Moore or Jones?

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

It's a she not a he. Unless the accusers had some real evidence/proof I think her testimony as another woman would carry some weight. Would for me if I was on the jury.

Well, that isn't generally how it works.  People saying "I never saw nothing bad from him" isn't exonerating.  

At some point, you have to ask yourself if you really believe this many women are lying about him.  I have my own reasons to say that I don't find him to be a man of character, nor his wife as a woman of character.   So maybe I could take the stand and say that and it would be just as relevant as this person who knew him 40 years ago.

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Well, that isn't generally how it works.  People saying "I never saw nothing bad from him" isn't exonerating.  

At some point, you have to ask yourself if you really believe this many women are lying about him.  I have my own reasons to say that I don't find him to be a man of character, nor his wife as a woman of character.   So maybe I could take the stand and say that and it would be just as relevant as this person who knew him 40 years ago.

 

Guess that's why we have juries. At tis point I don't know what to believe. It still strikes me as being odd that all Moore's accusers suddenly came forward a month before the current election when they were silent when he ran for other offices over the years. But that discussion has been had here ad nauseum and I still wonder.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

Guess that's why we have juries. At tis point I don't know what to believe. It still strikes me as being odd that all Moore's accusers suddenly came forward a month before the current election when they were silent when he ran for other offices over the years. But that discussion has been had here ad nauseum and I still wonder.

I imagine that's because you've never experienced anything like what they are talking about.  So it's hard for you (or I) to get inside the mind of someone who has been assaulted by someone powerful and know what fears they face in coming forward and what it takes to finally work up the courage to do so. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I imagine that's because you've never experienced anything like what they are talking about.  So it's hard for you (or I) to get inside the mind of someone who has been assaulted by someone powerful and know what fears they face in coming forward and what it takes to finally work up the courage to do so. 

That's true but it's reality that has to be taken into account. I've heard several commentators say part of the problem the women face is the process and it needs to be changed. Not familiar with the process problems.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

2 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

That's true but it's reality that has to be taken into account.

No it doesn't.  It simply isn't relevant.  There are myriad reasons that are documented over and over from years of studies and accounts of women who were sexually assaulted by men in positions of power.  It is completely normal for them to either refuse to come forward, or to wait years or even decades before doing so.  And no, they don't necessarily come forward the first time said powerful person is running for some office or up for some other position of power.  The risks of coming forward and not being believed are every bit as amplified as they were before, and could be even worse if you stick your neck out and your attacker wins anyway.  Now they are even more entrenched but you've outed yourself and painted a target on your back.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

No it doesn't.  It simply isn't relevant.  There are myriad reasons that are documented over and over from years of studies and accounts of women who were sexually assaulted by men in positions of power.  It is completely normal for them to either refuse to come forward, or to wait years or even decades before doing so.  And no, they don't necessarily come forward the first time said powerful person is running for some office or up for some other position of power.  The risks of coming forward and not being believed are every bit as amplified as they were before, and could be even worse if you stick your neck out and your attacker wins anyway.  Now they are even more entrenched but you've outed yourself and painted a target on your back.

OK your honor.

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

OK your honor.

Reason, facts, logic and thought are wasted on you.  You will believe whatever you want to believe, so long as it affirms things you already think are true.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Reason, facts, logic and thought are wasted on you.  You will believe whatever you want to believe, so long as it affirms things you already think are true.

Any discussion with you is a waste of time because of your ego making you believe no one can be right....EVER. I made a simple post about another Moore classmate saying he was always a nice guy and you make a federal case out of it.

Right now Tuesday is what's important and you are going to be unhappy again.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2017/senate/al/alabama_senate_special_election_moore_vs_jones-6271.html

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

Any discussion wit you is a waste of time because of your ego making you believe no one can be right....EVER.

You bring nothing to discussions.  You posted a classmate saying he was a good guy and act like it's something of massive consequence.  It isn't.  It's a footnote.  It's not about me being right, it's basic common sense.

 

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

I madw a simple post about another Moore classmate saying he was always a nioce gut and you make a federal case out of it.

Federal case = "pointing out that it's of minor importance at best."  Gotcha.

 

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

Right now Tuesday is what's important and you are going to be unhappy again.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2017/senate/al/alabama_senate_special_election_moore_vs_jones-6271.html

You're right.  Because the Republcans keep supporting sorry individuals of low character and excusing sexual assault and mistreatment of women because their politics are their god.

[AUDub 11,184]

21 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Right now Tuesday is what's important and you are going to be unhappy again.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2017/senate/al/alabama_senate_special_election_moore_vs_jones-6271.html

Win win for me, though it makes my home state look terrible. 

Moore is a hell of an albatross with the midterms coming up next year. 

Got to say I admire Jones though. Guy is leaving it all on the field, even with the tremendous odds against him. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

For those who say say Moore had never denied the accusations made against him, here you go.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_i_never_molested_any.html#incart_m-rpt-2

[AUDub 11,184]

19 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

For those who say say Moore had never denied the accusations made against him, here you go.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_i_never_molested_any.html#incart_m-rpt-2

Yeah we know he denied it after the fact. His hemming and hawing during and immediately after the accusations came out were practically an admission, though. 

[AUDub 11,184]

Jason Isbell is a trip.

For the uninitiated, he performed a GOTV concert in support of Jones yesterday. 

[homersapien 11,447]

5 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

Guess that's why we have juries. At tis point I don't know what to believe. It still strikes me as being odd that all Moore's accusers suddenly came forward a month before the current election when they were silent when he ran for other offices over the years. But that discussion has been had here ad nauseum and I still wonder.

Actually, they didn't "come forward" at all.  They were sought out, interviewed and decided to tell their experiences..

[AUDub 11,184]

Hmm.

 

[alexava 6,973]

If I ever get a DUI I’m going to get dozens of friends and family to testify they only saw me drive sober. This should exonerate me. 

[Grumps 3,704]

So we all know how Doug Jones will vote on everything. Even if he is a better person, why would a conservative vote for him?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

10 minutes ago, Grumps said:

So we all know how Doug Jones will vote on everything. Even if he is a better person, why would a conservative vote for him?

Perhaps you noted why in you intro? Jones has been in the Bham business community a long time. I am surprised more hasn't come out on him. It's out there. My guess is disdain for Jones keeps many silent. Time will tell. 

[TexasTiger 13,017]

2 hours ago, Grumps said:

So we all know how Doug Jones will vote on everything. Even if he is a better person, why would a conservative vote for him?

So how will he vote? Probably against this crappy tax plan most Americans don't want. What else actually comes up for a vote? 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

So how will he vote? Probably against this crappy tax plan most Americans don't want. What else actually comes up for a vote? 

Maybe a SCOTUS nominee.  Ginsburg is 84, Kennedy is 81 and Breyer is 79. I'm sure RBG and SB will do everything they can to hold out til 2020 in hopes that Trump won't win reelection, but they're all getting up there.  And there are countless other federal judges to be confirmed.

[TexasTiger 13,017]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Maybe a SCOTUS nominee.  Ginsburg is 84, Kennedy is 81 and Breyer is 79. I'm sure RBG and SB will do everything they can to hold out til 2020 in hopes that Trump won't win reelection, but they're all getting up there.  And there are countless other federal judges to be confirmed.

True. But this the same thinking that all the damage Trump could do to our institutions, standards and world standing was worth Gorsuch over Garland.

[AUDub 11,184]

Promising sign, but I don't put too much stock into this one. 

Like the rustbelt, I don't think a lot of pollsters know how to properly poll this state 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

Promising sign, but I don't put too much stock into this one. 

Like the rustbelt, I don't think a lot of pollsters know how to properly poll this state 

Yeah, the Al.com article I just read had Moore up by 5 points.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_vs_doug_jones_latest_3.html#incart_m-rpt-2

[Grumps 3,704]

I think that a lot of people will vote for Moore who don't want to say that they are voting for Moore. Similar to voting for Trump.

[AUDub 11,184]

16 minutes ago, Grumps said:

I think that a lot of people will vote for Moore who don't want to say that they are voting for Moore. Similar to voting for Trump.

Could be other pollsters are missing folks. Could be folks are lying to live interviewers. Could be, IDK what.

Difficult race to gauge.