Florida State Seminoles

[eCat]

by most accounts, Mike Pence is a decent guy - while its a bit weird, its certainly doesn't seem nearly as weird in today's environment that he never meets a woman alone and often includes his wife.

Of course Pence is miles away in terms of ideology from being an ideal candidate to the left.

So my question is, lets say Mike Pence is running against the Democratic equivalent of Roy Moore in your home state for Senator.

The Democratic Roy Moore is going to play a key role in appointing a left leaning SCOTUS, his vote is needed to support the platform for funding Obamacare and moving toward a single payer system, tax reform that helps balance the wealth inequality in this country and compassionate immigration reform

but the Democratic Roy Moore raped 14 year old girls 15 years ago.

So as a Democrat - are you going to vote for the rapist or Mike Pence?

Its easy to sit there throw shade on Moore being a shitty human being, but at the end of the day are you going to not vote at all or vote for the the decent human being that will vote in favor of everything you stand against?

Are you serious? Of course you don't vote for the guy who raped a 14 year old. What the fuck?

no I am completely serious. So where is the line then? Felt up a 14 year old?, forceably kissed a 14 year old, had nude pictures of a 14 year old? 15,16, 17 ? - That line of questioning may seem absurd to you, but that's exactly what we're dealing with - what constitutes boorish behavior versus behavior unacceptable for the position of the office. You have people in both parties who don't even see a person, just their ideology and no one can tell me that at the end of the day , many, many would choose ideology over character.

We had a president who had sex with an intern, and used a cigar as a sex toy on her in the oval office (not that location matters but still). Now granted she was a 21 year old woman but the democratic party not only held this man up as their elder leader until Obama came to power but then put forth his wife who stood by him during this time as their party's choice to be president. it was almost an afterthought during her run for presidency.

[Tree]

by most accounts, Mike Pence is a decent guy - while its a bit weird, its certainly doesn't seem nearly as weird in today's environment that he never meets a woman alone and often includes his wife.

Of course Pence is miles away in terms of ideology from being an ideal candidate to the left.

So my question is, lets say Mike Pence is running against the Democratic equivalent of Roy Moore in your home state for Senator.

The Democratic Roy Moore is going to play a key role in appointing a left leaning SCOTUS, his vote is needed to support the platform for funding Obamacare and moving toward a single payer system, tax reform that helps balance the wealth inequality in this country and compassionate immigration reform

but the Democratic Roy Moore raped 14 year old girls 15 years ago.

So as a Democrat - are you going to vote for the rapist or Mike Pence?

Its easy to sit there throw shade on Moore being a shitty human being, but at the end of the day are you going to not vote at all or vote for the the decent human being that will vote in favor of everything you stand against?

A simple cost/benefit analysis says you vote for Moore in that scenario. I lost all respect for Franken after seeing that picture and watching Tweeden talk about the kiss, but I don't want him unseated. Whether he's a douchebag POS or not doesn't change the fact that he does vote in ways that are good for the American people and we need more Senators voting the way he does, not less.

[eCat]

by most accounts, Mike Pence is a decent guy - while its a bit weird, its certainly doesn't seem nearly as weird in today's environment that he never meets a woman alone and often includes his wife.

Of course Pence is miles away in terms of ideology from being an ideal candidate to the left.

So my question is, lets say Mike Pence is running against the Democratic equivalent of Roy Moore in your home state for Senator.

The Democratic Roy Moore is going to play a key role in appointing a left leaning SCOTUS, his vote is needed to support the platform for funding Obamacare and moving toward a single payer system, tax reform that helps balance the wealth inequality in this country and compassionate immigration reform

but the Democratic Roy Moore raped 14 year old girls 15 years ago.

So as a Democrat - are you going to vote for the rapist or Mike Pence?

Its easy to sit there throw shade on Moore being a shitty human being, but at the end of the day are you going to not vote at all or vote for the the decent human being that will vote in favor of everything you stand against?

A simple cost/benefit analysis says you vote for Moore in that scenario. I lost all respect for Franken after seeing that picture and watching Tweeden talk about the kiss, but I don't want him unseated. Whether he's a douchebag POS or not doesn't change the fact that he does vote in ways that are good for the American people and we need more Senators voting the way he does, not less.

case in point Cletus....

fwiw, I can't say I wouldn't vote for Moore either. I can't say I would but I'm not going to get on a soapbox about my morals and ethics and then knowingly let a candidate get elected that stands for everything I'm against

[hedge]

Again not defending Franken, but I still say there's a lot of difference b/w what appears to be almost serial preying upon teenagers and what Franken did. Now then, if a bunch more women come out of the woodwork and it turns out Franken is a serial harasser, I might adjust my opinion, and I'll go ahead and say it seems unlikely that this was the first and only time he ever acted inappropriately, but I haven't heard anything by anyone else at this point. But yet and still, even if it turns out that he did more stuff like that, I still think it's different from a district attorney molesting teenagers and intimidating them into silence by telling them "nobody is going to believe you," which I am fully convinced Moore did...

[SnoodGator]

e you've set up a false choice. The proper answer is you force the rapist to withdraw and support a write in for the position.

[aTm]

We could stop having elections where there can only be a maximum of 2 valid choices...

[AlabamAlum]

I hate Moore. I would never, ever vote for him. He is the Ayatollah of Alabama. Over several years he paid himself a million dollars for his part-time work with the charity he runs. He flouted actual laws as state Chief Justice if they didn't jive with his understanding of what his imaginary bearded sky dad would want; however, we, as a society, need to be very careful with passing judgment on people through allegations of impropriety made in the media. It's a dangerous game and goes against the America system of justice.

[Tree]

By the way, Mike Pence and his shameless shilling for big tobacco have caused far more misery and death in the real world than Moore ever could in your hypothetical example. But that's neither here nor there, I suppose.

[Saint]

People like Moore are a dime a dozen in the South. He's a tainted candidate. Why can't they just stick some other fucker in there to run on the GOP ticket?

[AlabamAlum]

Nullifing his primary win and removing him from the ballot that's three weeks away can't be done because of what 2 people (the other three accusations are not criminal) said happened 40 years ago. At least it can't be done on public allegation alone. There would have to be a trial, imo, and I believe that it is past the statute of limitations for a criminal charge. Regardless, after 40 years, witnesses and forensics would be impossible - making it a civil case where no real proof is presented. Just two persons' conflicting testimony.

Moore is horrible, but I am not for orchestrating and manufacturing a way to remove hom from the ballot that flouts due process.

[hedge]

People like Moore are a dime a dozen in the South. He's a tainted candidate. Why can't they just stick some other fucker in there to run on the GOP ticket?

His constituency is too numerous...

[hedge]

"Moore is horrible, but I am not for orchestrating and manufacturing a way to remove hom from the ballot that flouts due process."

Agree. Let the people of Alabama decide. It will be more valuable in the long run to know where they stand than getting rid of Moore without a vote. FWIW, the most damning remarks I have heard are from former staffers who, although they aren't making any allegations of harassment against themselves, have said it was an open secret that he was a serial groper (at best) of teens and other women...

[hedge]

"It was common knowledge that Roy Moore dated high school girls, everyone we knew thought it was weird," says Teresa Jones, deputy Etowah County district attorney from 1982 to 1985. "We wondered why someone his age would hang out at high school football games and the mall."

http://theweek.com/speedreads/737706/ro ... en-alabama

[Saint]

But if Moore stepped aside, someone else could take his place on the ballot, right? He's put himself over his party, which isn't surprising

[AlabamAlum]

It's too late to replace him on the ballot.

[Professor Tiger]

Are you serious? Of course you don't vote for the guy who raped a 14 year old. What the fuck?

Well, this zero tolerance policy you express against guys what rape underage teenagers is certainly correct, and I agree with it whole-heartedly. But that is a relatively new policy for Democrats. Where was this zero tolerance policy back in 1983?

Two congressman were caught having sex with teenage congressional pages: one Republican (Dan Crane) and one Democrat (Gerry Studds). Both admitted to the acts were given a slap on the wrist in the form of a congressional censure. The Republican was voted out of office the next year. But the Democrat was re-elected multiple times until he retired on 1997. The Democrat voters in Massachusetts apparently had no problem voting for a rapist of teenagers.

But if, all of a sudden, Democrats now disapprove of that sort of behavior, then I bid them a welcome to the party, belatedly, sort of.

[eCat]

its really just a perspective on ideology over character.

I didn't have to say rapist. I could have said exchange sexy text messages with a 16 year old girl 3 states away or some other softer character flaw that while disturbing would have been easily justified away.
My point was at some point people choose ideology over character. There is never zero tolerance if you consider character as part of the equation in determining your candidate.

And as Tree said, the formula for the greater benefit in my scenario would lead someone to vote for my hypothetical version of Moore.

In the last election Trump and Hillary were both so flawed in character that people had to vote ideology.

[hedge]

"The Democrat voters in Massachusetts apparently had no problem voting for a rapist of teenagers. "

"Studds defended his sexual involvement as a "consensual relationship with a young adult." Dean Hara, whom Studds married in 2004, said after Studds' death in 2006 that Studds had never been ashamed of the relationship. "This young man knew what he was doing," Hara said.[6] In testimony to investigators, the page described the relationship as consensual and not intimidating."

Not defending Studds, but it certainly doesn't sound like rape. Why did you lie, Prof?

[sardis]

This kind of reminds me of one of ghose bad Porky’s sequels where the kids set up their congressman with a high school floozy.

[eCat]

I would urge all of you so inclined to contact your Senator and tell them you are against dismantling net neutrality rules, today if possible.