues are Faith, Morality, Family Values. That’s why they’re voting for Roy Moore.
They’ll vote for Moore despite that he’s a pedophile because they’ve been indoctrinated to have Faith that any Lame-Stream news source is Immoral, and provides only FakeNews — they probably don’t even let their Family click to websites that feature FactNews or FakeScience like evolution.
To expand: if Moore wins, but only just, that is pretty bad, bordering on grim. Not “Texas goes totally blue” bad, but bad. Pubbies in states not as rigidly and solidly reactionary start hearing approaching footsteps from behind.
If Moore loses, even just barely, Il Douche will totally lose his shit. He will have lain his hands upon Lazarus and cried out “Rise!”…and Lazarus just gets stiffer and stinky. He will need at least three wildly enthusiastic pep rallies to get straight.
Expect McConnell to come up with something about why the Dem cannot be seated at once because reasons. Or Franken must leave at once, otherwise no fair!
You can expect certain graceless and crude partisans to gloat extravagantly. They will be scolded.
If Alabamans vote on issues of Morality and Family Values, they won’t vote for a candidate whose behavior violates every decent person’s sense of morality and upends the concept of family values, right?
But I wouldn’t assume they ARE voting for Roy Moore. The polls that show Moore ahead are by and large automated calls. By law, automated polls cannot use cell phone numbers. That means about half of all Alabama voters are not getting polled. Younger voters and poorer voters are less likely to use a landline and are therefore less likely to be reached by automatedpolls. Those polls that are conducted live and by humans tend to show Jones ahead.
Here’s hoping tomorrow’s election results will show that character still counts .