Let's talk Moore

[Just_A_Guy]

Megan McCardle tweets:  

 

Which elicits this response:

 

 

 

[anatess2]

9 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I really didn’t expect this.  I won’t say I’m “pleasantly” surprised; because the grim work of restoring the GOP’s moral credibility while trying to articulate conservatism and growing the base (not to mention governing effectively) still lies before us.  But . . . it’s a necessary first step; and lays a foundation the party can build on if it so chooses.

Moore’s fans are forecasting that every Republican candidate next year is going to have trumped-up sexual harassment accusations thrown at them.  That may be so; but if the GOP nominates folks who haven’t spent decades cultivating the image of a millionaire playboy or folks who didn’t verifiably date/marry women decades younger than themselves, then such accusations won’t have much sticking power.

I didn't expect anything one way or another.  On one hand you got a Democrat in Alabama.  On the other other hand you got the RNC cutting off funds from the Republican and high-profile Republicans donating money to the Democrat.  There's only one guy who can beat that kind of challenge.  And he's in the oval office.

But I did see Bill Mitchell tweeted a 97% voter turn-out for Democrats and 50% voter turn-out for Republicans in Alabama making the 10,000 vote squeak.  Now, THAT is the unexpected thing.  97% turn-out for Democrats who are historically lazy voters?  That's some major grassroots going on there!

And the forecast is not a forecast.  It's happening right now.  Calls for impeachment over sexual allegations is gaining steam.  And here's what REALLY bugs me.  The Trump Presidency so far has been crazily pushing conservative.  And results are palpable.  And yet here we are still talking about millionaire playboys like he got a lewinsky in the oval office.  Okay, this one's for you - thanks to a Trump Presidency, sexual perverts are getting drained out of the swamp and the public arena in record numbers.  So even with that, he's giving you what you want.

Edited December 13, 2017 by anatess2

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

And the forecast is not a forecast.  It's happening right now.  Calls for impeachment over sexual allegations is gaining steam.  And here's what REALLY bugs me.  The Trump Presidency so far has been crazily pushing conservative.  And results are palpable.  And yet here we are still talking about millionaire playboys like he got a lewinsky in the oval office.  Okay, this one's for you - thanks to a Trump Presidency, sexual perverts are getting drained out of the swamp and the public arena in record numbers.  So even with that, he's giving you what you want.

So . . . The backlash against pervert Trump is the reason for the defeat of the pervert Moore (whom Trump endorsed), and I owe Trump my thanks for that?

Yeah . . . no.  Next, you’ll be telling me I should thank Stalin for the Marshall Plan.

Trump, we are told, is an expert at “branding”; and if it comes to impeachment he will stand or fall based on the brand he has built for himself.  You wouldn’t have seen Romney or Flake getting impeached for sex misconduct, though; because they’ve established very different brands for themselves.

[anatess2]

14 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

So . . . The backlash against pervert Trump is the reason for the defeat of the pervert Moore (whom Trump endorsed), and I owe Trump my thanks for that?

Yeah . . . no.  Next, you’ll be telling me I should thank Stalin for the Marshall Plan.

Trump, we are told, is an expert at “branding”; and if it comes to impeachment he will stand or fall based on the brand he has built for himself.  You wouldn’t have seen Romney or Flake getting impeached for sex misconduct, though; because they’ve established very different brands for themselves.

Grrrr.  Why is it that when we talk politics you just could not understand a thing I'm saying????

Try reading what I said again - just the thing you quoted is fine.  Without your projected vitriol this time.  Or not.  It's up to you.  Tell me if it still has anything to do with any 'backlash against pervert Trump" having anything to do with Moore.  Or do you need me to rephrase it so you can understand what I'm saying?

It's undeniable JAG.  You have a deep hatred for Trump and it's clouding your vision.  I wouldn't go so far as saying you have developed a hatred for me because I support the guy, but it sure has made what I say become something completely different when it hits your brain - something completely uncharacteristic of you with our long history on this board.

Edited December 13, 2017 by anatess2

[Just_A_Guy]

40 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Grrrr.  Why is it that when we talk politics you just could not understand a thing I'm saying????

Try reading what I said again - just the thing you quoted is fine.  Without your projected vitriol this time.  Or not.  It's up to you.  Tell me if it still has anything to do with any 'backlash against pervert Trump" having anything to do with Moore.  Or do you need me to rephrase it so you can understand what I'm saying?

It's undeniable JAG.  You have a deep hatred for Trump and it's clouding your vision.  I wouldn't go so far as saying you have developed a hatred for me because I support the guy, but it sure has made what I say become something completely different when it hits your brain - something completely uncharacteristic of you with our long history on this board.

Oh, I understood what you said quite well.  I just disagree with it.  

Trump’s campaign cries of “drain the swamp” had nothing to do with a return to sexual probity either in government or in Hollywood, and you know it.  If you’re pointing to the implosion of Weinstein et. al. as a happy accident justifying the predator Trump’s election, then my prior point stands—that’s like saying the Marshall Plan was a happy accident justifying the rise of the dictator Stalin.  There are still very big negatives associated with Trump’s rise (most recently, the rending of the GOP that just gave the Dems a Senate seat in Alabama; along with the Republican cession of the moral high ground on all issues sexual, which will be a handicap for decades to come); and they aren’t outweighed by the fact that a few liberal pop-culture icons have been fired this year.

I am happy to confess to a *contempt* for Trump (“hatred” is a little strong), which is similar to the contempt I hold for rapists, lechers, and inveterate liars generally.  That said, I wouldn’t have to spend so much time dwelling on Trunp’s flaws, if there weren’t others on this board who try to justify his flaws as being indicators of strength and who hold strength to be the ultimate political and personal virtue.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest Godless]

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Okay, this one's for you - thanks to a Trump Presidency, sexual perverts are getting drained out of the swamp and the public arena in record numbers.  So even with that, he's giving you what you want.

I think Harvey Weinstein deserves most of the credit for that. And let's not forget that Trump himself has multiple women accusing him of sexual harassment and sexual assault. He's hardly the hero of the "me too" movement, though he may eventually become a casualty of it.

[anatess2]

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Oh, I understood what you said quite well.  I just disagree with it.  

No you didn't understand what I said.  Let me clarify:

 

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Trump’s campaign cries of “drain the swamp” had nothing to do with a return to sexual probity either in government or in Hollywood, and you know it.  

I never said this.

 

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

If you’re pointing to the implosion of Weinstein et. al. as a happy accident justifying the predator Trump’s election, then my prior point stands—that’s like saying the Marshall Plan was a happy accident justifying the rise of the dictator Stalin.

Except that Trump is neither Stalin nor a dictator.  And you know it.  I preceded that statement with a nod to his conservative achievements just this year alone.  Therefore, regardless of what you think of his character, he is achieving what conservatives have been voting for in the past 2 decades.  As for the "happy accident" I said - and you even got that one too.

 

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

There are still very big negatives associated with Trump’s rise (most recently, the rending of the GOP that just gave the Dems a Senate seat in Alabama; along with the Republican cession of the moral high ground on all issues sexual, which will be a handicap for decades to come); and they aren’t outweighed by the fact that a few liberal pop-culture icons have been fired this year.

I disagree with the moral high ground on issues sexual being a handicap for decades to come.  That has been a handicap - even a noose - for Republicans for decades past up to and including losing a Deep Red State to a Bright Blue Senator who has no problem killing fetuses up to the day of birth.  Fact:  Democrats own the media.  It is just too easy to get rid of great candidates like Gingrich with just one whiff of sexual scandal.  This goes with the ease by which Republicans can be painted racist, sexist, homophobe, etc., leading Republicans to do stupid things like amnesty and Republican candidates to say stupid things like they have binders of women just to prove they're not racists and sexists.

 

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I am happy to confess to a *contempt* for Trump (“hatred” is a little strong), which is similar to the contempt I hold for rapists, lechers, and inveterate liars generally.  That said, I wouldn’t have to spend so much time dwelling on Trunp’s flaws, if there weren’t others on this board who try to justify his flaws as being indicators of strength and who hold strength to be the ultimate political and personal virtue.

I don't believe Trump is a rapist, lecher, and inveterate liar - that's Bill Clinton.  But that's just me.

 

[Guest MormonGator]

13 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I really didn’t expect this.  I won’t say I’m “pleasantly” surprised; because the grim work of restoring the GOP’s moral credibility while trying to articulate conservatism and growing the base (not to mention governing effectively) still lies before us.  But . . . it’s a necessary first step; and lays a foundation the party can build on if it so chooses.

Moore’s fans are forecasting that every Republican candidate next year is going to have trumped-up sexual harassment accusations thrown at them.  That may be so; but if the GOP nominates folks who haven’t spent decades cultivating the image of a millionaire playboy or folks who didn’t verifiably date/marry women decades younger than themselves, then such accusations won’t have much sticking power.

You gotta listen to Gator sometimes bud. I told you this would happen. 

[Traveler]

 

For those that think that the swamp is getting drained and that we are seeing the undoing of powerful figures as an indication of what happens when a swamp gets drained.  I would remind everyone that both history (past) and prophesy teaches us that swamps are only drained with bloodshed.   When corrupt elements get hold of power in governments – only bloodshed will change that. 

I would suggest that the swamp is not being drained – not even close – just that a few rats are getting eaten by some of the crocodiles.

 

The Traveler

[zil]

9 minutes ago, Traveler said:

just that a few rats are getting eaten by some of the crocodiles.

Next come the hippos...

 

[JohnsonJones]

On ‎12‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 11:05 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

I really didn’t expect this.  I won’t say I’m “pleasantly” surprised; because the grim work of restoring the GOP’s moral credibility while trying to articulate conservatism and growing the base (not to mention governing effectively) still lies before us.  But . . . it’s a necessary first step; and lays a foundation the party can build on if it so chooses.

Moore’s fans are forecasting that every Republican candidate next year is going to have trumped-up sexual harassment accusations thrown at them.  That may be so; but if the GOP nominates folks who haven’t spent decades cultivating the image of a millionaire playboy or folks who didn’t verifiably date/marry women decades younger than themselves, then such accusations won’t have much sticking power.

That sure seems to be the Democrat playbook at this point.  I wonder how long it will take for independents to catch on and have it backfire in the Democrats faces. 

[JohnsonJones]

Well, what's interesting with Moore currently is that most of the accusations have faded...no lawsuits.  Gee wiz...imagine that.

However, one HAS arisen which should become interesting.  Roy Moore I think filed a lawsuit with Alabama to not certify the results of the election.  I think part of it deals with outside tampering and the accusations of lies against him (and I think there is strong evidence of massive outside tampering...but I don't know why that wouldn't let Alabama certify the election...the election is done I think the results stand for themselves).

IN that light, Leigh Corfman has filed a defamation lawsuit in regards to the Moore Lawsuit.  In it, she seeks to say that She was not lying in regards to Moore and all she wants is payment of court costs...so no monetary damages.

Should be interesting to see where it goes at least.