Doug Jones

[alexava 6,973]

4 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Ok.  So would you vote for a candidate whose economic views you considered to be more beneficial to your interests that held such views over one whose economic policies were noticeably less beneficial but whose views on the above issue were more in line with yours?  Would you find such a choice difficult to make?

Yes. Because that issue is what it is. It's changed very little if at all in my lifetime or adulthood anyway. It won't ever change much at all if any. If it did change, the effect on me and my life would be very near zero. So I think it's beyond ridiculous to hinge my vote on that when there are many more issues that actually matter. Running on the platform of anti- abortion should be an insult on intelligence. 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

27 minutes ago, alexava said:

Yes. Because that issue is what it is. It's changed very little if at all in my lifetime or adulthood anyway. It won't ever change much at all if any. If it did change, the effect on me and my life would be very near zero. So I think it's beyond ridiculous to hinge my vote on that when there are many more issues that actually matter. Running on the platform of anti- abortion should be an insult on intelligence. 

Again, we aren't talking about one issue though.  So you'd sellout your pro-choice beliefs over economic ones.  Surely there are social/moral issues that you would find difficult to vote against in favor of some economic issues that would be to your benefit.  Or are you saying you have no principles on social matters that you wouldn't compromise if it puts money in your pocket?

[alexava 6,973]

40 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Again, we aren't talking about one issue though.  So you'd sellout your pro-choice beliefs over economic ones.  Surely there are social/moral issues that you would find difficult to vote against in favor of some economic issues that would be to your benefit.  Or are you saying you have no principles on social matters that you wouldn't compromise if it puts money in your pocket?

Again throw one out there. I honestly can't think of any. I mean I'm for gay rights but not so much to cut my own nose off to spite my face. Most who align with me fiscally are not too far out there socially. Basic common good and understanding of working families and education. I'm not a fan of BLM not against it either. Any candidate who can't denounce white supremacy without taking a jab at the"other side" is disqualified. So Trump fits the bill. I liked his economic policies but never trusted his honesty. 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

Then you're a unique individual.  Because I would venture to bet that if most are honest on both sides of the various big social and moral issues, they won't support a candidate who doesn't pretty much align with them on those matters important to them, no matter how good they think they are on economics.  For instance, you bring up abortion a lot in this thread as if I and others are single issue voters, when I'll bet you anything you'll find that there are just as many people on the other side of that issue who are 'single-issue' voters.  They'd vote in a complete bumbling idiot so long as they were right on that issue for them.  Lament it if you wish, but it's the truth and it's not just an indictment on one side's voting patterns.

In fact, the Alabama Democratic Party is perfect evidence of it.  They'll cut off their nose to spite their face by offering up socially liberal candidates more in step with the Northeast or Left Coast to get slaughtered in general elections over and over again rather than concede that they might need to find an at least somewhat socially conservative Democratic candidate who might give them half a chance.  Ideological purity on a few hot buttons outweighs any other consideration.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

I find abortion abhorrent. And so does the baby. It does affect others besides the mother and the doctor. 

[alexava 6,973]

20 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

I find abortion abhorrent. And so does the baby. It does affect others besides the mother and the doctor. 

Not if others mind their own business. 

[alexava 6,973]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Then you're a unique individual.  Because I would venture to bet that if most are honest on both sides of the various big social and moral issues, they won't support a candidate who doesn't pretty much align with them on those matters important to them, no matter how good they think they are on economics.  For instance, you bring up abortion a lot in this thread as if I and others are single issue voters, when I'll bet you anything you'll find that there are just as many people on the other side of that issue who are 'single-issue' voters.  They'd vote in a complete bumbling idiot so long as they were right on that issue for them.  Lament it if you wish, but it's the truth and it's not just an indictment on one side's voting patterns.

In fact, the Alabama Democratic Party is perfect evidence of it.  They'll cut off their nose to spite their face by offering up socially liberal candidates more in step with the Northeast or Left Coast to get slaughtered in general elections over and over again rather than concede that they might need to find an at least somewhat socially conservative Democratic candidate who might give them half a chance.  Ideological purity on a few hot buttons outweighs any other consideration.

What other than right to choose do you not like about Jones? I most certainly am unique. 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

7 hours ago, alexava said:

What other than right to choose do you not like about Jones? I most certainly am unique. 

On social issues, he's pretty much just boilerplate national Democrat.  Indistinguishable from Nancy Pelosi.  In a couple of local interviews he's highlighted his support for the contraceptive mandate with zero caveats about organizations like Little Sisters of the Poor or religious non-profits.  Slate interviewed him and even lobbed him an easy softball to make some sort of distinction between himself and the party at large.  They basically asked him what issues he would take a more conservative stance on to distinguish himself from the national Democratic party brand to win in Alabama.  He couldn't come up with one.  The closest thing on his site is something about streamlining regulations on small businesses.  I'm not rolling the dice on a guy like that.

To me, that says he's either avoiding the subject because he knows he's not in step with the electorate on those things, or he's clueless about how out of step he is to attempt to win in Alabama.  I'd say the same thing about an arch-conservative running for Senate in a place like Connecticut, California or Massachusetts.  You have to know the temperature of the room.

[DKW 86 7,426]

So: Jones or Moore?

[homersapien 11,385]

42 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

On social issues, he's pretty much just boilerplate national Democrat.  Indistinguishable from Nancy Pelosi.  In a couple of local interviews he's highlighted his support for the contraceptive mandate with zero caveats about organizations like Little Sisters of the Poor or religious non-profits.  Slate interviewed him and even lobbed him an easy softball to make some sort of distinction between himself and the party at large.  They basically asked him what issues he would take a more conservative stance on to distinguish himself from the national Democratic party brand to win in Alabama.  He couldn't come up with one.  The closest thing on his site is something about streamlining regulations on small businesses.  I'm not rolling the dice on a guy like that.

To me, that says he's either avoiding the subject because he knows he's not in step with the electorate on those things, or he's clueless about how out of step he is to attempt to win in Alabama.  I'd say the same thing about an arch-conservative running for Senate in a place like Connecticut, California or Massachusetts.  You have to know the temperature of the room.

So, supporting a woman's right to choose and requiring that insurance cover contraception is enough to disqualify a candidate in Alabama?

 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

So, supporting a woman's right to choose and requiring that insurance cover contraception is enough to disqualify a candidate in Alabama?

Well first of all, he couldn't even think of one way in which he departs from the national party on any matter that would make him more palatable to conservatives.  So that's not all the reasons why he doesn't have a chance.

Alabama is just the inverse reflection of more liberal states.  If you are a Republican running for statewide office in California, you may as well save your money if you're going to run carrying the same social views as a Republican from Alabama, Georgia or South Carolina.  It's just common sense.  Being pro-life from conception to natural death would be a complete non-starter to win a race in CA, even if you supported a single-payer universal health care system, wanted to return tax brackets to the rates of the Clinton years, believe in man-made climate change, and had no intention of trying to reverse the gay marriage decisions.  You have to know the electorate.  You have to be able to detect the temperature of the room.

So yes, it's a fool's errand for the Democrats in Alabama to run a candidate who expresses zero departures from the national Democratic party, particularly on social issues.  They may as well call a news conference, set up a bonfire in front of their headquarters and toss every bit of money spent on Doug Jones' candidacy into it for all the world to see.

[TitanTiger 20,498]

29 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

So: Jones or Moore?

Write in.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

So: Jones or Moore?

Luv Gov 

[alexava 6,973]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Write in.

That mindset gave us Trump. 

[alexava 6,973]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Well first of all, he couldn't even think of one way in which is departs from the national party on any matter that would make him more palatable to conservatives.  So that's not all the reasons why he doesn't have a chance.

Alabama is just the inverse reflection of more liberal states.  If you are a Republican running for statewide office in California, you may as well save your money if you're going to run carrying the same social views as a Republican from Alabama, Georgia or South Carolina.  It's just common sense.  Being pro-life from conception to natural death would be a complete non-starter to win a race in CA, even if you supported a single-payer universal health care system, wanted to return tax brackets to the rates of the Clinton years, believe in man-made climate change, and had no intention of trying to reverse the gay marriage decisions.  You have to know the electorate.  You have to be able to detect the temperature of the room.

So yes, it's a fool's errand for the Democrats in Alabama to run a candidate who expresses zero departures from the national Democratic party, particularly on social issues.  They may as well call a news conference, set up a bonfire in front of their headquarters and toss every bit of money spent on Doug Jones' candidacy into it for all the world to see.

I agree he needs to get as far to the middle as possible. I also liked Will Boyd because he understood this. 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

Just now, alexava said:

That mindset gave us Trump. 

No it didn't.  I could have voted for Hillary and Trump still would have taken Alabama's 9 EVs by a huge margin.  

[alexava 6,973]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

No it didn't.  I could have voted for Hillary and Trump still would have taken Alabama's 9 EVs by a huge margin.  

Nationally. 

[AUcivE09 582]

Titan - you've hit the nail on the head with Jones. As much as people want to dance around the issues with the Dem party in this state - they will have to run a candidate more in line with the old Blue Dogs to stand a chance.

I think it is safe to say that Moore will be the next senator. FWIW - he was wrong to do what he did on the bench. I will bash anyone for legislating from the bench. What he did is no different that what the 4 judges on the USSC  did in voting to uphold Obama's unconstitutional executive order on immigrants. That being said - what Moore and people like RBG do from the bench is perfectly ok for the senate. I like Moore's values and have no problem giving him my vote for senate. Given the opportunity to vote for him as a judge - never.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

16 hours ago, alexava said:

Not if others mind their own business. 

Hard for the baby to mind his or her business while being torn apart and murdered.

[alexava 6,973]

2 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Hard for the baby to mind his or her business while being torn apart and murdered.

Like I said mind their own business. Leave emotional rhetoric out of it. 

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

People in Alabama are convinced that there are only two biblical issues in politics, abortion and homosexuality, so they vote Republican. And the GOP has convinced voters here that the economic hardships they face are a result of poor people on welfare. Ironic since Jesus commanded his followers to care for the poor. 

[DKW 86 7,426]

2 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

People in Alabama are convinced that there are only two biblical issues in politics, abortion and homosexuality, so they vote Republican. And the GOP has convinced voters here that the economic hardships they face are a result of poor people on welfare. Ironic since Jesus commanded his followers to care for the poor. 

I am infinitely LGBTQ Friendly, but I feel killing a baby because people are too lazy to treat their sexuality like an adult and take responsibility for their own actions is just endorsing stupid behavior before and after the reality of parenthood. Look, non-procreative sex is out there. There is literally birth control on every corner. If all this is too hard for you to understand, I think you need to figure out how to Adult. I would bet that I am now Left of most on this board, but I will never understand taking the life of the unborn can in any way be condoned by civilized people.

However, God is in the forgiving business and we all, especially myself, do stupid things and all need forgiveness...As hard as it is for even me to accept, we all sin and no one's sin is any greater than anyone else's...

[alexava 6,973]

2 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

People in Alabama are convinced that there are only two biblical issues in politics, abortion and homosexuality, so they vote Republican. And the GOP has convinced voters here that the economic hardships they face are a result of poor people on welfare. Ironic since Jesus commanded his followers to care for the poor. 

You couldn't have said it any better. 

[TitanTiger 20,498]

9 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

People in Alabama are convinced that there are only two biblical issues in politics, abortion and homosexuality, so they vote Republican. And the GOP has convinced voters here that the economic hardships they face are a result of poor people on welfare. Ironic since Jesus commanded his followers to care for the poor. 

This is exactly the one-sided myopia I'm talking about.

Believe me, in a deep blue state, if you offer up any candidate who isn't in line with the Left's thinking on those and a few other social issues, they won't have a prayer of winning no matter how qualified or intelligent they are, no matter how effective a leader they are, or how much all their economic, domestic or foreign policy views perfectly align with progressives.  In fact, if they only failed to back the liberal view on just one or the other of those things but not both, their candidacy would be toast.  

This isn't a conservative thing or an Alabama thing.  It's a US of A thing.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

This is exactly the one-sided myopia I'm talking about.

Believe me, in a deep blue state, if you offer up any candidate who isn't in line with the Left's thinking on those and a few other social issues, they won't have a prayer of winning no matter how qualified or intelligent they are, no matter how effective a leader they are, or how much all their economic, domestic or foreign policy views perfectly align with progressives.  In fact, if they only failed to back the liberal view on just one or the other of those things but not both, their candidacy would be toast.  

This isn't a conservative thing or an Alabama thing.  It's a US of A thing.

In the past, I have supported candidates within the GOP. But after seeing recent behaviors of this party, the desire to strip Americans from healthcare, the hypocrisy of claiming to be a moral party yet elevating the immoral to the presidency, the unwillingness to rapidly condemn racism, I will never again vote for someone who runs under that party.