• 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!

If Moore wins in Alabama does that mean that the women lied?

I

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
9,303
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
 
independentusa said:
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
Click to expand...

What it will mean if Moore wins is that the voters in Alabama know a hit political hit job when they see one. They are highly suspicious of these women all coming out nearly all at one time nearly 40 years later. Moore has been involved in high profile campaigns many times before. This is about the Washington Post setting up shop in Alabama and trolling for dirt and in all likelyhood paying for it.
 
What it means is that Alabama voters will vote for a sex deviant who votes the way they want rather than elect a decent man.
 
It would be nice if there was some kind of video/photo evidence and within the statute of limitations... otherwise, I think it's people's duty to note it and move on.

It wasn't even brought up decades ago... it's just now... even if there was a settlement or accusation on the books decades ago, that would have been a lot better as far as evidence goes.
 
independentusa said:
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
Click to expand...

A good question. I think the women have more credibility than him. If somebody molested me as a teen and then put himself in the public spotlight, my instinct would be to out him. I could never go to the polls and vote for a guy like Moore. I would make myself feel sick. I don't deserve it. A guy with multiple accusations spanning multiple years doesn't deserve my vote either. If he wins, I don't see how it would be good for victims anywhere.
 
independentusa said:
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
Click to expand...

Pretty much. They'll validate it to themselves somehow....fake news, all of the ladies are lying, everyone is out to get him. Rightwing media will throw enough crap out there on Fox and Friends, Hannity or other even less reputable news sources feeding into those ideas...usually using badly written stories or straight up speculation. Rightwing snowflakes will vote in a child molester but will not face the reality of how they are partisan hacks by hiding behind their wild conspiracy theories.

We've seen this before. Misinformed angry people at their worst.
 
It will simply make a very strong statement about the majority voters in Alabama. And not a very positive one at that. The state can spend millions on advertising and image improvement but a Moore victory turns the clock back fifty years in the eyes of many Americans who will simply shake their heads in disbelief until they reminds themselves that "its Alabama".

Think I will watch CHINATOWN tonight.
 
independentusa said:
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
Click to expand...

First, Moore isn’t going to win. Finally, if by some fluke he does? I think tens of millions will be very disappointed because it will mean we truly do have a bunch of partisan idiots going to the polls.
 
haymarket said:
It will simply make a very strong statement about the majority voters in Alabama. And not a very positive one at that. The state can spend millions on advertising and image improvement but a Moore victory turns the clock back fifty years in the eyes of many Americans who will simply shake their heads in disbelief until they reminds themselves that "its Alabama".

Think I will watch CHINATOWN tonight.
Click to expand...

Does that also apply to people who have voted for either Clinton?
 
First, these women all told someone back when, but they all knew that they would be the ones to suffer if they came out back then. And Moore's wife was just sixteen when he first hit on her and she is the same age as the woman who said he hit on her when she was 14. Finally it seems that Trump has told us that Moore is innocent because like Trump he absolutely denies having done any of the things that the women in both Moore's and Trump's cases said they did. I mean denying it makes it true, you do believe that don't you?
 
independentusa said:
I have heard Huckabee say in other words that Trump won last November which means that the public decided on who was telling the truth. So does that mean that if Moore wins the public decided that the women who have come out are lying, or that Republicans in Alabama will vote for a GOP candidate no matter what he has done?
Click to expand...

I think they would vote for a GOP candidate that is very much needed to pass an ambitious tax reform bill and other necessary legislation that is very difficult to do if the margin of majority narrows further in the Senate.

At least two of the women who have accused Moore have been discredited in their narratives of what happened. It has been debunked by critical witnesses that Moore was once barred from a Birmingham mall. That never happened. Once the fake news is separated from credible accounts, he might not look so bad. But. . .

If Moore is charged with sex offenses and is removed from the Senate, the Atlanta governor can replace him with another Republican. If a Democrat is elected, we are all screwed.
 
Not to change the subject but with all this sexual "deviancy" coming to light a thought crossed my mind.

"The times, they are a changin'"

Are the things considered taboo today the same things that were considered taboo, say, 50 years ago?

For example. You never hear about kids getting swats in the principal's office anymore. Heck, parents hardly dare to spank a child. Child Welfare Dept., would be knocking at your door.

I knew some folks, that most folks considered to be good people, get married at a very young age 50 years ago. I never see that happening anymore.

So, I got to thinking, what was the "age of consent" considered to be 50 years ago?

From what I gathered, it varied from nation to nation. But here in America, it looks like it was 16. Now, I knew a LOT of 16 year old girls who had baby's at that age. (Hey, it was Texas. 50 Years ago.) So, that means, they were most likely kickin' it at 15. In most all situations, the couple married and did the "right thing." But I don't recall anybody going to jail. Lot's of gossip, for sure. But nobody really got all bent out of shape about it, that I recall.

Lord knows I have broken a heart or two back in my wild oats days. But I was a late bloomer and the girls my age were legal enough by then. LOL!

But anyways, back to topic on how society looks upon things over history, I was flabbergasted to find out that:
1. In 1880, the legal age of consent in Delaware was 7 years old.
2. In 1880, the legal age of consent in Alabama was 10 years old.

Most other states were in the 10-12 y/o range. Were they perverted or what?

By 1920, most all states had raised the age of consent to 16 to 18. With the exception of Georgia, where the legal age of consent was only 14 years old.

Anyways, I am no mathematician, but if the trend keeps going, maybe by 2075, the age of consent will be 35 years old and the divorce rate might go down. LOL!

Happy Thanksgiving everybody!

Children and Youth in History | Age of Consent Laws
 
Last edited:
ObamacareFail said:
Does that also apply to people who have voted for either Clinton?
Click to expand...

Pretty much, although I'm not sure that Bill had any such allegations at the time of his first presidential election.
 
imagep said:
Pretty much, although I'm not sure that Bill had any such allegations at the time of his first presidential election.
Click to expand...

Bill had allegations before during and after his time in Washington DC. The first scandal that nearly tanked him in the primaries in 1992 was in regards to gennifer flowers.
 
Captain America said:
Not to change the subject but with all this sexual "deviancy" coming to light a thought crossed my mind.

"The times, they are a changin'"

Are the things considered taboo today the same things that were considered taboo, say, 50 years ago?

For example. You never hear about kids getting swats in the principal's office anymore. Heck, parents hardly dare to spank a child. Child Welfare Dept., would be knocking at your door.

I knew some folks, that most folks considered to be good people, get married at a very young age 50 years ago. I never see that happening anymore.

So, I got to thinking, what was the "age of consent" considered to be 50 years ago?

From what I gathered, it varied from nation to nation. But here in America, it looks like it was 16. Now, I knew a LOT of 16 year old girls who had baby's at that age. (Hey, it was Texas. 50 Years ago.) So, that means, they were most likely kickin' it at 15. In most all situations, the couple married and did the "right thing." But I don't recall anybody going to jail. Lot's of gossip, for sure. But nobody really got all bent out of shape about it, that I recall.

Lord knows I have broken a heart or two back in my wild oats days. But I was a late bloomer and the girls my age were legal enough by then. LOL!

But anyways, back to topic on how society looks upon things over history, I was flabbergasted to find out that:
1. In 1880, the legal age of consent in Delaware was 7 years old.
2. In 1880, the legal age of consent in Alabama was 10 years old.

Most other states were in the 10-12 y/o range. Were they perverted or what?

By 1920, most all states had raised the age of consent to 16 to 18. With the exception of Georgia, where the legal age of consent was only 14 years old.

Anyways, I am no mathematician, but if the trend keeps going, maybe by 2075, the age of consent will be 35 years old and the divorce rate might go down. LOL!

Happy Thanksgiving everybody!

Children and Youth in History | Age of Consent Laws
Click to expand...

1920 was damn near 100 years ago. Suffice to say, probably before Roy Moore's parents were born. At least in regards to diddling teenagers, the times a-changed a long time ago.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I think they would vote for a GOP candidate that is very much needed to pass an ambitious tax reform bill and other necessary legislation that is very difficult to do if the margin of majority narrows further in the Senate.

At least two of the women who have accused Moore have been discredited in their narratives of what happened. It has been debunked by critical witnesses that Moore was once barred from a Birmingham mall. That never happened. Once the fake news is separated from credible accounts, he might not look so bad. But. . .

If Moore is charged with sex offenses and is removed from the Senate, the Atlanta governor can replace him with another Republican. If a Democrat is elected, we are all screwed.
Click to expand...

Golly, that's fascinating. Who are the witnesses who debunked that, and when did they do so?
 
Kobie said:
1920 was damn near 100 years ago. Suffice to say, probably before Roy Moore's parents were born. At least in regards to diddling teenagers, the times a-changed a long time ago.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain about his father, but if I'm not mistaken Roy's mother was 9 when she gave birth to Roy. :shock:
 
AlbqOwl said:
If a Democrat is elected, we are all screwed.
Click to expand...

See, this is the kind of nonsense that is poisoning our discourse. Why do so many conservatives seem to desire unfettered, one-party rule?

You act as if a Democrat winning a Senate seat is the end of the world.
 
haymarket said:
You wrote nonsense... there is nothing to :work out" other than to dismiss it.
Click to expand...

No...you are just too hyper partisan to think about it objectively. You proved that with your previous post.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No...you are just too hyper partisan to think about it objectively. You proved that with your previous post.
Click to expand...

You cannot even explain your own convoluted upside down nonsense so that it makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom