Predict tomorrow's results in Alabama

[The Derp]

I'm siding with this guy! He knows winners!

Who knew that Chuck Norris was a child molester supporter.

Kinda makes you take a second glance at Walker, Texas Ranger, doesn't it?

 

[toobfreak]

You mean just like all of the Moore and Trump accusers, eh?

Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo. You either don't know what innuendo is, or you're pretending you don't. In either case, you suck.

When a Liberal tells you you SUCK, that is a sure sign that he's run out of any intelligent, on-point things to say! Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo, you say? Obama's own grandmother who said Little Barry was born in Kenya, she was a first-person account! All the women who reported Bill Clinton's crimes with bruises, medical records, semen stains, pay offs, etc., they were all a first-person account! The men who were supposed to go in to save the Libyan Ambassador and were held back and recounted what they went through, they were a first-person account! When Hillary said she had THOUSANDS of requests a year, too many for her to deal with personally, and Benghazi was just one more of them, THAT was a first-person account! Our records of Hillary's involvement in Uranium One and the Russian Reset and her paying for the Steele Dossier, her salacious Clinton Foundation activities and getting advance answers during the debates from Donna Brazille and illegally snuffing out Bernie's chances, they were all first-person accounts! And when James Comey said that Hillary was extremely careless with our nation's secrets, a felony offense, and now that one of Mueller's FBI insiders CHANGED THE WORDING to keep Hillary out of prison so she could (hopefully) go on to BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT, those were all first-person accounts, too!

But since you would have us treat ANY person who comes forward to attack an important public official with nothing but the smile on their face with totally unfounded, unproven, unsupported allegations as FACT just because they did so in the (allegedly) first person as automatically not being innuendo, not only do you show yourself to all of the world as the Asshat, but you would try to elevate ANY person making ANY allegation as being unimpeachable on the face of nothing more than THEIR WORD! THE VERY OPPOSITE of what our justice system, the best in the world, is based upon.

 

[Faun]

You mean just like all of the Moore and Trump accusers, eh?

Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo. You either don't know what innuendo is, or you're pretending you don't. In either case, you suck.

When a Liberal tells you you SUCK, that is a sure sign that he's run out of any intelligent, on-point things to say! Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo, you say? Obama's own grandmother who said Little Barry was born in Kenya, she was a first-person account! All the women who reported Bill Clinton's crimes with bruises, medical records, semen stains, pay offs, etc., they were all a first-person account! The men who were supposed to go in to save the Libyan Ambassador and were held back and recounted what they went through, they were a first-person account! When Hillary said she had THOUSANDS of requests a year, too many for her to deal with personally, and Benghazi was just one more of them, THAT was a first-person account! Our records of Hillary's involvement in Uranium One and the Russian Reset and her paying for the Steele Dossier, her salacious Clinton Foundation activities and getting advance answers during the debates from Donna Brazille and illegally snuffing out Bernie's chances, they were all first-person accounts! And when James Comey said that Hillary was extremely careless with our nation's secrets, a felony offense, and now that one of Mueller's FBI insiders CHANGED THE WORDING to keep Hillary out of prison so she could (hopefully) go on to BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT, those were all first-person accounts, too!

But since you would have us treat ANY person who comes forward to attack an important public official with nothing but the smile on their face with totally unfounded, unproven, unsupported allegations as FACT just because they did so in the first person as it automatically not being innuendo, not only do you show yourself to all of the world as the Asshat, but you would try to elevate ANY person making ANY allegation as being unimpeachable on the face of nothing more than THEIR WORD! THE VERY OPPOSITE of what our justice system, the best in the world, is based upon.

LOLOL

Obama's grandmother: "Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii."

 

[JakeStarkey]

Roy is accused of groping an underage woman. Not raping a child.

Because that's such an important distinction.

Tell me something; how much "groping of underage girls" is too much? Is there a certain amount of groping that's OK for Conservative voters? What is that line?

Because you are playing the exaggeration game of the Alt Right criminals in America? It's bad enough without lying about it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You mean just like all of the Moore and Trump accusers, eh?

Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo. You either don't know what innuendo is, or you're pretending you don't. In either case, you suck.

When a Liberal tells you you SUCK, that is a sure sign that he's run out of any intelligent, on-point things to say! Eyewitness and first-person accounts aren't innuendo, you say? Obama's own grandmother who said Little Barry was born in Kenya, she was a first-person account! All the women who reported Bill Clinton's crimes with bruises, medical records, semen stains, pay offs, etc., they were all a first-person account! The men who were supposed to go in to save the Libyan Ambassador and were held back and recounted what they went through, they were a first-person account! When Hillary said she had THOUSANDS of requests a year, too many for her to deal with personally, and Benghazi was just one more of them, THAT was a first-person account! Our records of Hillary's involvement in Uranium One and the Russian Reset and her paying for the Steele Dossier, her salacious Clinton Foundation activities and getting advance answers during the debates from Donna Brazille and illegally snuffing out Bernie's chances, they were all first-person accounts! And when James Comey said that Hillary was extremely careless with our nation's secrets, a felony offense, and now that one of Mueller's FBI insiders CHANGED THE WORDING to keep Hillary out of prison so she could (hopefully) go on to BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT, those were all first-person accounts, too!

But since you would have us treat ANY person who comes forward to attack an important public official with nothing but the smile on their face with totally unfounded, unproven, unsupported allegations as FACT just because they did so in the first person as it automatically not being innuendo, not only do you show yourself to all of the world as the Asshat, but you would try to elevate ANY person making ANY allegation as being unimpeachable on the face of nothing more than THEIR WORD! THE VERY OPPOSITE of what our justice system, the best in the world, is based upon.

Not at all, toobfreek. Your arguments suck. They are not true. They are impeachable. You are anti-American when you make such arguments.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Blowout for Roy Moore. Not even close.

Democrats will rejoice. Win/win election for them.

Win/win...how so?

Are you serious?

Win: We gain a seat and only takes TWO votes.

Lose: We're going to tattoo Roy Moore to the GOP brand in 2018. ANOTHER win

Anyone sane views the whole thing as simple as it actually is.
The decades old allegations made against Moore are without merit and or have been proven to be lies fabricated by the same corrupt people that rig their own elections.
Am I missing something?

Yes. The allegations are with merit and not lies.

 

[LoneLaugher]

After today's bombing? Moore by ten points.

And....214 blurts out the real desire of nutbag cons. More terrorism cuz it frightens rubes into voting for GOP candidates.

 

[DarkFury]

After today's bombing? Moore by ten points.

And....214 blurts out the real desire of nutbag cons. More terrorism cuz it frightens rubes into voting for GOP candidates.

Well if. Moore wins we will know what Americans consider lower than an accused predator!

 

[toobfreak]

After today's bombing? Moore by ten points.

And....214 blurts out the real desire of nutbag cons. More terrorism cuz it frightens rubes into voting for GOP candidates.

If so then, they've had as good an example possible given them:

The DEMOCRATS trying to frighten voters perennially that a republican winning election means:

Loss of woman's rights
The end of the world
Big corporations crushing the little guy
Loss of our civil rights
Massive deficits
Destruction of our environment
Blacks not being allowed to vote
Discrimination and persecution of minorities everywhere
Unchecked, rabid gun availability
White Supremacist Nationalism

Shall I go on?

 

[Avatar4321]

You keep riding on this false platform of your belief that RM is guilty....with NO PROOF.

So what can the accusers do to prove their allegations are true?

Letting an independent third party examine the evidence they claim to have helps.

Not having criminal convictions for fraud

Addressing holes in their version of what happened.

Stuff like that

 

[BrokeLoser]

Blowout for Roy Moore. Not even close.

Democrats will rejoice. Win/win election for them.

Win/win...how so?

Are you serious?

Win: We gain a seat and only takes TWO votes.

Lose: We're going to tattoo Roy Moore to the GOP brand in 2018. ANOTHER win

Anyone sane views the whole thing as simple as it actually is.
The decades old allegations made against Moore are without merit and or have been proven to be lies fabricated by the same corrupt people that rig their own elections.
Am I missing something?

Yes. The allegations are with merit and not lies.

The allegations of misconduct are just as credible as Moore's denials of the claims. Again, the burden of proof lies with the claimant / plaintiff. Pull your heads out of your asses…this is basic shit.

 

[John Shaw]

You have a terrible habit of putting words in people's mouths, it seems.

Well, look, you're trying to pass off groping as no big deal, or something that's not as bad as actual penetration. Even when underage girls are the victims.

I'm saying that's a pretty shitty distinction to make and doesn't help your cause because it ends up making you look like a monster as well...mansplaining what is rape and what isn't.

People can decide for themselves what they believe to be acceptable and what they believe to be crossing a line. If we considered groping to be the same as rape, then anyone who ever blacked out and got handsy would be a rapist. Which would probably constitute a solid 30 - 40% of the adult population, including a sizable chunk of women. Anyone with a lick of common sense can see how stupid that would be.

No. People don't get to make that decision for themselves. That's not how it works. And if you're saying that 30-40% of people grope each other, then you're making the argument that it's institutional. Is that your intent?

Uh, what?

No. Seriously. Go back and read again. It feels like smashing one's head into a brick wall, trying to get through to you.

No, what's happening is that you're finding your position is become less and less tenable as you defend it, so that manifests itself in the acts of Dunning-Kruger like you're trying here.

I'm not the problem...the problem is your flexible and fluid morality. Don't blame me for your argument's shortcomings.

My argument is quite simple.

Groping is one thing.

Rape is another.

Both become sexual assault IF REPORTED

Rape is far more serious than other sex crimes.

Here's what I want you to do. Sit down with one woman who had her ass grabbed at the bar and another woman who was viciously gang-raped in a dark alleyway. Then tell them, "You ladies both suffered the same thing. You were both raped."

And then tell me how the woman who was actually raped reacts to that statement.

The underaged/child part takes it to yet another level of seriousness, but that's not what I'm talking about. The question was, did Roy Moore rape anyone. The answer is, no he did not.

What you are finding so difficult to understand about this is beyond my mortal ability to fathom.

But of course, Conservatives were arguing about 5 years ago that there are degrees of rape...some of the time, those women aren't "forcibly raped". Surely you remember Todd Akin and the GOP position of what constitutes rape?

Can we all just agree that sexual assault of any kind is intolerable, and there's no need to distinguish the severity of it?

Can agree with the first part. Cannot agree with the second. That can become extremely insulting to real rape victims whose lives are forever altered by tragedy, rather than someone who endured some discomfort but then carried on with their life as normal .

 

[jc456]

Sadly, i had to go with the Dems. Looks like they got this seat stolen. It's the most heinous political lynching in US history. I honestly didn't believe the Democrats would ever stoop as low as accusing someone of being a 'Child Rapist', to steal a Senate Seat. I was obviously very naive on that. So, they'll likely get their seat. But i hope it comes back to haunt them someday. What they did to that man is absolutely unforgivable.

you really think the voters will vote against their child's future? there is much more to the seat than just an alleged child molester, it is their future, not some alleged forty year old alleged incident. really?

 

[AntonToo]

Dems. I cannot believe that the People of Alabama are going to elect an alleged Child Molester to represent them in the United States Senate.

Oh they will, just watch.

 

[AntonToo]

No fuckin' clue. I think either Moore wins in a very close contest, or it's a Jones landslide. I think we'll see results similar to the Governor's race in VA. But who knows?

This is not VA, this is Alabama.

 

[JakeStarkey]

After today's bombing? Moore by ten points.

And....214 blurts out the real desire of nutbag cons. More terrorism cuz it frightens rubes into voting for GOP candidates.

If so then, they've had as good an example possible given them:

The DEMOCRATS trying to frighten voters perennially that a republican winning election means:

Loss of woman's rights
The end of the world
Big corporations crushing the little guy
Loss of our civil rights
Massive deficits
Destruction of our environment
Blacks not being allowed to vote
Discrimination and persecution of minorities everywhere
Unchecked, rabid gun availability
White Supremacist Nationalism

Shall I go on?

You have quite captured exactly what the Alt Right neo-fascists and some of the Far Right crazy Christians want to do.

 

[The Derp]

No fuckin' clue. I think either Moore wins in a very close contest, or it's a Jones landslide. I think we'll see results similar to the Governor's race in VA. But who knows?

This is not VA, this is Alabama.

Exactly why I said "no fuckin' clue".

 

[The Derp]

you really think the voters will vote against their child's future? there is much more to the seat than just an alleged child molester, it is their future, not some alleged forty year old alleged incident. really?

Yes, a future where Medicare and Social Security are cut to pay for corporate tax cuts that don't pay for themselves.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I predict Moore will win because it's Alabama and over the course of this election, many have shown that they don't think a 30 year old preying on teenagers is a big deal.

Not 40 years ago.

 

[DarkFury]

I predict Moore will win because it's Alabama and over the course of this election, many have shown that they don't think a 30 year old preying on teenagers is a big deal.

Not 40 years ago.

If or when Moore wins we will know what's lower than an ACCUSED predator.
A Democrat!