Moore or Strange?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Hannity and his mindless flock live in another reality.

Just like you. Pot calling kettle black

 

[TexasTiger 12,876]

25 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

And you and your tribe convict a guy based on one side of the story. Guess your tribe don't believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty. And I guess your tribe believes it is coincidental all this crap comes out just before the election when the Dem was trailing in the polls. Just like the Dem in Virginia ran an ad showing his GOP opponent running down people in a truck. Your tribe is full of hypocrites.

 

 

The evidence in this case is pretty persuasive. The only trial may be for defamation if Moore calls these women liars. And they would win. But stay in denial, Proud. Did you ever think as a young man that angry tribal politics would lead you to become a Putin supporting pedophile apologist?

[Mikey 16,603]

I am extremely suspicious about this. Why wait nearly 40 years to complain? There is no evidence, just complainants. The age of consent in Alabama is 16, so the one that was 14 has a legal gripe if she's telling the truth. The others do not. Sleazy does not equal illegal.

Several years ago I decided that I would never, ever vote for Roy Moore for anything. I hadn't planned to bother to vote Dec. 12. If this turns out to be an unfounded political hatchet job I'll break my promise to myself and go vote for Moore just for spite. If this turns out to be true, I'll go fishin' Dec. 12 and not vote.

[Mikey 16,603]

19 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

The evidence in this case is pretty persuasive.......

Is there any evidence? All I've seen is accusations. Not saying evidence can't be out there but I haven't seen evidence.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

18 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Is there any evidence? All I've seen is accusations. Not saying evidence can't be out there but I haven't seen evidence.

Different women with similar stories. Other People attesting to being told about it when it was alleged to have occurred. It's either an amazing conspiracy or true. If they are lying, why not claim the behavior went even farther? 

[HVAU 673]

19 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I am extremely suspicious about this. Why wait nearly 40 years to complain? There is no evidence, just complainants. The age of consent in Alabama is 16, so the one that was 14 has a legal gripe if she's telling the truth. The others do not. Sleazy does not equal illegal.

Several years ago I decided that I would never, ever vote for Roy Moore for anything. I hadn't planned to bother to vote Dec. 12. If this turns out to be an unfounded political hatchet job I'll break my promise to myself and go vote for Moore just for spite. If this turns out to be true, I'll go fishin' Dec. 12 and not vote.

You could always write in Strange.

As far as "sleazy does not equal illegal" I agree, but , just my opinion, sleazy does equal unfit to represent me in the Senate.

[alexava 6,973]

Just a few days ago Conservatives were throwing the name Harvey Wine......something around like he was the chairman of all things progressive. Now  sexual offense accusations are just women trying to make money. 

[Mikey 16,603]

5 hours ago, alexava said:

Just a few days ago Conservatives were throwing the name Harvey Wine......something around like he was the chairman of all things progressive. Now  sexual offense accusations are just women trying to make money. 

I haven't said that. I said this is suspicious as hell. The fact that accusing prominent people of performing acts of sexual misconduct from 30 years ago is the current soupe du jour adds to my suspicion.

I didn't vote in the primary because I didn't want either Strange or Moore to be my senator and now I certainly don't want Jones. Maybe I'll write in the name of my old bird dog, he's be a better choice.

[homersapien 11,373]

6 hours ago, alexava said:

Just a few days ago Conservatives were throwing the name Harvey Wine......something around like he was the chairman of all things progressive. Now  sexual offense accusations are just women trying to make money. 

This forum is an ongoing demonstration of political psychology.  It's fascinating.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

9 hours ago, Mikey said:

I am extremely suspicious about this. Why wait nearly 40 years to complain? There is no evidence, just complainants. The age of consent in Alabama is 16, so the one that was 14 has a legal gripe if she's telling the truth. The others do not. Sleazy does not equal illegal.

Several years ago I decided that I would never, ever vote for Roy Moore for anything. I hadn't planned to bother to vote Dec. 12. If this turns out to be an unfounded political hatchet job I'll break my promise to myself and go vote for Moore just for spite. If this turns out to be true, I'll go fishin' Dec. 12 and not vote.

Thanks. But stand by for Tex to call you nasty names for just disagreeing with him.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

The evidence in this case is pretty persuasive.

Why? Do you know much of anything about any of the accusers. The evidence you find persuasive wouldn't convict anyone in court. At his time it is a classic "she said, he said."

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 hours ago, alexava said:

Just a few days ago Conservatives were throwing the name Harvey Wine......something around like he was the chairman of all things progressive. Now  sexual offense accusations are just women trying to make money. 

And liberals had no problem defending Bill Clinton for a BJ in the Oval Office with a young intern followed up by accusations by several other women.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

9 hours ago, Mikey said:

I am extremely suspicious about this. Why wait nearly 40 years to complain?

I addressed why victims may wait years, even decades to say something here:

https://www.aufamily.com/forums/topic/158813-moore-or-strange/?do=findComment&comment=2759774

That is not a reason, at all, to disbelieve them.  It doesn't make it automatically true either, but the "why wait" defense is wrongheaded.

 

Quote

There is no evidence, just complainants.

First, we aren't talking about the standard of proof required in a court of law, we're talking about giving someone a vote.  Second, sexual assault rarely has evidence.  Generally speaking, the perpetrators aren't stupid enough to do it with witnesses around.  So it's automatically he said/she said.  And if it's not rape, there probably won't be DNA evidence left behind either.  Plus, this was the 70s - people didn't have a cell phone in their pocket capable of secretly videoing or recording audio of a secret meeting like this.  

 

Quote

The age of consent in Alabama is 16, so the one that was 14 has a legal gripe if she's telling the truth. The others do not. Sleazy does not equal illegal.

You're imposing legal requirements on something that really isn't about that.  This isn't really about whether there's enough here to throw a man in jail.  It's about whether the man running for Senate in Alabama is really who he says he is - this upstanding man of impeccable moral character.  It's about whether you find him worthy of a vote and holding that office.

 

Quote

Several years ago I decided that I would never, ever vote for Roy Moore for anything. I hadn't planned to bother to vote Dec. 12. If this turns out to be an unfounded political hatchet job I'll break my promise to myself and go vote for Moore just for spite. If this turns out to be true, I'll go fishin' Dec. 12 and not vote.

My plan was to not vote.  I can't support Jones, a Pelosi clone with a Southern accent.  If it turns out to be a lie to try and get him to drop out of the race, I may vote for him out of spite myself to teach the Democrats a lesson.  Otherwise, I'll go about my business and not vote.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

 

I didn't vote in the primary because I didn't want either Strange or Moore to be my senator and now I certainly don't want Jones. Maybe I'll write in the name of my old bird dog, he's be a better choice.

It is looking like the good old boy GOPers are pushing to have Strange as a write in. Pure stupidity since that will assure the Dem is elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/10/roy-moore-turmoil-prompts-talk-luther-strange-write-in-campaign-in-senate-race.html

 

[AUDub 11,148]

Where do we find these people? 

[TitanTiger 20,482]

8 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Why? Do you know much of anything about any of the accusers. The evidence you find persuasive wouldn't convict anyone in court. At his time it is a classic "she said, he said."

This isn't a court.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

Where do we find these people? 

In caves.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

15 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Why? Do you know much of anything about any of the accusers. The evidence you find persuasive wouldn't convict anyone in court. At his time it is a classic "she said, he said."

It would win a defamation case.

[aujeff11 6,243]

18 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

That is not a reason, at all, to disbelieve them

There is no reason to believe them either. I️I️ believe in due process. I’m not going to assume guilt based on one side of the story definitely when the accusations come a month before his election.

Edit: My phone is blanking the homophone for Eye.... don’t know why...

[aujeff11 6,243]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

This isn't a court.

Yeah, the ladies made sure of that by waiting forty years. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

19 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Generally speaking, the perpetrators aren't stupid enough to do it with witnesses around.  So it's automatically he said/she said.  And if it's not rape, there probably won't be DNA evidence left behind either.  Plus, this was the 70s - people didn't have a cell phone in their pocket capable of secretly videoing or recording audio of a secret meeting like this.  

So go around on Twitter with the popular #RoyMooreChildMolester if it’s your choice to believe the [F]/ M side of the story from forty years ago.

Am I️ supposed to believe women in forty years, if they all of sudden claim that you molested them? Even when there were no whispers or indicators of such behavior?

Edit: My phone is blanking the homophone for Eye.... don’t know why...

[AUDub 11,148]

5 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Yeah, the ladies made sure of that by waiting forty years. 

You have a very inaccurate and very unreasonable standard for how you expect victims of sexual assault to behave.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

7 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

There is no reason to believe them either. I️I️ believe in due process. I’m not going to assume guilt based on one side of the story definitely when the accusations come a month before his election.

How on earth did you manage to quote just that line and miss the sentence literally right after it?

It doesn't make it automatically true either, but the "why wait" defense is wrongheaded.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

2 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

So go around on Twitter with the popular #RoyMooreChildMolester if it’s your choice to believe the [F]/ M side of the story from forty years ago.

Am I️ supposed to believe women in forty years, if they all of sudden claim that you molested them? Even when there were no whispers or indicators of such behavior?

According to at least one reporter, there have been whispers of this amongst some for about two years, but the alleged victims weren't willing or ready to go on the record.

Again, "forty years" is not a reason to be suspicious.  It does not mean someone is lying.  It doesn't make it true either, but to keep tossing that out there as if it makes it less truthful is a dumb argument.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

The thing I find most fascinating is basically everyone that has come out saying "I don't believe this" or "Why did they wait so long" are men.  Unless I'm wrong (and I could be), there hasn't been a single Republican woman to come out attacking these women's character.  Says a lot about what prism people are looking at this through.