• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Roy Moore Might Win. Blame the Media

There may be an ethics investigation, but I don't see it going anywhere.

Senate ethics investigations (investigating fellow senators), are usually where problems go to die and get swept under the rug.

Plus I think the politics (as usual) will win out. The GOP need this guy's vote. Trump needs this guy's vote. And the Trump-Bannon wing of GOP voters want this guy's vote. So I think he's good.

I think if these women testify and there is any truth to the allegations evidence will emerge. I know where I work most people know what is going on. If the other workers are interviewed the truth will come out. Of course if its not what we want to hear will we believe and accept it.
 
Lets not forget this last election. Hillary clearly supported Bill Clintons actions. What about JFK? Trump needs to chase some young workers around the Oval Office to gain the respect of the left.
The Civil Rights Act was a long time ago and blacks need to get over it, but JFK needs to be in our thoughts as we vote for Roy Moore.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks said Tuesday:

"What you have is the mainstream leftwing socialist Democrat news media trying to distort the evidence to cause people to reach the conclusion
that Roy Moore engaged in unlawful conduct with a minor and my analysis of the evidence is that is not the case," Brooks said on "The Dale Jackson
Show" on WVNN Alabama radio. "Most importantly, the media likes to say 'well, there are nine complainers.' Seven of them aren't complainers.
In fact, I would be calling seven of those ladies as witnesses on behalf of Roy Moore on the issue of whether he is engaged in any kind of unlawful conduct.”

"So, now you're down to one witness who said that Roy Moore engaged in nonconsensual sexual contact, okay?" he said. "Well, that one witness'
testimony is in direct and stark contrast with that of the other seven ladies, who said that he acted like an officer and a gentleman. And you look
at the preponderance of the evidence and then you add Roy Moore's denial and you add his long deeply held Christian beliefs and I just don't
think there's any way in the world that a jury would agree with the assertions of The Washington Post and others that are trying to make us
believe in the state of Alabama that we would be electing a pedophile."

Wednesday, November 29 2 days after McConnell's 'write in guy' announced:
Race/Topic (Click to Sort)PollResultsSpread
Alabama Senate Special Election - Moore vs. JonesJMC AnalyticsMoore 49, Jones 44Moore +5
Time to break out the hillbilly jokes.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Which sexual allegations were in the public domain against Clinton prior to the 92 and 96 elections?

Jennifer Flowers had been public by then. In 96 the numbers had gone up substantially
 
The 1st day after this 'write in guy' announced his campaign the odds went down for a Moore victory but things have stabilized
and more still commands a healthy lead. Another disgraceful move by McConnell. Today Moore's odds moved back to a healthy lead
in spite of McConnell's tactics:
Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election -315
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election +235

Things looking even better for Moore today:

US Senate - Alabama Special Election Winner
Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election -380
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election +260
 
I remember a little nugget from Charles Murray's "Coming Apart" thesis. The masses were typically decent enough people, but they needed the elites to aspire to something greater. Now the masses are engaging in decay and the elites aren't interested in taking up their responsibilities for showing the unwashed how to behave.

Murray was perhaps largely right after all.

If the American public are morally bankrupt and/or the elites are contributing or encouraging that development, it's time to call it out as it is. That the masses are unwilling to look at themselves in the mirror does not negate the truth that they are dirty.

Welcome to the human race. Its dirty down here with us commoners, but that's our species.
I've not read Murphy's thesis, but it sounds semi-pompous. Maybe I'm wrong though...haven't read it.
I don't see any unnatural decay socially. I see change managed poorly.
The rate of technological change has been staggering. The distribution of wealth is lop-sided as hell.
The leaders of the "3rd world" countries are generally greedy bastards who don't care for anything but their bank accounts and the military.
Then there's us in the west...

I see those you call the "elites", whipping the world's populations into a frenzy. Cultivating social upheaval and unrest.
From the moment the central banking system was put into operation, we've been on a collision course with a nasty destiny.
So IMO, the "elites" are fomenting this mess. 9/11, AlQaeda and the boogieman Bin Laden, Afghanistan, Iraq, ISIS, Syria, Islamist Jihad and refugees, Terrorist attacks, racial confrontations, Donny Trump and Rocketman.

As it happens, the general public is oblivious for the most part. We're so busy just trying to make ends meat, that it becomes a blur of bad news. But one interesting byproduct of all this upheaval, is anger...on a wholesale scale. Anger that drives people...perhaps...to dredge up an old encounter with a Judge who was a bit of a dick.

This isn't an enlightenment of humans...its a preparation stage.
 
I think if these women testify and there is any truth to the allegations evidence will emerge. I know where I work most people know what is going on. If the other workers are interviewed the truth will come out. Of course if its not what we want to hear will we believe and accept it.
Maybe.

But Senate hearings are as much or more politics, than anything.

If the citizens of Alabama vote the guy in, he's in (IMO). Unless there's undeniable evidence of a serious crime. But even then, do we have the right to over-ride the voting desires of Alabamans? I really don't know if we do.

Even if the guy was convicted of some heinous crime previous to the election, he did his time, and Alabamans then said, "He's our guy!". Do we have the right to take that away from them?

Now if he commits crimes while in the Senate, well that's a different story. But this stuff he's done is before his time in the Senate, and the citizens have no issue with it.
 
Maybe.

But Senate hearings are as much or more politics, than anything.

If the citizens of Alabama vote the guy in, he's in (IMO). Unless there's undeniable evidence of a serious crime. But even then, do we have the right to over-ride the voting desires of Alabamans? I really don't know if we do.

Even if the guy was convicted of some heinous crime previous to the election, he did his time, and Alabamans then said, "He's our guy!". Do we have the right to take that away from them?

Now if he commits crimes while in the Senate, well that's a different story. But this stuff he's done is before his time in the Senate, and the citizens have no issue with it.

I agree if he was convicted and has served his time then he is just as eligible as anyone else. However he has not been charged so if indicted I think he should not be eligible until after the trial and punishment.

All these allegations are slander unless they have sworn testimony to the Police and/or DA. Then I want to know why they are not doing their job if we have 30 witnesses. I am sorry but other than children adults that wait decades to file charges are not credible.
 
“How have we reached a point in this country when nearly half the voters of a U.S. state so mistrust, and even revile, major media outlets that they are willing to brush aside credible evidence and elect an accused sexual predator simply out of spite? How have we reached a point where a president of the United States can just declare ‘fake’ news he doesn’t like—and largely get away with it?”

How, you ask? Consider this and this.

Also:



You betcha.

No, blame the white uneducated rubes . As the governor said she would rather vote for a pedophile than a dem.
Ever been to Alabama? Nixxer every 5 mins.
 
The Civil Rights Act was a long time ago and blacks need to get over it, but JFK needs to be in our thoughts as we vote for Roy Moore.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
So mr pipe wrench would you rather be born black or white ?
Do tell.
Usually deafening silence
Easy to get over lynching, not so easy to get over the supremist genes
 
Jennifer Flowers had been public by then. In 96 the numbers had gone up substantially

Gennifer Flowers had a consensual affair: that's not behavior that is qualifying for "sexual predator".
 
Gennifer Flowers had a consensual affair: that's not behavior that is qualifying for "sexual predator".

wow, its Gennifer. You win a kewpie doll!. can a subordinate woman ever have a consensual affair with a superior? Catherine McKinnon would call it RAPE
 
wow, its Gennifer. You win a kewpie doll!. can a subordinate woman ever have a consensual affair with a superior? Catherine McKinnon would call it RAPE

In what way was Gennifer subordinate to President Clinton?
 
wow, its Gennifer. You win a kewpie doll!. can a subordinate woman ever have a consensual affair with a superior? Catherine McKinnon would call it RAPE

WOW!
That bis a very dangerous idea.
 
Can you substanciate any single parent dragging their child to a custody hearing on a school day according Leigh Corfman's on words for any other reason? You can't for it makes no sense.

Sure it does. For example, my niece went to her hearings, when my SIL was getting full custody.

The documents prove there was a change in custody on February 22 1979. If there was no chance in change of custody there would be no reason for Leigh Corfman to be taken out of school to be at the courthouse. Furthermore since the father gained custody on February 22, 1979 and lived in a city 22 miles away from her mother then that means Leigh Corfman was no longer in the custody of her mother and the account she gave about Moore calling her at her mother's home and meeting him around the corner of her mother's house seem even more unlikely.

That's an excellent point. It would have been absolutely impossible for Moore to drive all the way across down in the mere twelve days between him picking her up at the courthouse and the day she shifted to her fathers' house.

Much like the claims that the restaurant didn't exist, Moore's defenses tend to... well, fall apart.


But, then, you never described to me how this conspiracy achieved the time-travel necessary for all of them go to back over decades and tell others at the time? Could you break down for us how that happened? And why does his story keep changing, in self-contradicting ways?
 
if the folks in northern Alabama want a skeezy old 'born again' child molester for a US Senator then that's their business

MHGA ..................... Make Hillbillies Great Again ..............

My mom would have slapped your face for that. Even if she’d had to reach them your computer screen to do so. “Hillbilly”was a very offensive word akin to nigger not that long ago. Watch your manners. I happen to know my Kentucky mom is watching. ;)
 
I'd argue that there are some who give him a pass but the consequences of his lying are real.

Trump has a 57% disapproval rating.

MORE VOTERS THINK TRUMP IS DUMB, WEAK AND UNFIT FOR OFFICE THAN EVER BEFORE

Trump's disapproval rating Novenber 6, 2016 according to an article in the Huffington post was higher than the 57% you mentioned, 57.5%.
That was hours before he won the election! It peaked at 63% in March 2016 his disapproval rating is irrelevant when he won the election
with the same disapproval you crow about today!

https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating
 
Sure it does. For example, my niece went to her hearings, when my SIL was getting full custody.



That's an excellent point. It would have been absolutely impossible for Moore to drive all the way across down in the mere twelve days between him picking her up at the courthouse and the day she shifted to her fathers' house.

Much like the claims that the restaurant didn't exist, Moore's defenses tend to... well, fall apart.


But, then, you never described to me how this conspiracy achieved the time-travel necessary for all of them go to back over decades and tell others at the time? Could you break down for us how that happened? And why does his story keep changing, in self-contradicting ways?

You have obviously passed judgement on Moore. It has been obvious from the beginning of the allegations brought forth by WaPo three weeks ago. Your posts prove that out.

Evidently, recent polls show the majority of Alabamians are not buying the allegations.

Have you ever been accused of something you did not do? I have and it was a life lesson for me to never rush to judge someone until both sides present their case

Making 40 year old claims of sexual abuse 4, 3 ,2, 1 weeks to the same newspaper that endorsed the opposition candidate months ago in itself stinks but makes it very hard to rebut. The court records on file did shoot holes in Corfman's story and to date no one has disputed those documents brought forth by Moore's attorneys. Not one news agency.

It looks at the moment Moore may just win this race. The senate has no choice but to seat him. At that time there may very well be a call to have Moore investigated by the ethics committee. Call all those who made their claims of sexual abuse to give testimony and bring their witnesses and evidence and Moore will also be given an opportunity to produce his witnesses, court documents, signed affidavits etc before the ethics committee as well.

But crucifying a man over 11th hour allegations that are 40 years old and the man has been in politics for 40 years during a heated senate race is not my idea of justice.
 
You have obviously passed judgement on Moore. It has been obvious from the beginning of the allegations brought forth by WaPo three weeks ago. Your posts prove that out.

Evidently, recent polls show the majority of Alabamians are not buying the allegations.

Have you ever been accused of something you did not do? I have and it was a life lesson for me to never rush to judge someone until both sides present their case

Making 40 year old claims of sexual abuse 4, 3 ,2, 1 weeks to the same newspaper that endorsed the opposition candidate months ago in itself stinks but makes it very hard to rebut. The court records on file did shoot holes in Corfman's story and to date no one has disputed those documents brought forth by Moore's attorneys. Not one news agency.

It looks at the moment Moore may just win this race. The senate has no choice but to seat him. At that time there may very well be a call to have Moore investigated by the ethics committee. Call all those who made their claims of sexual abuse to give testimony and bring their witnesses and evidence and Moore will also be given an opportunity to produce his witnesses, court documents, signed affidavits etc before the ethics committee as well.

But crucifying a man over 11th hour allegations that are 40 years old and the man has been in politics for 40 years during a heated senate race is not my idea of justice.
So, you can't figure out how they managed the time-travel part, and so you're going to ignore it, eh?
 
So, you can't figure out how they managed the time-travel part, and so you're going to ignore it, eh?

I am not ignoring anything cpwill. The court documents speak for themselves. February 22, 1979 the day Leigh Corfman's parents signed an affidavit for change in physical custody of their daughter from the mother to the father because both parents felt it was in the best interest of their daughter Leigh as she had become a real disciplinary problem for the mother and could no longer control her. On the very same day the judge overseeing the case gave physical custody to Leigh's father who did not live in Gadsden but O'Hatchee a good 30 minutes away. With that knowledge it pretty much sinks Corfman's claims that Moore called her at her mother's home and met Moore around the corner of her mother's house in Gadsden.

Believe what the heck you want, personally i see this as a dozen red flags.
 
I expect the left to trot out some more fake 'victims' this week. Moore should still win. I don't think many people are buying
this garbage. Allred still hasn't produced the yearbook. Another one of the accusers worked for the DNC. Another was`ruled
against in here divorce proceedings by Judge Moore himself. This was the most poorly planned hitjob ever.

A week after the first accusations
'US Senate - Alabama Special Election Winner
Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election +105
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election -145'

Today after the voters have been able to see the accusations for what they really are:

US Senate - Alabama Special Election Winner
'Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election -400
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election +280'

It looks like the smear campaign will fail, Roy Moore has turned things around Las Vegas odds inspite of
'the massive disparity in TV ad spending between the two candidates in the Alabama special election to a Senate seat,
where Jones, the Democratic candidate, is outspending Moore roughly 7-to-1.'
 
Last edited:
I expect the left to trot out some more fake 'victims' this week. Moore should still win. I don't think many people are buying
this garbage. Allred still hasn't produced the yearbook. Another one of the accusers worked for the DNC. Another was`ruled
against in here divorce proceedings by Judge Moore himself. This was the most poorly planned hitjob ever.

A week after the first accusations
'US Senate - Alabama Special Election Winner
Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election +105
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election -145'

Today after the voters have been able to see the accusations for what they really are:

US Senate - Alabama Special Election Winner
'Thu 12/12 951 Roy Moore wins Alabama special election -400
9:00AM 952 Field wins Alabama special election +280'

It looks like the smear campaign will fail, Roy Moore has turned things around Las Vegas odds inspite of
'the massive disparity in TV ad spending between the two candidates in the Alabama special election to a Senate seat,
where Jones, the Democratic candidate, is outspending Moore roughly 7-to-1.'


This one hell of a ride though, I felt the girls could have a chance at proven something against Moore. Until Gloria Allred joined them that is, then I knew that it was going to go downhill from there.
 
I am not ignoring anything cpwill

I have repeatedly asked you how this conspiracy managed to get multiple women who did not know each other to travel backwards in time, and tell others years or decades ago. Thus far, you have studiously ignored this rather large problem for the argument that this is some kind of hit job without actual merit.

The court documents speak for themselves.

They do. For example, they demonstrate that Roy Moore did, in fact, have access to Leigh Corfman on the day she says he did.

February 22, 1979 the day Leigh Corfman's parents signed an affidavit for change in physical custody of their daughter from the mother to the father because both parents felt it was in the best interest of their daughter Leigh as she had become a real disciplinary problem for the mother and could no longer control her. On the very same day the judge overseeing the case gave physical custody to Leigh's father who did not live in Gadsden but O'Hatchee a good 30 minutes away. With that knowledge it pretty much sinks Corfman's claims that Moore called her at her mother's home and met Moore around the corner of her mother's house in Gadsden.

It does not. I think you are confusing "papers signed that day" with "therefore Moore couldn't have driven her back during the proceeding" and also, somehow, with "the day she moved".

And I'm still waiting on you to tell me how this conspiracy managed time travel so the women could go back years and decades and get their younger selves to tell others.

Believe what the heck you want, personally i see this as a dozen red flags.

I see half a dozen women telling pretty much the same story, I see a politician whose own story keeps changing (in ways that make him a liar at least), and who has at times admitted in his own words key points of their stories. I see his defenders forced to resort to massive conspiracy theories that depend, among other things, on outlandishly breaking the laws of physics.

I think, if you will examine your thoughts, you will discover that you aren't asking "what does the weight of evidence say", but rather "is there a way I can justify not believing multiple accusations from unconnected sources against a candidate whom I want to be a good person."

I was a Roy Moore voter and defender. But I wasn't willing to sell my integrity to defend Trump, and I won't do it to defend him.
 
Last edited:
I have repeatedly asked you how this conspiracy managed to get multiple women who did not know each other to travel backwards in time, and tell others years or decades ago. Thus far, you have studiously ignored this rather large problem for the argument that this is some kind of hit job without actual merit.



They do. For example, they demonstrate that Roy Moore did, in fact, have access to Leigh Corfman on the day she says he did.



It does not. I think you are confusing "papers signed that day" with "therefore Moore couldn't have driven her back during the proceeding" and also, somehow, with "the day she moved".

And I'm still waiting on you to tell me how this conspiracy managed time travel so the women could go back years and decades and get their younger selves to tell others.



I see half a dozen women telling pretty much the same story, I see a politician whose own story keeps changing (in ways that make him a liar at least), and who has at times admitted in his own words key points of their stories. I see his defenders forced to resort to massive conspiracy theories that depend, among other things, on outlandishly breaking the laws of physics.

I think, if you will examine your thoughts, you will discover that you aren't asking "what does the weight of evidence say", but rather "is there a way I can justify not believing multiple accusations from unconnected sources against a candidate whom I want to be a good person."

I was a Roy Moore voter and defender. But I wasn't willing to sell my integrity to defend Trump, and I won't do it to defend him.

I get what you mean about Moore, but from a standpoint of actually coming from a legally trained eye. There is only a little actual evidence against Moore and not everything that is being said about him is illegal, save for the relationship with the minor and the assault.

The document puts them in the case of being capable of meeting one another, but does not show they actually met.

I have no love for the man, but all of this dirt being flung at him is somewhat laughable.
 
I get what you mean about Moore, but from a standpoint of actually coming from a legally trained eye. There is only a little actual evidence against Moore and not everything that is being said about him is illegal, save for the relationship with the minor and the assault.

I remember having to explain this to the Clinton defenders. Criminality is not the standard for morality or even basic decency. It's just an offense so bad we are willing to use state violence against you, should you engage in it.

You have independent, multisource verification with dozens of confirming witnesses, and Moore has changed his story multiple times in self-contradicting ways. :shrug: the evidence points pretty clearly to there being fire behind this smoke.
 
Back
Top Bottom