Republicans and Conservatives: If it is proven that AL Senate candidate Roy Moore had sex with a 14-year-old girl when he was in his 30's, and no write-in candidates were allowed, would you still vote for him in order to block a Democrat?
The difference between Democrats and Republicans on this issue is we arrest our alleged rapists, they elect them!
If it was proven that he had sex with a 14 year old, I wouldn’t vote for him. However, that isn’t even an accusation. This one woman has accused him of sexual misconduct 40 years ago. He vehemently denies it. There is no evidence whatsoever. The other 2 women were of age, and say they didn’t have physical contact with him. They were family friends.
I'm pretty sure he wasn't accused of sex. The accusation was of heavy petting. Not much better, but there is a difference.
Phal ... I get that the facts matter little to Democrats, but the woman isn’t claiming that they had sex. She’s claiming that he touched her, and when she asked him to stop that he stopped.
I’m not condoning his behavior, or yours!
Oh, well that's different, then...after all, what's a little inappropriate touching among adults and minors, right?
Sex is sex is sex, Think. Psychologically speaking, the damage done is the same.
People stoop to low levels to make sure their views are represented, I doubt I'd be any different.
It would take a truly horrible Democratic candidate to make me vote for him.
Not sure she claims they had sex. Said they met at 14. Didn’t date till 16 (I thought). Still haven’t heard that they had sex. Also. All 4 women claim it was consensual.
“Republicans only care about children,
until they’re born”.
I never agreed with the statement above until this very second.
It is the sad truth. Once they are military age they start caring again
Yes, it’s the truth. It’s hurtful but true.
Stop being ridiculous and dramatic.
First of all, the majority of all groups voted “no” as of the time I️ write this, so that throws that claim right out the window.
Second, this isn’t actually about allowing a politician to continue to hurt anyone, or get away with hue, because we all know that, in reality, if he committed a felony he wouldn’t be able to take office anyway.
Third, therefore, this poll is really asking, “would you rather have a democrat or an empty seat in office by voting for a bad candidate who will be in jail before he ever takes an oath of office,” and that choice is a no brainer. An empty seat and an opportunity for a new election with better candidates will do less damage to the country than a democrat every single time.
For the record, I️ voted that I️ would not vote for him if he’s proven guilty, because nobody is going to vote for a child molester.
The poll specifically states “if he is proven guilty” and people have voted “yes”.
There are comments below that confirm they would vote for a child molester over a democrat.
Do you mean Bertgoldberg? He clearly said he would vote for him knowing he’d be impeached, and that would result in either a new election or a republican replacement.
This isn’t about supporting a pedophile (unless praetorianus voted) it’s about using one temporarily to block a democrat.
You’d have to ask “would you want a convicted pedophile to serve a full term of office if doing so meant your opposing party would be blocked from office for that term”
Or maybe, to get the spin you’re trying to pull, you’d have to ask “would you want a known, active pedophile to serve a term in office and continue to hurt children during that time, if it meant the opposing party would be blocked from office for that term.”
This poll is asking about something that happened 30 years ago, and which would lead to impeachment anyway- so it’s not about approving of pedophilia like you’re trying to claim.
I️ don’t know who Alcerus is. And he doesn’t speak for me, or, based on the results and other comments, most conservatives.
And, with the way politics are right now, I️ think there are people on both sides of the aisle who would vote for the felon if it meant blocking a candidate they disagree with.
That’s exactly how everyone who voted for Hillary managed to sleep at night after the last election.
And that doesnt excuse it- it just says there are people on both sides who think this way, which negates your spastic finger wagging at republicans.
So, you not responding usually means you’re crying into a can of chicken, or that you’re so angry you’re just walking away.
I’m going with the chicken.
Majority of Republicans said yes. Party of "family values," eh?
Revenge for Bill Clinton
Well, at least you're honest.
You've already had it. Remember Mark Sanford?
His crime was a personal fault. He took a demotion after changing.
I️ see that the majority of Republicans said no.
The same people who answer yes are the same ones who whine and moan about “feeling more rules“ in America. <SMH>
I'd rather have someone who intentionally screwed the wrong person 20 years ago than one who intentionally screws people over every day.
Omg.. I cannot believe you said that.
How can there be “yes” votes? Wtf
I'm not surprised one bit. It's been Party over Principles for a long time.
It's not that I love republicans. It's just that I really hate democrats, and I would literally vote for a child molester over a democrat.
This is part of why I’ve become distanced from my party. Al, that’s really sick. If that was your child...
Phal ... don’t be silly. It is rich that Democrats would attempt to use this trumped up charge to show their virtue after they supported a molester in the White House. You lose ANY moral authority by supporting Mr Clinton.
I voted no.
Thank you, Think.
Do you believe in "guilty until proven innocent"? There's no evidence that this guy is guilty. It's clearly a political move to help the Democrats win. This *is not* the first time the left has brought bogus sex crime charges against their opponent at the last minute to sway voters. I recognize this, and find it more despicable than the charges themselves. Understand this, and realize what kind of people you're supporting: those who would gladly lie about child rape to get what they want.
1. You assume I’m supporting democrats because I’m distAncing myself from my party. Not true.
2. Assuming this is a liberal smear tactic, can we assume that all the other accused from liberal Hollywood was a conservative smear tactic? No. It’s silly.
Beverly Young Johnson just came out. She’s a republican and has accused Moore of sexual assault. Still want that kind of guy in office?
Those accused in Hollywood are not running for government office. I'm just saying that this tactic has been used before and I wouldn't be surprised if it's a false accusation. You shouldn't assume things are true just because someone said it's true. I would have lost a lot of friends if I believed all the stupid high school rumors. Just wait for an investigation before dusting off your noose, that's all I'm asking.
How many more accusers need to come forward? What’s a sufficient number? Bill Cosby has 50 something accusers. Is that a sufficient number? Sexual assault isn’t and shouldn’t ever be a political issue. If it turns out that this was a smear tactic then there should be legislation to address false accusations. If this is true, the full weight of whatever form of justice is left should come down on Moore.
There already are laws for false accusations. And there could be 50,000 accusers; if they fail to bring a single shred of evidence for their claim, then why should I believe a word out of their mouths? Do you know how many Scientologists there are in the US? There are 25,000 crazy Scientologists all claiming the same thing. Do you automatically assume that Scientology is true because 25,000 people claim that it is? Of course not. We live in a country of due process. That is, innocent until *proven* guilty. Think of the Salem witch trials. How many hundreds of innocent people were executed based on hearsay and no actual evidence? There must be any evidence if anything before my opinion of it will lean favorable. Once infallible evidence of his guilt has been provided, I will gladly change my opinion.
It would appear there is information deemed credible to accompany the picture that Moore had a predilection for young girls. He often trolled the malls and was known to the locals as someone to lookout for.
I apologise, but again, that's not evidence. So he goes to malls, who doesn't? The people were told to "watch out for him"? Sounds like more hearsay and rumors.
I understand that providing physical evidence of these accusations is almost impossible under any circumstance, but the burden of proof lies with the accuser, not the accused. It's just a part of our legal system that exists to help avoid false imprisonment, and I think it's a pretty good rule to have in general. It helps to avoid a lot of anger and contempt for other people.
I didn’t say it was evidence. It would be impossible to provide physical evidence so many years after. With the latest pulls of support, Roy Moore will crap out. I doubt he will admit guilt (or that he even believes what he did was wrong) but he’ll drop stating that he can’t effectively support the people Alabama with this hanging over his head.
I know that it's impossible to provide evidence of sexual assault forty years later, but my question is, why do you assume the allegations are true and factual when it's essentially "he said vs she said"?
I think it’s because there are more than 1. And Beverly Johnson was very believable. Now, in the grand scheme, what does my opinion matter? Nothing really. I don’t even live in the state of Alabama. However, to come full circle (to get political because that’s what this has turned into) accusers accusing a liberal Hollywood director should be treated the same way that accusers accusing a republican figure are treated and vice versa. And the accused shouldn’t get a pass just because a certain party is en Vogue. Many politicians and public figures on both sides have been offenders and many have gone on without any repercussions. That’s the issue here.
If this was indeed 1979, I might forgive because sometimes people DO change.
Impeachment is always an option, and will result in a republican over a democrat
Please tell me you would not vote for him.
Why? He is innocent until proven guilty!
Harry- reread the question.
EarlyBird, the Democrats do it all of the time, for example: Evan Edwards (LA), Marion Berry (Washington DC), Harry Truman (MO KKK), plus a whole bunch that I don't know about. Face it, politics attracts the scum of the Earth. That's why it is so dirty! Of course let's not forget the Teflon coated Clintons. Really talented people stay out of politics for the sake of their families! It's a crying shame, and Judge Moore could be the victim of a smear campaign. Many members of the Media are happy Swamp dwellers.
Tsk-tsk Harry, “ because the other guy did it” is not a green light.
Child molesters are monsters. It sickens me that people are willing to sacrifice children for politics.
The results of this poll are shocking. They make me see some of my conservative SOH friends in a different light.
Let’s drop the conversation. I don’t want to talk about it anymore. 🤢
^^ this is what’s said when you know your on the wrong side of right
I don't believe the media should be rewarded with a liberal In office for 6 years when they hoarded a story and released it at a time when there is no other option so they can manipulate the outcome of the election. If Moore did it there are ways to remove him once to proven and wouldn't fall for being shamed into giving up the cards by the democrats, media, and people like you. Dems and media have no strategy or plans which is why they resort to dirty and divisive mob tactics.
Agree with the timing and proof comments. Both sides do this. It’s disgusting. The losers are the American People.
EarlyBird, if Judge Moore had been a child molester, it would have been a sickness that would keep him doing it. In view of his reputation for decency over the years, had he been doing this, it would have been noticed. These despicable tactics of raising accusations based on supposed acts from long ago have been tried on Trump and now on Judge Moore. Why don't these same accusers go after Bill Clinton in the same way? The answer is simple, they are on his side.
Harry - I agree with everything you said. Everything!
None of that matters in this poll though. The poll says “if he’s found guilty, would you vote for him or a democrat?”
I feel like I’m spinning my wheels here. Time to move on.
EarlyBird, the question is meaningless, since there is no time for a trial prior to the election. The allegations are based on a forty year old event, and are all that can be used against the judge. There can be no verdict to clear him either. Mighty good timing for his opponents!