I Just De-Registered As A Republican

[Pogo]

There were myriad reasons to not elect Roy Moore, paramount among which was incompetence.

I agree, Moore was a terrible candidate and there were many reasons not to vote for him. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about and I'd say the same thing if it were Doug Jones, who was a worse candidate than Moore, in my opinion.

I don't care what letter is beside someone's name or what they do for a living, or whether I agree or disagree with their views.... none of that matters in terms of how they should be treated regarding allegations of wrongdoing. We have a system and a protocol is supposed to be followed in adjudication.... for some reason, that has apparently broken down and we now live in an age where mob allegation replaces true justice.

Did you vote in that election?

Whether you'd like to answer that or not, how would Jones be "worse" than a judge kicked off the bench (twice) because he couldn't follow the law, which is kinda basic for the position of judge? Was Jones disbarred at some point because he couldn't follow legal ethics?

I mean that's pretty damn blatant.

 

[Boss]

Did you vote in that election?

Whether you'd like to answer that or not, how would Jones be "worse" than a judge kicked off the bench (twice) because he couldn't follow the law, which is kinda basic for the position of judge? Was Jones disbarred at some point because he couldn't follow legal ethics?

I mean that's pretty damn blatant.

Again, this is not about the argument over whether Moore was a good candidate. Completely different debate altogether. It doesn't matter who I voted for, that's not what is at issue here. That's why I made the statement that my position would be the same if it were the other way around and Jones were being accused.

We have a SERIOUS ******* problem here! A rather large contingent of people in our society have suddenly had their crazy trains jump the track and believe it's acceptable to condemn and convict people on the basis of sheer allegation and gossip. We've got to do something about that and get things back under control or we've lost our nation to crazy people.

 

[Pogo]

Did you vote in that election?

Whether you'd like to answer that or not, how would Jones be "worse" than a judge kicked off the bench (twice) because he couldn't follow the law, which is kinda basic for the position of judge? Was Jones disbarred at some point because he couldn't follow legal ethics?

I mean that's pretty damn blatant.

Again, this is not about the argument over whether Moore was a good candidate. Completely different debate altogether. It doesn't matter who I voted for, that's not what is at issue here. That's why I made the statement that my position would be the same if it were the other way around and Jones were being accused.

We have a SERIOUS ******* problem here! A rather large contingent of people in our society have suddenly had their crazy trains jump the track and believe it's acceptable to condemn and convict people on the basis of sheer allegation and gossip. We've got to do something about that and get things back under control or we've lost our nation to crazy people.

Far as I know several women with Moore experience simply told their stories. Whether those stories were credible and/or whether they influenced the election is unquantifiable and up to individual judgment.

What's the alternative --- that these women should have sat down and shut up?

 

[Boss]

Far as I know several women with Moore experience simply told their stories. Whether those stories were credible and/or whether they influenced the election is unquantifiable and up to individual judgment.

What's the alternative --- that these women should have sat down and shut up?

There is NO doubt they influenced the election. I don't know if their stories were true or not, and that's the whole problem here... no one knows except them and Moore. I don't know what the alternative is but we better be figuring it out... we cannot live in a society where people can be totally destroyed by simple allegation. That's a huge slippery slope we can't go down. It is blowing my mind that so many of you are ambivalent to this and think it's perfectly fine and dandy! Is that because "your guy" won a Senate seat? Are your politics really more important than the integrity of civil society?

 

[JakeStarkey]

"I don't know" fits Boss well on this thread. Notice his red herring of physical evidence or formal charges or arrest forty years after the events and almost that long with the elapse of criminal statues.

There is a good reason we have statutes of limitations.

I am not arguing that at all. Just because someone has gotten beyond the statutes does not mean s/he is not accountable to public opinion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Far as I know several women with Moore experience simply told their stories. Whether those stories were credible and/or whether they influenced the election is unquantifiable and up to individual judgment.

What's the alternative --- that these women should have sat down and shut up?

There is NO doubt they influenced the election. I don't know if their stories were true or not, and that's the whole problem here... no one knows except them and Moore. I don't know what the alternative is but we better be figuring it out... we cannot live in a society where people can be totally destroyed by simple allegation. That's a huge slippery slope we can't go down. It is blowing my mind that so many of you are ambivalent to this and think it's perfectly fine and dandy! Is that because "your guy" won a Senate seat? Are your politics really more important than the integrity of civil society?

Trump and his WH staff said a GOP senate was more important than Moore's character, yes.

 

[Pogo]

Far as I know several women with Moore experience simply told their stories. Whether those stories were credible and/or whether they influenced the election is unquantifiable and up to individual judgment.

What's the alternative --- that these women should have sat down and shut up?

There is NO doubt they influenced the election. I don't know if their stories were true or not, and that's the whole problem here... no one knows except them and Moore. I don't know what the alternative is but we better be figuring it out... we cannot live in a society where people can be totally destroyed by simple allegation. That's a huge slippery slope we can't go down. It is blowing my mind that so many of you are ambivalent to this and think it's perfectly fine and dandy! Is that because "your guy" won a Senate seat? Are your politics really more important than the integrity of civil society?

Again, the point I already made in this tangent --- whether any given allegation is "true" or not or can be "proven" or not is irrelevant. That would be relevant if it was a criminal charge; it isn't. What it is is an aggregate depiction of the candidate's character. The final analysis the voter has (had) to make was not "whether X, Y or Z happened" but whether Roy Moore's character makes it likely that such a pattern did exist.

That cannot be definitively established for the average voter. Who after all can say they "know" a candy they've never personally met or interacted with? So they're left with the various experiences of those who did have such a relationship, balanced against what Moore offers in his defense. And since he offered very little, Occam's Razor leans the other way. In fact he also lied about his own relationships with some of them, so that's an additional character assessment (mendacity) separate from the sexual stuff. That's provable.

(/off the topic)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Boss, you agree that Moore was a terrible candidate.

Jones is a better man. In two years the seat will revert to the GOP.

The election is a lesson for both parties.

Get rid of Schumer and Pelosi, McConnell and Ryan, and the Black Caucus and the Freedom Caucus, half the members of each who are sleeping with their secretaries.

 

[Boss]

Boss, you agree that Moore was a terrible candidate.

Jones is a better man. In two years the seat will revert to the GOP.

The election is a lesson for both parties.

Get rid of Schumer and Pelosi, McConnell and Ryan, and the Black Caucus and the Freedom Caucus, half the members of each who are sleeping with their secretaries.

I agree Moore was a terrible candidate but that doesn't make Jones a better man.

I disagree with Jones on policy but if there had been the same crop of last minute allegations made against him, I would have said the same thing about that. It's just ******* wrong, it doesn't matter about the politics. We cannot have a civil society operating on vigilante lynch mob justice. That's not how this works!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Boss, you agree that Moore was a terrible candidate.

Jones is a better man. In two years the seat will revert to the GOP.

The election is a lesson for both parties.

Get rid of Schumer and Pelosi, McConnell and Ryan, and the Black Caucus and the Freedom Caucus, half the members of each who are sleeping with their secretaries.

I agree Moore was a terrible candidate but that doesn't make Jones a better man.

I disagree with Jones on policy but if there had been the same crop of last minute allegations made against him, I would have said the same thing about that. It's just ******* wrong, it doesn't matter about the politics. We cannot have a civil society operating on vigilante lynch mob justice. That's not how this works!

Your definition of vigilantism and what is happening is over the top, not realistic, and partisan driven.

 

[Boss]

Boss, you agree that Moore was a terrible candidate.

Jones is a better man. In two years the seat will revert to the GOP.

The election is a lesson for both parties.

Get rid of Schumer and Pelosi, McConnell and Ryan, and the Black Caucus and the Freedom Caucus, half the members of each who are sleeping with their secretaries.

I agree Moore was a terrible candidate but that doesn't make Jones a better man.

I disagree with Jones on policy but if there had been the same crop of last minute allegations made against him, I would have said the same thing about that. It's just ******* wrong, it doesn't matter about the politics. We cannot have a civil society operating on vigilante lynch mob justice. That's not how this works!

Your definition of vigilantism and what is happening is over the top, not realistic, and partisan driven.

No, I've been watching this shit happen for the past several years now. Like I said, from the 'Hands up--don't shoot' incident to Antifa thugs assaulting people "because they're Nazis" to Charlottesville, and now this latest political strategy of destroying candidates after it's too late to take them off the ballot. Over and over, we're seeing the same pattern unfold... like a sick Sally Jessie Rafael episode, the "accusers" come out to condemn and the gullible crowd cheers as vigilante lynch mob justice is meted out.

Furthermore, is seems to be partisan driven by the LEFT. Of course, if it happens to one of your own, you kick and scream... do everything you can to run clock and obfuscate... try to find every conceivable loophole to dance through... pay off officials and have FBI directors in your back pocket if you need to.... whatever the hell it takes to avoid accountability when you're caught red handed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The right is as partisan driven as the left, comrade.

 

[OldLady]

Boss, you agree that Moore was a terrible candidate.

Jones is a better man. In two years the seat will revert to the GOP.

The election is a lesson for both parties.

Get rid of Schumer and Pelosi, McConnell and Ryan, and the Black Caucus and the Freedom Caucus, half the members of each who are sleeping with their secretaries.

I agree Moore was a terrible candidate but that doesn't make Jones a better man.

I disagree with Jones on policy but if there had been the same crop of last minute allegations made against him, I would have said the same thing about that. It's just ******* wrong, it doesn't matter about the politics. We cannot have a civil society operating on vigilante lynch mob justice. That's not how this works!

Because Moore is a public figure, and the ones we are hearing about in the MeToo movement have been public figures, it seems like lynch mob justice. It is actually being handled the same as sexual harassment claims have always been handled. Sexual harassment seldom has witnesses (except for other women who have been subjected to similar behavior) or physical evidence. There is no "proving" it the way you would in a court of law.
The men in the private sector--media, Hollywood, etc., had the accusations examined by HR and it was the companies that determined if the guy's continued involvement with them would be detrimental. That was their call to make as a private business, even if the guy was "famous." As a matter of fact, being famous makes it worse for the guy because of the political sensitivity to the topic right now. Advertisers would pull out if you kept an accused pig on your nightly news show, for example. If it were just an average Joe Schmoe no one knew, he might get a chance to take some trainings and told to mind his P's and Q's if it was the first time. Fame makes it more likely you'll be fired.
Some politicians are simply bowing out to avoid any more publicity than necessary, and that is their decision. I'm assuming they're guilty or they wouldn't leave their jobs.
Some politicians are flatly denying any wrong doing and so far they've gotten away with it because like you pointed out, what evidence is there one way or the other? So believe who you like.

I get what you're saying about men losing their jobs over unfounded allegations. I get what you're saying about losing Moore the election over accusations that can't be proven in criminal court. But that's how these allegations have always worked and why women have traditionally been so reluctant to file complaints. It is "He said/she said" and if He is powerful, He wins, she gets labelled a trouble maker, a liar, or worse.

I think things will get on a more reasonable footing after a bit. IMO, the accusations should remain private -- including the identity of the harasser -- until the investigation has been finished by the appropriate Dept. In the case of D.C. politicians and congressional staff, I don't know who it is, but it needs to improve, big time.

In the case of Roy Moore, there WAS no one to do an investigation since he wasn't employed by anyone and the allegations were from 40 years ago--so would it have been the D.A.'s office if the statute hadn't run? That was a mess, but I have no doubt he was going after high school girls in his 30's and I have no reason to disbelieve Corfman, either. It fits with what was going on at the time.
I don't think Roy was unfairly railroaded, and while it seems a draconian solution to fire people like Lauer and Ayles, it's a business and their ruined reputations would have hurt them.

I realize that's pretty long winded, but if you managed to read all that, hope it put it a little into perspective.