Doug Jones (D) won the special election on Tuesday to fill the United States Senate seat vacated by Jeff Sessions. Good news?
Neither would have been good news to me, but Jones seems like a decent guy. We will see.
No, not good news. But then, Moore getting elected wouldn't have been good news either, except maybe for tax reform.
Brooks should have won. A solid conservative. Instead we had that fucking prick Mitch McConnell playing politics trying to get his puppet Strange elected which led to Roy. McConnell is responsible for a good majority of republican failures.
Liberals, had Roy Moore not been the candidate this election would not have been a contest. Let’s do something you don’t normally do and accept the 2 year rental. Moore was a bad candidate, at least we can admit that. We’re not crying, we’re not rioting. It is what it is and we accept it. Meanwhile about 1 year later you can’t still accept defeat in a national election. Get a job and stop blaming the rich for your laziness. Thanks! I won’t check the comments for another week or so and by that time I’ll be over this point, so I probably won’t read your usual pompous and high horse responses. Later
To be honest, the pompous one on a high horse here seems to be you.
Get a grip on reality! You're the ones that can't accept that you voted for the biggest loser in history. You even knew the clown was a bigot, racist, misogynist, xenophobe and homophobe and you still voted for him. You know the ship is sinking fast yet you continue to keep a stiff upper lip and hope for the best. Go back under the rock you've been hiding under!
You tell liberals to stop being lazy and get a job and yet somehow cheer for a guy who has claimed bankruptcy 7 times and has built his wealth through a lifetime of screwing people over.
Amazing news. A man like Moore should never be elected to any public office.
True. Unfortunately, same with Doug Jones.
Jones helped convict racist murderers, Moore has no understanding of separation between church and state. One is clearly better, and more qualified for a US senate seat, than the other.
"Jones helped convict racist murderers,"
So? He also supports dismembering innocent humans in utero.
"Moore has no understanding of separation between church and state."
Neither does Doug Jones.
You seem to have no understanding of what pro-choice is.
Not anywhere near the level that Moore is at.
I understand what abortion is (dismembering innocent children in utero) and I understand that treating it as a right is supporting it.
Doug Jones is probably farther from the Constitution than Moore, as far as religion.
You seem to have no understanding that fetuses are closer to clumps of cells rather than actual children for a few weeks.
That statement is clearly false, you must know nothing about Roy Moore.
Now why won't you accept that Jones was clearly the better candidate, are you aware that he sent racist child murderers to prison.
Fetuses ARE actual children, and YOU are a clump of cells. The unborn are living human beings, and you cannot support abortion without supporting the summary execution of innocent human beings. This is a matter of fact.
"That statement is clearly false, you must know nothing about Roy Moore."
It's more likely you know nothing of what the Constitution says about religion.
"Now why won't you accept that Jones was clearly the better candidate, are you aware that he sent racist child murderers to prison."
So what? Moore probably did, too. He was a DA. Sending murderers to prison is just what you're supposed to do; it doesn't give you credit against which you can morally support child dismemberment!
Show my a 2 day old fetuses soul, conscious, ability to think, awareness, viability, and ability to have rational thinking. Looks like you can't.
Roy Moore believes gays should be executed because "gods laws are superior", said "all liberty comes from God", and that the first amendment should only protect Christians. Jones misunderstanding is far, far, FAR below Moores misunderstanding of separation of church and state.
It does when decades of other judges and attorney generals did nothing while those murderers were left to walk free. It also does when Moore supported gays being executed for no reason. Now what's the difference, gays can feel pain, most fetuses ,at time of abortion, can not.
"Show my a 2 day old fetuses soul, conscious, ability to think, awareness, viability, and ability to have rational thinking."
Show me all this in a comatose man. Should we be able to walk into a hospital room and dismember a man who is expected to come out of his coma in 9 months? If not, then those factors you mentioned are not relevant distinctions.
"Roy Moore believes gays should be executed because 'gods laws are superior',"
No he doesn't.
"said 'all liberty comes from God',"
This is a philosophical position, not a legal one, and he's correct.
"and that the first amendment should only protect Christians."
And that's his error.
"Jones misunderstanding is far, far, FAR below Moores misunderstanding of separation of church and state."
Jones thinks separation of church and state is a constitutional position. It isn't. The Constitution provides one-way protection of the church from the state. Not vice versa. Jones favors protection of the state from the church.
"It does when decades of other judges and attorney generals did nothing while those murderers were left to walk free."
No it doesn't.
So you can't show me any of those. Thanks for proving yourself wrong.
He still said "gods laws are superior than mans laws" which proves you wrong.
He is not correct, unless you believe that God changes things on earth and shapes governments around his ideas, and shapes minds to fit those positions, which makes any form of God irrelevant.
That's also proof he doesn't understand separation between church and state, that's why he was removed from office for putting up the Ten Commandments.
Yes it does.
"So you can't show me any of those. Thanks for proving yourself wrong."
No. I provided an argument showing why your concept of what makes a human being is wrong, and therefore why your argument was bogus.
"He still said 'gods laws are superior than mans laws' which proves you wrong."
No it doesn't. It's true, though the correct proposition is "to" man's laws. The Holocaust was legal. Slavery was legal. Man's laws justified both. They're wrong strictly because God's laws are higher.
"He is not correct, unless you believe that God changes things on earth and shapes governments around his ideas, and shapes minds to fit those positions, which makes any form of God irrelevant."
That doesn't follow. All liberty comes from God because without God the universe is deterministic.
"That's also proof he doesn't understand separation between church and state, that's why he was removed from office for putting up the Ten Commandments."
Putting up the 10 commandments doesn't violate the Constitution. Separation of church and state isn't a law and occurs nowhere in our founding documents. Moore understands this aspect of the issue better than Jones.
Nope it proved you wrong, you just can't accept it. Someone in a coma is still a million times more viable than almost every aborted fetus, also unlike fetuses people in comas have past references that prove they have a soul. So you're still dodging the question, a question which still proves you wrong.
Are you also unaware that if abortions are made illegal people will still get abortions with wire hooks, which could get them killed. So tell me, why do you want innocent people to die, horrible painful deaths?
Yes it does, it proves that Moore values our constitution less than the bible. Which means he decides cases off of his religious beliefs, which is a incorporating religion into government matters.
The bible and gods law, justifying murder, mass murder, genocide, incest, and a vast array of other thing things for 2000 years.
It does follow, you just don't understand a concept close to that of predestination, which is a concept that makes any form of God irrelevant. Also, if our liberties come from god that must also mean God thought it was ok to have the holocaust and slavery.
Looks like you're wrong again. Moore himself believes that the first amendment is only for Christians. Which is absolute proof that he's against freedom of religion.
"Nope it proved you wrong, you just can't accept it."
Okay, if you're so confident, put it in a syllogism. I'll show you how it's unsound.
"Someone in a coma is still a million times more viable than almost every aborted fetus,"
Wrong. Viability isn't a spectrum. Either you can survive on your own or you can't. You don get less dead for being almost viable.
"also unlike fetuses people in comas have past references that prove they have a soul."
No, that only proves they HAD one. Not that they have it presently.
"So you're still dodging the question, a question which still proves you wrong."
Not at all. I debunked your argument. Your question was DOA and needed no dodging.
"Are you also unaware that if abortions are made illegal people will still get abortions with wire hooks, which could get them killed. So tell me, why do you want innocent people to die, horrible painful deaths?"
If you're killing innocent children, you're not an innocent person. Murdering a child should not be safe.
"Yes it does, it proves that Moore values our constitution less than the bible."
Which doesn't prove you right or me wrong. The Bible is of a higher value.
"Which means he decides cases off of his religious beliefs,"
"which is a incorporating religion into government matters."
Which is protected in the Constitution, not prohibited.
"The bible and gods law, justifying murder, mass murder, genocide, incest, and a vast array of other thing things for"
"It does follow,"
Explain precisely and completely how.
"you just don't understand a concept close to that of predestination, which is a concept that makes any form of God irrelevant."
I assure you my understanding of predestination and similar theological mistakes is far beyond yours.
"Also, if our liberties come from god that must also mean God thought it was ok to have the holocaust and slavery."
Nope. That doesn't follow either.
"Looks like you're wrong again."
No, it looks like you don't have a damn clue what you're talking about.
"Moore himself believes that the first amendment is only for Christians. Which is a mistake I admitted he made. But Jones's mistake that you share in is greater.
A syllogism would not accurately represent this.
But more viable is a thing. People in a coma still have most of their major organs, many can breathe, pump blood, and even have brain waves. You can't say the same about a 2 day old fetus.
So you believe that comatose people don't have a soul, you sir are the real monster here. So going off of your logic, if people in a coma don't have a soul because they can't prove it at that time, than you must believe that fetuses also do not have a soul. So it looks like you proved yourself wrong.
You debunked nothing, and I've throughly debunked everything you've said.
"Murdering" It isn't murdering, you proved that you have no idea what you're talking, and to top it off you proved you're arguing your personal religious beliefs stop trying to push your religious beliefs on other people you fascist.
If the bible has greater superiority over mans laws, than you must believe that there are an uncountable, justifiable, reasons to go around murdering other people, or you've never read the bible. Seems like you just branded yourself as a cruel person who supports murder for ridiculous reasons.
Yes Moore does. He admitted to it, multiple times. He decided cases based off his religious beliefs and he was taken off those cases and taken out of office. So it looks like it isn't protected by the constitution.
If our liberties come from God than God must have leant a hand in creating our government, than he must of also shaped those ideas in the minds of the founding fathers. Now if God could do that, than why wouldn't he do it with everyone else. Unless he has been doing it to everyone else which would mean God called for slavery and the holocaust.
You're the one that has no idea what you're talking about. Jones never said that, Moore did. Moore admitted to deciding cases off of his religious beliefs. Moore has proved you wrong about your misconceptions about Moore.
Now Doopy. I've scrolled through enough comments to know that you'll never admit when you are wrong, even when you are quite obviously wrong, case and point every argument from above. I will no longer engage in your essay long, religious nut filled, trolling, comment tantrums until you actually answer the questions I proposed, instead of dodging them and using strawmans. Here's a few tips.
1. Your personal religious beliefs do not matter to me, or anyone for that matter.
2. Trying to change the topic or using a straw man isn't answering the question.
3. If you're not actually answering the questions I've asked please refer to tip 1 and 2.
4. Don't forget, you're trying to defend an islamaphobic, religious nut, and a pedo in a few of your 'arguments'.
"A syllogism would not accurately represent this."
Then you have a rant, not an argument.
"People in a coma still have most of their major organs, many can breathe, pump blood, and even have brain waves. You can't say the same about a 2 day old fetus."
Yet they *will* both die if removed from their support systems, so there is no viability difference.
"So you believe that comatose people don't have a soul, you sir are the real monster here."
I believe they both have souls. I know they both have equal evidence of having souls. YOU are the one who says it's okay to kill innocent human beings.
"So going off of your logic, if people in a coma don't have a soul because they can't prove it at that time,"
That is not my logic. That is your assumptions about the unborn applied consistently. Try and follow what's going on here.
"It isn't murdering,"
Of course it is. It's killing an innocent human being.
"and to top it off you proved you're arguing your personal religious beliefs stop trying to push your religious beliefs on other people you fascist."
You brought up souls; I was arguing a scientific case. You're the one trying to force your religious views, so you're the fascist.
"If the bible has greater superiority over mans laws, than you must believe that there are an uncountable, justifiable, reasons to go around murdering other people,"
Explain why that hogwash "must" be.
"Yes Moore does. He admitted to it, multiple times."
Why do you keep pressing this argument? I have said that was his mistake. The thing is, it is not as grand a mistake as yours.
"He decided cases based off his religious beliefs and he was taken off those cases and taken out of office. So it looks like it isn't protected by the constitution."
It looks like the courts don't follow the Constitution. Removing a monument to the 10 commandments by force of law is a law respecting an establishment of religion.
"If our liberties come from God than God must have leant a hand in creating our government, than he must of also shaped those ideas in the minds of the founding fathers."
Why "must" that have been?
"Now if God could do that, than why wouldn't he do it with everyone else. Unless he has been doing it to everyone else which would mean God called for slavery and the holocaust."
And God can't just point the way that we should go, and great men follow while villains choose their own path?
"Jones never said that, Moore did."
Jones thinks that the state is Constitutionally protected from the Church, as do you. That is a greater error with worse consequences than Moore's.
Looks like you can't understand some very simple things. I've already explained to you why everything you said is wrong, or how it discredits another one of your arguments, I've used your own words, I've used your own arguments, I've used logic and facts.
All you've been doing is ranting about your personal religious beliefs, misinterpreting law, and using invalid argument.
I don't hide behind my religion like you do, I haven't even brought up my religious beliefs like you assume I did, that's why you're still wrong and you're still the fascist. You even started one of your rants with "I believe". Your own words prove everything I've been saying is right.
Worst of all you believe that accepting the current definition of separation of church and state is worse than misinterpreting the first amendment, and deciding court cases over ones religious beliefs, which is not allowed or protected under the constitution.
You spew you own religious beliefs when it's quite obvious you've never read the bible, and you prove that by saying "gods law is superior than mans" when gods law has hundreds of acceptable forms of what the US calls murder. Hence you must believe in murdering innocent people, or gods laws are not superior than mans.
Good bye troll. I hope you'll be able to your control those religious nut rants, flawed logic cases, misinterpretations of simple laws and arguments, and all those false nonsensical or invalid arguments of yours.
"Looks like you can't understand some very simple things. I've already explained to you why everything you said is wrong,"
No, you've simply asserted that it is. Your arguments are invalid, and your conclusions are ridiculous.
"All you've been doing is ranting about your personal religious beliefs,"
"misinterpreting law, and using invalid argument."
No, that's you.
"I haven't even brought up my religious beliefs like you assume I did,"
You said, "also unlike fetuses people in comas have past references that prove they have a soul". That was the first mention of a religious belief of a commenter in this thread.
"You even started one of your rants with 'I believe'."
You stated my beliefs incorrectly and I corrected you. The worst part is, that part where you state something wrong and then jump on someone for correcting you representative of the rest of your conduct not only on this thread, but the app in general, and—I assume—the whole rest of your life. You are a moron careening through life befouling everything you touch with your incompetence.
"Worst of all you believe that accepting the current definition of separation of church and state is worse than misinterpreting the first amendment,"
It IS misinterpreting the first amendment. It's just doing it in a more profound and damaging way!
"and deciding court cases over ones religious beliefs, which is not allowed or protected under the constitution."
Yes it is. Show me where it's disallowed. When you admit you can't, I'll show you where it's protected.
"You spew you own religious beliefs when it's quite obvious you've never read the bible, and you prove that by saying 'gods law is superior than mans' when gods law has hundreds of acceptable forms of what the US calls murder."
I think I've steeled myself for the blast of ignorance that is to follow this challenge, so tell me what you're thinking of.
"Hence you must believe in murdering innocent people, or gods laws are not superior than mans."
Nope. False dichotomy.
No you just have the inability to follow simple logic or arguments
Already did, multiple times.
No that's you
A soul is not solely for religion
I used logical argument that I obtained from your own words, if I misrepresented something that's your fault
"The worst part is, that part where you state something wrong and then jump on someone for correcting you representative of the rest of your conduct not only on this thread, but the app in general, and—I assume—the whole rest of your life. You are a moron careening through life befouling everything you touch with your incompetence."
No that's you
The US government agrees, you can't judge a court case based off your religious beliefs
You stated "gods laws are superior to mans" what I stated are gods laws, so if gods laws are superior than you must believe in murdering innocent people. It's like you have the inability to follow simple logic.
I'm honestly laughing at you and your ignorance, you are truly a troll.
"No you just have the inability to follow simple logic or arguments"
I can follow valid ones. Even extremely complex ones. It's my hobby. Yours are invalid. I can't follow them because they don't follow. They're simply pure, unadulterated crap.
"Already did, multiple times."
"No that's you
A soul is not solely for religion"
It's a religious idea you tapped for its religious significance. You exemplify everything you accuse me of.
"I used logical argument that I obtained from your own words, if I misrepresented something that's your fault"
No, you twisted my words without argument and claimed I said something I never did. Your lies are *your* fault.
"No that's you"
Dude, you don't understand. I'm not arguing against you anymore. I've given up. I am calling you a moron because you *need* to know that you are a moron! You **SUCK** at logic! You couldn't tell a good argument from a bad one if your life depended on it, and until you take a serious dose of humility and do some serious study, that will continue to be true, and your idiocy will continue to plague you and Everton you speak to. Seek help. Your quality of life depends on it.
"The US government agrees, you can't judge a court case based off your religious beliefs"
The US government is not a trustworthy interpreter of the document that limits its power.
"You stated "gods laws are superior to mans" what I stated are gods laws,"
No they are not. What you stated are a series of pointlessly vague accusations. You're avoiding specifics like the plague, and that's because specifics can be proven false. You're afraid the truth will come out.
"so if gods laws are superior than you must believe in murdering innocent people."
That's one of those vague accusations unsupported by any valid argument. What you have stated takes the logical form "(A), therefore fruitcake." It is a wild and ridiculous non sequitur.
"It's like you have the inability to follow simple logic."
It's because it's so simple, it's not logic. There are no logical operations in any of your arguments. It's like you're making up axioms as you go!
Laugh all you want. I value your opinion at hog shit, and worry deeply about a society that could not only produce you, but give you communications tools.
You can't follow logic, I already proved that remember.
Yes I did, you must have a selective memory.
But it's not solely for religion.
I did not twist your words, that's you. I used extremely simple logic and arguments, you just can't seem to follow it.
Argue. Verb. 1. To give reasons I support of an idea action or theory... Looks like you are arguing, your ignorance strikes again.
"I am calling you a moron because you *need* to know that you are a moron! You **SUCK** at logic! You couldn't tell a good argument from a bad one if your life depended on it, and until you take a serious dose of humility and do some serious study, that will continue to be true, and your idiocy will continue to plague you and Everton you speak to. Seek help. Your quality of life depends on it."
No that's you
And you hahahaha! Your ignorance and denial holds no bounds.
No those things are literally in the bible as gods law. You just can't accept it you moron.
No it follows very simple logic that you can't wrap your head around.
Logic. Noun. 1. Reasoning obtained from principles of validity.
Looks like my arguments do come from logic, you're just a moronic troll that can't comprehend simple things.
If you go around trying to prove things wrong, which you failed at BTW, than you don't value others opinions. You have been going around this entire comment section and this entire app refusing to accept others opinions. You are nothing but a lying, religious nut, moronic, fascist, troll. You almost have the complete inability accept your wrong, even when you are obviously wrong.
When people like you are given communications like this all you do is go around trolling and making the entire place a cesspool of your own whining, denial, and ignorance.
Now is you actually care about my opinion, leave. Don't say anything, just leave. Or you could continue to prove you're an ignorant troll.
"You can't follow logic, I already proved that remember."
No. Neither does anyone else.
"Yes I did,"
No, you're radically overstating the quality of your "arguments".
"But it's not solely for religion."
Regardless of whether or not that's true, you're applying it in a religious usage.
"I did not twist your words,"
"Argue. Verb. 1. To give reasons [in] support of an idea action or theory..."
Yup. And your reasons don't.
"No those things are literally in the bible as gods law."
You have no idea what you're talking about.
"Logic. Noun. 1. Reasoning obtained from principles of validity."
Validity. Something you've never touched with a 10-foot pole.
"Looks like my arguments do come from logic,"
Case in point. That was invalid. You cannot draw that conclusion from the definition of logic.
"If you go around trying to prove things wrong, which you failed at BTW, than you don't value others opinions."
I only value opinions that are correct.
"You have been going around this entire comment section and this entire app refusing to accept others opinions."
Because they're wrong.
"You are nothing but a lying, religious nut, moronic, fascist, troll. You almost have the complete inability accept your wrong, even when you are obviously wrong."
You've never seen me wrong. It doesn't happen often. Now stop accusing me of all your character flaws.
Other people can follow logic, you can't.
No I'm not, your just in too much denial to realize it.
LOL, no I'm not. You're so ignorant and brainwashed.
Nope, the only person twisting words here is you.
You saying that is confirming a few more of my argument, and proves, once again, that YOU are the one that doesn't know what you're talking about.
That's according to your denial stricken mind, I have correctly used logic multiple times in this thread, you on the other hand seem to be struggling.
But what I can draw from is the fact that my arguments do use logic, along with you not understanding what logic is.
You said you "value my opinion" but now you don't. All you're doing is proving a dozen of my arguments correct. You are a confirmed troll, confirmed religious nut case, confirmed hater of logic.
They aren't wrong, you're wrong. Get that through your thick skull, and into you dense brainwashed mind.
I have seen you wrong, multiple times, this one included. Now stop trying to deflect your own traits onto me. It's especially quite sad that I proved all traits, that you're trying to pin on me, with your own words. I guess that's just more proof you're ignorant.
"You said you 'value my opinion' but now you don't."
Behold your powers of persuasion.
You haven't made a dozen arguments. I asked a dozen times, but you haven't presented ANY.
You don't understand the words you're using, which means you're making a fool of yourself. There's no two ways about this. I am nothing you want to accuse me of being, and because I don't share in your character flaws, I will never be deceived by them. I am now thoroughly acquainted with the utter worthlessness of your—and I use the term generously—"thoughts" on the subject. All that is left is to take solace in the fact that a man who causes you as much distress as Donald Trump is in the White House, and that you leftists are all such raging hypocrites that you can never stop charging to the lowest moral ground that can be held before making accusations!
Or you made a mistake and tried backing out of it, either way you got caught.
Argument. Noun. 1. An exchange of opposing or opposite views.
Looks like you're wrong again, I've never debated someone as clearly ignorant, denial stricken, or as much as a troll as you.
You're the one that doesn't understand words, did you notice how I literally used the exact definitions. All you do is deny, deny deny.
You're right there's only one way around this, you accepting you're wrong.
You are everything I said you are, I even proved how you are a great many of them. Now stop denying you brainwashed troll.
The only thoughts that are worthless here are yours, I already proved that.
Wait, wait, what?
Hold on I'm not done.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Hahaha. Haha. Haaaa.
Whelp trollpy I can always rely on you to change the subject, in the most ridiculous way possible, then spewing a load of sh*t after. It seems that you're the one that's in distress.
Your the one who believes that innocent people should die, in a horrifically painful manner. You even admitted that. You can say whatever you want about my morals (which you're basing off your own beliefs, so you're automatically wrong), they'll always be higher than yours.
This has devolved from an incompetent leftist making mistakes about logic to the same incompetent leftist howling lies as a means to launch character attacks. It's been three days. I've given you dozens of opportunities. You have never provided a single reason anyone should believe anything you say.
And you will not respond with any, either. You'll think it's a reason, but it won't follow any valid form. Because you're incompetent.
You're to one that hasn't been able to convince people with your flawed logic, horrible arguments, and religious nut rants. I've provided more reasons in one comment than you have in this entire thread, or the entire comment section.
There's also an easy way to prove if you're convincing people or that people agree with you, called the like button. If you haven't noticed a single one of my comments convinced more people than every one of your comments in this section.
You have nothing valid to say, you are clearly brainwashed if you believe all your failed arguments in this thread prove anything. They don't, not a single one of your arguments is compelling, logical, or truthful, I was able to dispel them are the lies they are with ease.
You've done nothing but confirm your an ignorant troll grasping at nonexistent straws. You have no valid argument.
BTW I'm still laughing at you and your ignorance.
So now that all the steers have left the state of Alabama. Leaving only... you know light in the loafers, limp wristed, rimes with well...Steers
Neither choice was good. Bannon’s Hissing fitting cost us a good candidate
Funniest stories today on Faux News...they were already trying to spin this election as good for Republican's and that Doug Jones should vote along GOP lines. 😂😂😂 What a joke of a news organization.
It was good news that he won but as far as the results go I'm not thrilled about it.
The count was way too close considering the opponents ran the worst possible candidate and still damn near won.
Good news. It would have been insanity if a dunce like Roy Moore was allowed to serve in the senate.
Yes indeed! A ringing stinging defeat for Republicans and a huge "referendum" for intolerance of sexual misconduct when you stop and think about the number of Republicans that voted for Jones, wrote in someone else or just didn't vote at all. Let this "shot across the bow" serve you notice #45. You're next to be brought down and hauled away for good!
Lol maui your delusions about trump being removed should be framed they're hilarious🤣
Deny, deny and deny some more! What is it with you people? Why aren't you able to admit the truth? Is your embarrassment that you voted for super con man that overwhelming why can't bring yourself to admit you screwed up? How does it feel to be on a sinking ship?
It feels great watching your head explode👌
Yeah well, must be getting really bad for you there in Kansas. First there's the moron Brownback that is ruining your state and now you've got the imbecile DJT who is clueless and always will be. I'm sure your head has already exploded with this double whammy from your dear old GOP losers!
The correct answer to this poll is “no” regardless of the election results.
Exactly. Good news would be if SMOD won.
I made a meme to that effect last super bowl.
Soooo fellow conservatives... Do we have any riots scheduled, or are we going to go ahead and acknowledge that Roy Moore was one of the worst possible candidates to ever run for an important political position and deserved to lose?
No riots. Moore would have been an ongoing embarrassment. The decision was always the voters’. Hopefully he won’t turn out to have been an innocent man, falsely accused.
Would it be worse for him to have been falsely accused or to him have assaulted multiple underage girls?
No rioting for me. I got up and went to work. ✌🏼️ you won't see me chanting in the streets lighting cars on fire and breaking windows.
Alabama is a State, where it was common for girls to marry at fourteen and their husbands were often years older than they were. Times have changed, hut what seems like pedophilia now may have seemed normal forty years ago. I am only guessing, since I grew up in California which was conservative then, but now is run by flaming Liberals. If Moore is ever tried by a Court, I would be curious regarding the outcome.
This is so awesome, so refreshing and reassuring! DJT continues to lose. Chooses to campaign for the pedophile and makes an absolute fool out of himself. The little man doesn't know what he's doing, clueless and way out of his league!
He actually campaigned for luther initially. You must be retarded if you don't think he would support the Republican in the general election.
Hah! Campaign for a pedophile!! You have got to be kidding...campaign for regardless of the candidate's disgusting and despicable behavior? Are you out of your useless mind?
Also luther would've won the general election because he's less controversial, sounds like trump knew what he was doing.
Alleged pedophile you braindead moron.
Nope, very clear that the scumbag did everything he has been accused of. If not, why did he try and claim his signature was forged in the yearbook. Desperate, so desperate! Waiting for the other shoe to drop and be sued for divorce. So, go crawl back under a rock and stay out of touch with reality for good!
Rambo, your level of intelligence is astoundingly low. You're just using one of Trump's desperate attempts to distance himself from Moore after fiercely supporting that psycho.
That isn't evidence that he committed anything mauilover, at least you tried.
Halfback you're not one to talk about intelligence if you can't even comprehend the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
The signature wasnt even proven to be legitimate lol. She still won't release the yearbook
Handwriting expert confirmed it was his signature...where have you been?
Lol no shìt but it is still on her word. No one else has even interviewed or talked to this "expert" in how he determined his conclusion.
OK potty mouth! Enjoy the rest of your evening.
They were both horrible, despicable candidates. Neither should have even had a shot at running.
What did Jones do exactly?
He supports abortion even up until birth. That’s disgusting.
Republicans who supported Moore are despicable human beings
No more so than Democrats who supported Doug Jones.
And I am neither a Moore supporter nor a Republican.
You realize Moore is a child molester right?
But Jones admittedly believes in a right to dismember children in utero, which is even worse. There was no non-disgusting candidate on the ballot.
Doopy, what is it that Jones has done other than disagree with you?
He has lent support to the most evil practice in western culture.
You do know that abortion is legal & pedophilia is not? Only some folks are against choice in abortion while everyone, with the exception of a great many republicans, are against pedophilia.
"You do know that abortion is legal & pedophilia is not?"
Slavery and the Holocaust were legal. Abortion being legal is half the problem, not a moral argument.
"Only some folks are against choice in abortion while everyone, with the exception of a great many republicans, are against pedophilia."
Which is a highly complicated way of saying "some people think there is a right to dismember your offspring, while some people support pedophilia". In that, I suppose your statements is accurate. The part where you try and color those "some" categories for political haymaking is where it all turns to hogwash.
It is not the case that Moore has been proven to be a child molester. It is not the case that if he were, then his alleged victims would be young enough for it to constitute pedophilia. It is not the case that voting for someone who happens to be a pedophile means that you do not happen to be opposed to pedophilia.
I'm not about to let you get away with that.
Turnover is good...
As a respectful conservative, I was kinda hoping both lost. Wouldn’t have been psyched whoever won.
As a socialist, I agree.
Alabama on here voted no lol
Ha I wonder how many black women from Alabama are on this app?
A liberal from bama ?????
He will Be voted out in 2 yrs
I may be mistaken but his seat is not up for grabs until 2020.
The news I was watching last night said , whoever wins will occupy for 2 yrs. then another vote will occur for the seat. Perhaps it is 2yr 11 mo ?
He will be seated early January.
I think people start 2 years since the election is in 2018. People don't count the last 3 months because usually not much happens.
Isn't that what they said about Obama's first term? "We'll get him out in four years?"
Yet Jones, a Democrat, was elected in a solidly crimson red state. The Alabama voters said NO to Moore and all the baggage that he had attached to him. Whether the voters crossed party lines or stayed home dose not matter, either way it sent a huge message to the GOP.
Lol you're just regurgitating what the pundits said there's not going to be a huge upset in the gop because of this. If the oppenent was literally anyone else Jones wouldve lost
They only thing I think is really stupid are people who think Jones won because Alabama is becoming a democratic state
Personally I just hate Jeff sessions, so this is the biggest Fuck you for him
I love reading all the far-right whining about the “smear campaign” against Moore, like he didn’t dig himself into this hole. Keep it coming, guys!😆
Exactly. Even if he didn't do these things his response to the question of "did you ever date underage girls while you were in your 30s" was "I may have, but I never dated any woman without her mother's permission". Ummm....what? I wanted this seat to stay Republican but this guy has been a train wreck for years.
Everyone who is thinking this is a rejection of Trump is funny. The Republican vote total from 2016 to now went down by 51% and the Dem total only went down by 8%. Republicans didn't show up because the guy was toxic. This is Moore's loss alone. He was a horrible candidate and that's the only reason this seat flipped.
Agreed. The whole "big loss for Trump" thing is quite hilarious honestly. Had Moore never had the allegations pinned against him he would've won hands down. Trump's role wasn't in question with this election. Rather, the moral/ethical lines of party politics.
I'm inclined to agree that the whole "this is indicative of how mid-term elections will go" is a bit premature; he was fucked the moment he started hitting on underage girls. The only big loss I see to Trump is now the Republicans margin of error in Congress has narrowed and will make it harder for them to do anything.
It’s kinda bad for Trump because he publicly supports someone who’s most likely a child molesting pervert 🙄
I think Trump has bigger issues than his support for a potential child molester. If we're still talking about sexual harassment in a year, the Republicans are going to lose a lot of ground, only because he has an (R) next to his name. We can argue whether the accusations about misconduct towards him are true or not, but the perception that he has is enough to make people vote against a party that supports someone who may. Especially now with this sexual harassment awareness movement on the march. The political landscape has shifted since a year ago and if I had money, I wouldn't bet on the Republicans doing well at the current rate.
A baby killer in the senate is hardly good news.
What baby did he kill?
Their not babies you idiot
Oh I forgot, for you baby killers, they are simply, unwanted stem cells & resalable “body parts”, that Planned Parenthood, can sell for fun & profit😱❗️If we are deplorables , then you all are despicables‼️
Boston, who's the idiot here? It's *they're* not *their*
Eyeball, lungs, ears, hearts, livers, kidneys, fingers, toes, are not human things to some people.
You do realize they sell the parts to research firms, right? It’s not like they are selling them to some homeless people on the street.
Only the parts they don’t crush go to illegally to research. I don’t know what parts they give to the homeless.
Pepsi, that’s the best argument & analogy you could come up with for killing babies❓Pathetic❗️
Auto correct doesn't change a word to a completely different one. I'm also not liberal.
A Democrat winning is never good news.
It is when the other option is a pedophile who makes policy based on what his imaginary friend tells him to do
A Republican winning any election is despicable and should be avoided at all cost! Republicans are NEVER for what is best for America and her people only for their disgusting selfish personal wealth.
You too? Deny, deny, deny! You know the truth and refuse to admit it.
And the truth is?
One and only priority for Republicans is to hoard wealth; don't care one iota about was is best for ALL Americans. The rotten tax bill is a perfect example; favors corporations and the wealthy at the expense of others. You know the truth but play dumb about it, deny it. Shame on you!
According to the online calculators I've seen, I'll be saving between 7 and 8 thousand per year, and I'm far from wealthy.
Can we ever have a fair election again? A former Facebook executive said last week that social media is tearing our society apart. We've abandoned civil discourse. A person's life Is destroyed and elections won or lost on hearsay and innuendo. With the advancement of A.I. not only will be unable to trust what we hear, but what we see as well.
Have you seen this? www.ted.com/talks/zeynep_tufekci_we_re_building_a_dystopia_just_to_make_people_click_on_ads/up-next
It's basically exactly what you're talking about. You should watch it when you get time.
Fair campaigns have never happened in this country. They started with Jefferson and Adams and there have been dirty campaigns ever since.
History, that my friend, is why George hated “all” political parties & why I a registered Independent do too❗️
The Main Street Media was sure quick to label the results of this election as a "referendum against Trump". These results had little to do with Trump. Had the allegations about Moore's sexual misbehavior never been made, Moore would have won handily. Had Lester Strange won the primary (who, we shall remember -- was endorsed by Trump), Alabama would not now have a "blue state" senator.
U guys here about Moore riding his horse, sassy, to vote?
He owns a ranch a mile from the voting station.
A man you can't trust in a mall is someone you can't trust in the senate
It didn’t stop wild Bill Clinton.
The lie about the MALL has been proven false. FAKE NEWS got you.
I mean, the fact that it was even a story at all is unsettling. I used to work in a mall - there are all kinds of weirdos walking around and no one says anything. You have to be pretty damn creepy for people to actually take notice.
It’s never good news when a propaganda outlet (Washington Post) for the worlds richest man rigs an election
The Washington post is a propaganda outlet for bill gates?
Jeff Bezos who owns 100% stake of WaPo surpassed bill gates in wealth
Ah. Now it makes sense.
The worlds richest man is Vladimir Putin. He’s just hidden the money so it’s hard to track. Check out the book “Red Notice” for details.
More gridlock yay
Fantastic news. I am greatly disappointed to see that over half of the libertarians think this is bad news. My opinion of them has suffered.
What? The bad news is the fact you have only a choice between two individuals. A socialist, and a likely child molester. If you like these choices then YES! Great outcome..... think
Either major party’s candidate winning is bad news. Is it really that difficult to comprehend?
Every abused child can feel the slightest bit of hope. Just a tiny sigh of relief since 48% of the electorate are still willing to sell their souls for a political party.
"Sell their souls" being a little over dramatic there lol
I’m just still in shock about this win. I truly believed that no matter what Moore would win going away. I was wrong.
I hate it when people are commenting thanking black women for this victory. As if no black men voted for Doug Jones. As if no whites voted for Doug Jones. Stop it! Stop it! Stop it!
Why are so bent out of shape about it?
70% of whites voted for Moore...it's unfortunate but that doesn't make it untrue.
That doesn’t mean you can just dis all whites including those 30% who voted for jones. Cause that’s what happening on twitter now. It’s annoying. It’s disgusting
When 70 % of whites vote for a White candidate it is racist.
When 90 % of blacks vote for a black candidate it is "progress".
Never heard of that
A Leftist hand puppet for Schumer & Pelosi Alabama & it’s Republican majority will get what they deserve now one of their U.S. Senators that will vote against their mandates wishes❗️As they say be careful who you vote for, they might bite the hand that elected them, get ready Alabama, your about about to get you butts bit more than once‼️
Schumer & Pelosi, will their hands stuffed so far up this hand puppets rear, he can’t blink his eyes without them moving their fingers. Serves all you Georgia crackers right that voted for him‼️
Trump’s morning tweet:
“The reason I originally endorsed Luther Strange (and his numbers went up mightily), is that I said Roy Moore will not be able to win the General Election. I was right! Roy worked hard but the deck was stacked against him!”
Trump is never wrong???
I remember but apparently he forgot himself as time went by. 😊
Also I like that source.
Actually, I think this is good news for BOTH Party's...
I’m still upset that Harambe hasn’t won an election yet. That would’ve been my vote in this one.
Isn't smoking allowed in the gorilla pen? Cuz they smoked my brutha Harambe...
Doesn't matter. A Democrat won in AL. OK, it's been 20+ years, but it's a Democrat who won. Now, a Libertarian or any 3rd Party candidate victory in ANY state? THAT would be a big fucking deal! 🎆🗽🎆
Yes and no. He will be gone when the real election comes.
Good, gives Mo Brooks another shot
No. It’s generally a bad thing when a Republican or Democrat is put in a position to have control over others.
I agree. Parties are cancer.
Moore wasn't proven guilty so I'm not sure. If Moore was guilty then yes, because pedophiles are disgusting, but if not then no.
I mean, if Jones *isn’t* a pedophile, he’s gonna have to change that soon or he won’t fit in at work.
You believe someone needs to be convicted of a crime before it should be held against them by voters in an election?
Nah, everyone should just assume that anyone being accused of any crime is guilty just by reason of them being accused.
Or just lazily assume that people are assuming guilt based solely on an accusation.
Don’t fucking try to act like you’re a font of brilliance. The stores were credible. The reporting is credible.
Get the fuck off your pedestal and try actually looking at what we’re looking at, you intellectually lazy fuck.
Well, I suppose random personal attacks and name calling always works when your argument doesn’t....
Cite, I think you're the lazy fuck. The girl who accused him admitted to forging his writings in her yearbook. Not to mention that it's all very convenient she came out against him many years later RIGHT as he's seeking election. It all seems very fishy. If she was telling the truth she wouldn't have needed to forge anything in the yearbook. And no, an accusation doesn't need to be used against him during an election, as an accusation without prove is useless. Hillary Clinton supporters wanted to falsely accuse Bernie of sexual assault, yet you would probably not want them to use that against him, would you?
I ask again, Cookie, do you think someone needs to be convicted in court before allegations are considered and used by voters in an election?
Yes because their stories are full of holes
How old was he 40 years ago when he dated 15 year olds? 20? 25? There were plenty of people doing that in the 2000’s. And if it was in Nevada that’d still be legal today as the age of consent is 15.
Such as what, Rambo?
It’s always interesting with you, Liberty.
Liberty: Insults everyone by claiming we have no knowledge of the issue
Me: We know what we’re talking about, you lazy fuck.
Liberty: Insulting people means you have no argument, except when I insult people then it must mean I’m correct.
I’m trying to square this circle, Liberty, while I’m waiting for Cookie to answer.
How is it that you insulting and dismissing everyone is apparently good argumentation, but when I dare tell you to go fuck your self because of your idiotic statement, then I am making a bad argument?
How does this work? Teach me, Oh Font of Knowledge, how your baseless insults are valid while my response is not.
I never insulted anyone personally. I was just using sarcasm to point out the absurdity of assuming guilt with no evidence. You then resorted to name calling and cursing since you apparently had no cogent or pertinent retort.
Please point out the personal insult in this:
“Nah, everyone should just assume that anyone being accused of any crime is guilty just by reason of them being accused.”
Your position is that everyone who dares believe the allegations against Moore are believing only because of the allegations.
That’s insulting. Your claim of it just being sarcasm doesn’t remove the fact that instead of building an argument to refute the claims, you simply insulted everyone and said they believed the allegations because they were allegations.
Grow the fuck up and stop pretending your shit don’t stink.
That’s not my position at all. Again, it just points to the absurdity of the claim you made in your prior comment. You have to be able to separate the argument from the person making it (and apparently other random non involved persons as well).
No personal insults whatsoever and no assumptions as to why any particular person would hold any particular belief.
As a parallel:
If I were to remark upon the irony of telling someone to “grow up” amidst a fit of regression. That would be addressing a specific action rather than attacking a person.
But if I were to simply call you a childish moron, that would be attacking you personally.
See the difference?
Yes, obviously you need to be proven guilty of a crime for it to be used against you. How is this even a question?
So, Cookie, I assume you think the Benghazi hearings to attack Clinton were inappropriate, as well as any use of Clinton’s email to try and taint her candidacy.
As an independent, I'm insulted by your assumption that I side with either party. Yes, I think she should have been found guilty first. Although it seems more likely she's guilty than Moore.
He will get to do this again, soon.
Not just good, great!
It's good that a child predator didn't win, but the people of Alabama still lost. The people of Alabama want a good conservative, but they got Jones because Moore was unelectable. The democrats got lucky here and this is not a referendum on Trump or the republican policies. It's not a sea change. The timing of the allegations were to ensure that the democrats could steal the seat. Had the allegations came to light during the primary, we wouldn't be talking about this right now. Something that happened 40 years ago I guess waited just a few weeks longer to be dropped on Moore after the primary. All these BS political calculations are why the people of Alabama saw Clinton as unauthentic.
How do we get “child predator” out of an unproven accusation? Kind of diminishes those who are really child predators...
Those who accuse people of sexual assault, and even more so women accusing powerful men, take a great personal risk. They put themselves into the public eye and open themselves to attack from every sycophant and follower of the powerful who stands accused. They get attacked as liars, as whores, and attention seekers.
Until Roy Moore was up for election as a United States Senator, his victims might’ve simply hoped it would not be necessary for them to take those personal risks. But once he won the primary, they were convinced they should speak up and speak out.
There’s also the fact that only recently has there been a change in how women who accuse powerful men are treated. It’s still pretty awful, but at least it seems that more people are listening now than there were even four months ago.
I do not blame the women for waiting.
Also, I agree somewhat with your point at the start. Alabama is a very conservative state and should be represented by someone who shares their beliefs. While it is good politically for me as a Democrat, I do feel some sympathy for those who are represented by people who do not share much of anything with them. Currently Ted Cruz and John Cornyn are my Senators.
Jones is in a difficult spot, too. Does he vote with his heart and his principles, or does he vote to try and get re-elected?
If Republicans had nominated almost literally any other Republican in Alabama the GOP would have won this election, so my sympathy only goes so far.
Hopefully more moderate (and the term is relative) Republicans within Alabama reassert control of the party over the fringes who thought Moore was an acceptable option.
Seriously. How does a Republican lose a Senatorial race in Alabama? That’s like the easiest hurdle in all of politics, and only Moore was so terrible he couldn’t clear it.
Faith in America: restored.
I’m happy that a sleeze like Moore is not able to acquire more power and influence law.
I wouldn’t say it’s good news Jones won but it is good Moore lost. He was the wrong candidate and he just needs to go home. It’s incredible the parties keep nominating such bad candidates.