Poll: Judge Roy Moore leads competitors in runoff

[dannno]

Are you serious? Do you really have your head this far up your ass? He has certainly not "completely denied all specific allegations." He admitted to knowing two of the girls and said about one of them "I don't remember dating her, but if we did go on dates, we did." Very convincing.

Then when asked about buying alcohol for a minor on a date, he said something like "No, I remember she was at least 19, I wouldn't buy alcohol for a minor" which basically admitted that he had definitely dated that accuser.

He said "I dated a lot of young ladies" then he later said "I always had mothers permission before I dated the girls." How old would these girls be if he needed their mothers permission? 16? 17? 18? 19? He is literally admitting to dating teenagers, unless you really $#@!ing believe that its common for girls 20+ to need their mothers permission to date.

You retards earlier in this thread were saying amazingly stupid $#@! like "in the late 70s it was normal for 30+ year old guys to date high school girls," which is complete bull$#@! and anyone who claims this is simply lying. It's the 1970's not the 19th century what the $#@!.




The article is total BS. The manager that said Roy hadn't been banned was the manager from 81-88. Roy would have been banned in the late 70s, so very easy for it not to be known by this particular manager. There are plenty of people, like former police officers and colleagues of Moore who said he was interested in high school teenagers, and to watch out for him at malls/football games.

I don't know why you are supporting this guy and lying about his "small government credentials" when he
1. wants more military spending
2. wants to outlaw homosexuality
3. spend billions on the wall
4. israel firster, wants to move embassy to jerusalem
5. wants to maintain huge nuclear arsenal

this list would likely be way longer but roy moore is extremely unintelligent and is thus scared to debate his opponents on the issues. In his interview with hannity, to which I was referring, he answers the same exact question in 3 different ways. "I'm not gonna dispute that I dated teenagers" "I don't remember dating teenagers" "I definitely didn't date teenagers" He is certainly a liar, but I suppose that you want to support this bible thumping taliban member low IQ low energy creep anyways

Wow.... ok.. so you're saying that the girl who he knew but said he never recalled dating her must have dated him.. even though she may have lied about a civics lecture.. she was 17 but did not report any assaults.

And then he dated an 18 year old "accuser" who only accused him of buying alcohol for her a year before it was legal.. which he denies, says it was a dry county and he never would have done that.. took her on dates, no assault..

That's pretty weak sauce..

None of the girls who he actually assaulted, is there any proof that he ever knew any of them.

[dannno]

I don't know why you are supporting this guy and lying about his "small government credentials" when he
1. wants more military spending
2. wants to outlaw homosexuality
3. spend billions on the wall
4. israel firster, wants to move embassy to jerusalem
5. wants to maintain huge nuclear arsenal

He's a non-interventionist and for small government, those are our biggest issues right now.. If there was more than 10 senators who wanted to ban gay sex and that was becoming a legitimate issue of concern, I would have some pretty big reservations, but that isn't something that is going to come up for vote.

[anaconda]

He's a non-interventionist and for small government, those are our biggest issues right now.. If there was more than 10 senators who wanted to ban gay sex and that was becoming a legitimate issue of concern, I would have some pretty big reservations, but that isn't something that is going to come up for vote.

This is my take on it, too. The 1 million citizens of the Middle East who don't get bombed or turned into refugees because of a Roy Moore vote might be quite happy. As long as a legislator is not in jail he/she can vote. Plus, uhmm, innocent until proven guilty. Forgive me for not believing a damn thing from the main stream media anymore. I also first assume that all newsworthy acts of violence are false flags or faked.

[enhanced_deficit]

If he won, that could be a paradigm shift indicating that a Republican can win even with tacit opposition from Trump clan.


Ivanka Trump: There's a 'special place in hell for people who prey on children'

[Champ]

Ok, the sexual allegation strategy has all but failed. Bringing in Allred had the discrediting effect many here predicted, regardless if some of these women are telling the truth. Allred's past and the link to her daughter, Lisa Bloom, a recent attorney and defender of Harvey Weinstein's behavior, did not escape the minds of many, but desperation seems to very much be a key factor in determining strategy here.

What is next in the establishment playbook? Time is running out before the December election and there is no way they will capitulate on a Trump/Bannon momentum building candidate. I guess we will find out soon.

[Influenza]

Wow.... ok.. so you're saying that the girl who he knew but said he never recalled dating her must have dated him.. even though she may have lied about a civics lecture.. she was 17 but did not report any assaults.

And then he dated an 18 year old "accuser" who only accused him of buying alcohol for her a year before it was legal.. which he denies, says it was a dry county and he never would have done that.. took her on dates, no assault..

That's pretty weak sauce..

None of the girls who he actually assaulted, is there any proof that he ever knew any of them.

You said he denied all specific allegations, which was a lie as I just proved otherwise. He admitted to dating one teenager, basically said 50/50 on the other, then said he got mother's permission to date these very young ladies, so there were certainly more than one. Then he denied that he dated teenagers at all.

He's proven to be a liar. But for some reason, because he didn't admit to assaulting some of the girls, you think there's no proof whatsoever. So you think only two of the women were telling the truth, because Roy Moore admitted to most of what they said, and the others are lying, because he didn't admit. And that's you're only reason. Anything short of CCTV footage and DNA evidence would fail to convince you. Only Roy Moore's own admission can do that.

"Roy didn't assault those girls! He said he didn't!" -danno, ignoring the fact that Roy is a liar

[sparebulb]

Do you think that he is a danger to date teenage girls now?

Should we be nervous about Moore to the extent that we should support Jones?

relevant bump

[dannno]

You said he denied all specific allegations, which was a lie as I just proved otherwise. He admitted to dating one teenager, basically said 50/50 on the other, then said he got mother's permission to date these very young ladies, so there were certainly more than one. Then he denied that he dated teenagers at all.

He's proven to be a liar. But for some reason, because he didn't admit to assaulting some of the girls, you think there's no proof whatsoever. So you think only two of the women were telling the truth, because Roy Moore admitted to most of what they said, and the others are lying, because he didn't admit. And that's you're only reason. Anything short of CCTV footage and DNA evidence would fail to convince you. Only Roy Moore's own admission can do that.

"Roy didn't assault those girls! He said he didn't!" -danno, ignoring the fact that Roy is a liar

I wasn't including dating an 18+ teenager on the list of "allegations", nobody gives a $#@! about that. The allegation is that he gave her alcohol, which even then she was 18+ and most people start drinking in high school, almost everybody drinks in college..

If it came out he definetely dated 17 year olds, I guess even though it was legal there and then you could include it because it many places it is not legal, but 18+ is not some type of real "allegation" and most definitely not a crime.

[nikcers]

I wasn't including dating an 18+ teenager on the list of "allegations", nobody gives a $#@! about that. The allegation is that he gave her alcohol, which even then she was 18+ and most people start drinking in high school, almost everybody drinks in college..

If it came out he definetely dated 17 year olds, I guess even though it was legal there and then you could include it because it many places it is not legal, but 18+ is not some type of real "allegation" and most definitely not a crime.

Not only that but society has changed since then, people keep acting like it hasn't. Back then people were married with kids by a certain age or had problems or baggage. It was way more common for women to marry older men back then because of this. Now because of the amount of women working in society its not as common because women aren't married to men for income as much anymore.

[Swordsmyth]

A new poll shows that Trump’s outspoken advocacy for Roy Moore is having a big impact in the Alabama primary, despite the multiple allegations of sexual assault against the Republican Senate candidate.
The number of Trump supporters who believe the assault allegations to be true has decreased substantially, helping to prop Moore up. Ten days ago, 16 percent of Trump supporters believed the women, compared with 51 percent who didn’t. Today, just 9 percent say they believe them, while 63 percent believe the women to be lying.

More at: https://thinkprogress.org/trump-conv...-6e3cd734c9a7/

[Swordsmyth]

Moore has re-opened his 49 – 44 lead over the Democrat Doug Jones, according to progressive polling outlet Change Research. His lead is now as large as it was prior to November 9th, when the Washington Post first broke the story about a string of sexual assault allegations against Moore.

[eleganz]

Even if he wins, he is toxic and will be ineffective until this is resolved.

The only thing he can do is vote yes or no (hey not bad if that vote is lock step with Rand every time) and beyond that he will have no voice.

[specsaregood]

Moore has re-opened his 49 – 44 lead over the Democrat Doug Jones, according to progressive polling outlet Change Research. His lead is now as large as it was prior to November 9th, when the Washington Post first broke the story about a string of sexual assault allegations against Moore.

That must be why the new write-in campaign was just started.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...labama-n824531

[parocks]

Yes, I agree. It was stupid to impeach Clinton for getting a blowjob in the white house. What he should have been impeached for and then hanged for was for selling military technical secrets to the Chinese government.

He was impeached because he lied about the blowjob in court, under oath, perjury, a felony, when Bill Clinton was being sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment.

[merkelstan]

It's a little embarassing this soap opera commands anyone's attention while the US-supported genocide (near genocide?) in Yemen is happening.

[William Tell]

[William Tell]

They could do it and no court would ever review it; they can do what they like.

Your opinion vs Judge Nap's, should be interesting.

[JamesFischer]

I can't wait for him to win. It'll be a huge blow to the GOPe and the pro-thot agenda peddled by the left.

[JamesFischer]

They could do it and no court would ever review it; they can do what they like.

No. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress cannot refuse to seat a duly elected Congressman other than for failure to adhere to the qualifications stated under the Qualifications of Members Clause of Article One of the United States Constitution.

See Powell v. McCormack

[Anti Federalist]

Negotiate Rights Away strikes again.



NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ug-jones-will/

by AWR Hawkins29 Nov 201741

The NRA has not rated pro-gun Republican Roy Moore vs. pro-gun control Democrat Doug Jones in the race for the Alabama U.S. Senate seat, so Breitbart News is rating the two men for voters who are curious as to where the candidates stand on the Second Amendment.

To begin with, Doug Jones is not only open to more gun control but is actually supportive of more gun control.

On November 21 Breitbart News reported that Jones’ support of gun control might not be readily apparent to potential voters because Jones stayed mum on where he stood. But he uttered enough bits and pieces about his positions that clear pro-gun control positions came into focus. For example, he told the Washington Post that expanding background checks to gun shows “would be helpful.”

Jones did not point to even once incident where a mass public attacker acquired his guns at a gun show. Rather, he simply blew the dog whistle for leftists via the Democrats’ age-old war on gun shows.

Jones’ willingness to expand background checks is simply an outgrowth of his overarching belief that the Second Amendment is limited. The Alabama Political Reporter quoted him saying, “We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another.” Again, this is same phraseology other leftists use when they seek to justify infringing on those rights of which it is written, “Shall not be infringed.” Gun control Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), for instance, said similar things when he told told Rachel Maddow, “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.”

But wait–there is more. Politico recently gave Jones the opportunity to convince voters that he did not want to take their guns and Jones pivoted, focusing instead on another part of the question.

The bottom line is that Jones is another pro-gun control Democrat who varnishes over his liberal positions by assuring everyone he is pro-hunting, although the Second Amendment is not about hunting. Rather, it is about defending our lives and liberty from a tyranny within or without our borders. And this is where Roy Moore comes in. On September 12 he told Breitbart News that national reciprocity for concealed carry should be passed immediately and on September 25 he told an audience, “We’ve got to uphold the Second Amendment.”

He added, “You know, they say that guns are bad; that they kill people. Well I know a lot about guns–I’m the one that used guns in combat. I know what guns do…[But] guns don’t kill, people kill. [You could say] cars kill, are we going to get rid of our cars? Are we going to get rid of our knives?”

Moore lifted a concealed carry revolver in the air in two separate campaign events to show that he and his wife do more than just talk about carrying guns, they actually carry them.

And the differences between Moore and Jones are even clearer when one considers that Moore opposes the very gun controls Jones supports. For example, on September 20 Breitbart News reported that “Moore opposes an expansion of background checks for gun purchases. He views an expansion of background checks as a ruse by which the left can secure government-mandated firearm registration.”

It is clear that Moore understands the insidious nature of expanding background checks, be that expansion at gun shows or to all private sales. He sees that the end of such an expansion is gun registration. Moreover, Moore opposes an ‘assault weapons’ ban and a ‘high capacity’ magazine ban, two bans that are being feverishly pushed by the Democrat Party to which Doug Jones belongs.

So rating these two candidates is not so hard. Moore is absolutely pro-Second Amendment, which includes being for concealed carry and self-defense while opposing the various infringements on liberty being pushed by the Democrat Party. On the other hand, Jones is absolutely pro-gun control, which includes supporting an expansion of background checks and viewing the Second Amendment as limited, therefore open to government regulation.

A victory for Moore means Republicans gain a strong pro-Second Amendment vote in the Senate. A victory for Jones means Sens. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) get another pro-gun control vote, which bolsters their push to restrict to the Second Amendment.

[dannno]

No. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress cannot refuse to seat a duly elected Congressman other than for failure to adhere to the qualifications stated under the Qualifications of Members Clause of Article One of the United States Constitution.

See Powell v. McCormack

How could the founders of the country possibly envision that men would sexually harass women??

[Brian4Liberty]

That must be why the new write-in campaign was just started.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...labama-n824531

Even McMuffin 2.0.

Wonder where Bill Kristol dug up this neocon loser?

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/stat...69497011535874

[Brian4Liberty]

Here's "Reason" pushing Kristol's puppet Lee Busby. Shocked! Shocked I tell you.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/29/al...ouldnt-be-a-bi

[Swordsmyth]

Even if he wins, he is toxic and will be ineffective until this is resolved.

The only thing he can do is vote yes or no (hey not bad if that vote is lock step with Rand every time) and beyond that he will have no voice.

This will all fade into the memory hole, especially when he does or says something that drives the leftists insane.

[Swordsmyth]

That must be why the new write-in campaign was just started.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...labama-n824531

Not that that will do them any good.

[dannno]

Here's "Reason" pushing Kristol's puppet Lee Busby. Shocked! Shocked I tell you.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/29/al...ouldnt-be-a-bi

I'm sure Rev3 will be by soon to approve of Kristol's guy as well..

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/USAB4L/status/935975435380379649

[Anti Federalist]

LAW AND ORDER: I cannot begin to describe the sacrifice our law enforcement and Homeland Defense people make. I’m fiercely committed to supporting them.http://electleebusby.com/my-position/

What $#@!ing sacrifice?

Cops have Übermensch powers granted to them, they make, at the public tit, salaries far and above what other comparable blue collar jobs offer, they are next to impossible to fire or lay off, all while performing a "job" that, statistically, is less dangerous than being a garbageman, taxi driver or roofer, just for a few examples.

[eleganz]

This will all fade into the memory hole, especially when he does or says something that drives the leftists insane.

Do you think reporters would NOT ask Anthony Weiner a pedo question in an interview today?

[Swordsmyth]

Do you think reporters would NOT ask Anthony Weiner a pedo question in an interview today?

Probably not, doubly so because of leftist privilege, they may try to dog Moore with it for awhile but it will get old fast and their outrage buckets will be filled by something else he does or says.