Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> In the News
Will a Moore win wreck the GOP?
Previous  1  2  3  4



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Jeanette




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 10:00 am
southernbubby wrote:
but let's not forget about all of those Republicans who voted for Jones and even Fox news website has commentary that Moore would have made toast of the GOP, together with Trump

and BTW, Moore has not conceded, partially because the military absentee ballots still have not been counted and the race was very close.

As far as bigotry goes, sometimes it appeals to people, such as how Trump has gotten support from those who usually don't gain much from having a Republican in office and it appears that if they earn under $40k, they are really sorry that they drank the kool aid.


Thank G-d for those Republicans! They're the ones saving the country right now.

I was one of them by the way. I was a Republican until 2016. The nomination of Trump and his subsequent embrace by the party proved they have no principles other than winning. At some point we have to decide for ourselves when a line is crossed and we simply cannot suspend disbelief any longer.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 10:10 am
Jeanette wrote:
Republicans nominated this guy, supported him, defended him, campaigned for him and voted for him. But somehow it's the democrats' fault for focusing on the wrong flaws.


Its always the Democrats' fault.

If Moore had been elected, Fox would have seen it as a victory for Trump and the Republicans, because those stupid liberals don't understand Alabama.

Since he lost, however, its a victory for Trump and the Republicans, because those stupid liberals don't understand Alabama.

BTW, we should really be talking about what a great candidate Doug Jones was, and what a good Senator he will make. He's already reaching across the aisle, ensuring that he will serve all the people of Alabama. Practically the first words out of his mouth were let's fund CHIP, in fact, why don't you do it even before I'm seated.
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 10:19 am
Jeanette wrote:
Thank G-d for those Republicans! They're the ones saving the country right now.

I was one of them by the way. I was a Republican until 2016. The nomination of Trump and his subsequent embrace by the party proved they have no principles other than winning. At some point we have to decide for ourselves when a line is crossed and we simply cannot suspend disbelief any longer.

I'm surprised at you. The republicans have always hated him almost as much as the democrats did. He climbed over a lot of people in order to get this presidency, and although they may be smiling on the outside, on the inside they haven't forgiven him.

Isn't that why Washington is turning into a circus nowadays?
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 10:21 am
Fox wrote:
You seem to think that bigotry is some kind of horrible, beyond-the-pale sin; the absolute worst thing that can be said about a person. It's not. Bigotry is simply intolerance of others with different characteristics or opinions. Virtually all of us, in one way or another, are bigots. And nothing bad happens if someone calls you a bigot. You don't wake up with a skin rash or a yeast infection.

Bigotry among public officials has been a poor predictor of performance in the past. Richard Nixon was a tremendous anti-Semite -- at the same time he was doing more for Israel than his predecessors and opening up the DOJ to Jews. Lyndon Johnson was clearly a racist -- yet he signed civil rights legislation for the most cynical of motives.

I'm genuinely confused as to why Moore's bigotry is so upsetting to you. He doesn't believe anything that should shock us, however wrong we might believe him to be. Part of the explicit theology of Orthodox Christianity as well as even mainline Protestant sects is, in fact, that "salvation" can only come through beliefs which Jews do not share. Large percentages of Muslims believe that homosexuality should be illegal. Strong nuclear families are the biggest issue in the Hotep movement; they regularly equate welfare and slavery.

Which brings us to the key argument against Moore:

Moore was a bad choice based on his performance as an Alabama Supreme Court justice. His unwillingness in that role to obey the decisions of higher courts was the real problem. Whether his refusal was based on intolerance or sheer cussedness or voices in his head makes no difference.

In fact, his alleged bigotry should never have even come up. Making it part of the case against Moore suggests that voters could have overlooked his refusal to obey higher courts had his actions been based on something other than socially-unacceptable opinions.

As for the name-calling, go right ahead. While I obviously disagree that I am patronizing or condescending -- at least no more so than anyone else -- I notice that it only becomes a glaring personality flaw when someone doesn't like what I'm saying.


If it makes you feel better, I find you patronizing and condescending even in non-political threads, and even when I agree with you.

But allow me to explore your feeling that bigotry is irrelevant. The guy thinks that the last time America was great was when we had slaves, and that gays should be locked up, and you think its irrelevant. And I really don't care that there are people who agree with him. There are people who want to put me in a gas chamber. I don't think they should be elected to Congress.

Maybe that's what makes you a Republican. And maybe that's what I don't understand about Republicans. You think that bigotry and hatred is fine. So long as he's "good for Israel."
Back to top

imasoftov




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 11:30 am
Jeanette wrote:
Republicans nominated this guy, supported him, defended him, campaigned for him and voted for him. But somehow it's the democrats' fault for focusing on the wrong flaws.

Fox's purpose is to talk us into self-doubt and paralysis.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 12:06 pm
Jeanette wrote:
Republicans nominated this guy, supported him, defended him, campaigned for him and voted for him. But somehow it's the democrats' fault for focusing on the wrong flaws.


SixOfWands wrote:
If Moore had been elected, Fox would have seen it as a victory for Trump and the Republicans, because those stupid liberals don't understand Alabama.

In addition to attempting to misattribute both words and sentiments to me, you're both missing the difference between advocacy and analysis. I've never suggested that Moore was a good choice. At best, he's a loose cannon. At worst, he's unable to carry out his public duties anytime they conflict with his personal opinions.

Had I been advising the Democrats, I would have told them to ignore everything else and focus exclusively on the fact that Moore has a record of not carrying out his duties. And, in fact, that's pretty much what the Democrats did. IMHO, the Jones campaign played it pretty close to perfect.

Had I been advising the Republicans, I would have given them the same advice I give to parents of teenagers: Never let the kids (or the Democrats) find out where your goat is tied. Or in this case, your elephant. While a Presidential endorsement is pretty much required, the GOP should have tepidly wished Moore the best and left it at that. Instead, they allowed the media to create a circus and then had to spend valuable time and resources sweeping up the peanuts. Steve Bannon should have stayed home.

I happen to believe that the GOP will spin the loss pretty much as I predicted upthread. In fact, there are already signs of that happening, so I don't think I'm too far off. You can like or dislike how the GOP is spinning it, but don't blame me.

If the Democrats were to come and ask for advice at this juncture, I would tell them to spend the year qualifying and walking back Jones's views on various issues to be more in line with those of Alabama voters. No major reversals -- just a little softening. Jones picked up conservative voters who opposed to Moore; if the Republicans field a stronger candidate in the regular election -- and I don't know who they have backstage -- then Jones may lose his slight edge.

Everything I'm saying is pretty standard political analysis at this point. I'm not saying anything contentious. Most people with an interest in politics are able to put aside their own opinions long enough to discuss what each side did right or wrong and what the pitfalls are for each side. What I'm discovering, though, is that quite a few people who claim to be interested in politics are actually not; what they're interested in is ranting and raving and telling other people how awful they find them to be. Okay. Everybody needs a hobby.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 12:24 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
You think that bigotry and hatred is fine. So long as he's "good for Israel."

imasoftov wrote:
Fox's purpose is to talk us into self-doubt and paralysis.

Do you think it strengthens your case to make up things about me? Do you think it's okay to tell posters on Imamother what they're thinking?

It is fine not to like me for whatever reasons. Most of us have posters we don't care for very much. Set your account to ignore me if you find me so bothersome.

But when you resort to personal attacks, you are essentially admitting that you have nothing to say. In fact, you literally have to make up things and claim to know what I'm thinking in order to justify all that rage.

Well, here's what I'm thinking right now: naps and a cool-off period for everyone!
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 12:56 pm
Fox wrote:
Do you think it strengthens your case to make up things about me? Do you think it's okay to tell posters on Imamother what they're thinking?

It is fine not to like me for whatever reasons. Most of us have posters we don't care for very much. Set your account to ignore me if you find me so bothersome.

But when you resort to personal attacks, you are essentially admitting that you have nothing to say. In fact, you literally have to make up things and claim to know what I'm thinking in order to justify all that rage.

Well, here's what I'm thinking right now: naps and a cool-off period for everyone!


You said:

fox wrote:
I'm genuinely confused as to why Moore's bigotry is so upsetting to you.... In fact, his alleged bigotry should never have even come up.


Clearly, based on those statement, bigotry is not bothersome to you. In fact, you stated a believe that Moore's bigotry should not even have been an issue of concern for voters. You're fine with it, or at the very least it doesn't impact your opinion of him, or presumably others.

You also went on to discuss who bigots like Nixon were allegedly "good for Israel." Suggesting that their bigotry is OK as long as they help the Jews.

I'm sorry if you don't like people quoting your words.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 1:21 pm
Fox wrote:

Everything I'm saying is pretty standard political analysis at this point. I'm not saying anything contentious. Most people with an interest in politics are able to put aside their own opinions long enough to discuss what each side did right or wrong and what the pitfalls are for each side. What I'm discovering, though, is that quite a few people who claim to be interested in politics are actually not; what they're interested in is ranting and raving and telling other people how awful they find them to be. Okay. Everybody needs a hobby.


In all seriousness, I ask you to reread that comment, and ask yourself whether or not you see it as condescending and patronizing.

As I read it, you are stating that the positions that you espouse are standard, correct, and cannot be argued with. ("Everything I'm saying is pretty standard political analysis at this point. I'm not saying anything contentious.") And those who disagree with anything you say are not only objectively wrong by any standard, they are only interested in "ranting and raving ...."

And that method of arguing --delegitimizing any contrary opinions, and painting those who disagree with you as lacking in the level of intelligence and comprehension that you have --
is inherently condescending and patronizing.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 1:51 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Clearly, based on those statement, bigotry is not bothersome to you. In fact, you stated a believe that Moore's bigotry should not even have been an issue of concern for voters. You're fine with it, or at the very least it doesn't impact your opinion of him, or presumably others.

You also went on to discuss who bigots like Nixon were allegedly "good for Israel." Suggesting that their bigotry is OK as long as they help the Jews.

I'm sorry if you don't like people quoting your words.

The point about Nixon was not that he was "good for Israel"; it was to juxtapose his personal anti-Semitism with the fact that he was surprising helpful and supportive of Jews in a number of situations. In other words, Nixon was a bigot who didn't allow his bigotry to dictate how he did his job. Johnson was a racist who didn't allow his racism to dictate how he did his job.

Here's where we appear to differ: I assume that virtually all of us are bigoted in one area or another and that if bigotry disqualified people from public office, we'd have no one left.

Most of us have religious or personal beliefs that make us, in one context or another, intolerant of others. The key, though, is whether we can put aside our intolerance long enough to work and interact with others. I've worked before for devout Christians whom I assume believed I would not, as a Jew, merit olam haba. After all, that's kind of what defines a Christian. But they were able to put aside that "intolerance" to work with me successfully and evaluate me fairly.

Moore had a problematic history in allowing his personal beliefs to interfere with his job, and that would have been a problem regardless of whether his personal beliefs were based in evangelical Christianity, sharia, or witchcraft.

And that's why I think it's a mistake to focus on the specifics of Moore's bigotry. There's no way to police every possible type of bigotry. All we can ask is that people check it at the door.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 1:52 pm
The way I see it, it's a matter of how one perceives Moore's wishing away some amendments.
You can see it on an intellectual level and say, he's wrong, how can I vote for him?, but not focus on how bigoted he is. Because you know you've voted for people who are judicially right, but bigoted, we can't have everything.
Or you can see it as, what a bigot, what business does this person have in politics? I don't want him as dog catcher.

But that's how I'm reading things.

ETA: Cross-posted. Fox, while I'm more concise, you're more precise.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 2:28 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
In all seriousness, I ask you to reread that comment, and ask yourself whether or not you see it as condescending and patronizing.

As I read it, you are stating that the positions that you espouse are standard, correct, and cannot be argued with. ("Everything I'm saying is pretty standard political analysis at this point. I'm not saying anything contentious.") And those who disagree with anything you say are not only objectively wrong by any standard, they are only interested in "ranting and raving ...."

And that method of arguing --delegitimizing any contrary opinions, and painting those who disagree with you as lacking in the level of intelligence and comprehension that you have --
is inherently condescending and patronizing.


Not only did I re-read my post; I re-read the whole thread.

Delegitimizing contrary opinions requires a contrary opinion to have been offered.

For example, when I said that Democrats shouldn't take Jones's victory as a sign that Alabama was suddenly more liberal, no one argued substantively with that. Posters just made sarcastic comments.

I can think of tons of ways my assertion could have been challenged ("Will Moore's loss cause conservative Alabamians to question their party allegiance?") or even turned into an interesting conversation ("Are Southern states becoming more liberal as they become more cosmopolitan?").

Now, in all fairness, you did offer the opinion that the election was a repudiation of Trump. But it was mixed in with so much vitriol about bigotry and Republicans, etc., that it didn't seem to me like a considered opinion.

Well, when someone doesn't bother to respond thoughtfully to my points; mis-attributes words or motivations to me; and then complains that I'm being mean -- yes, I consider that ranting and raving.

As for "standard political analysis," I read a lot, and . . . that's what people are saying. Would you prefer I claim to have thought all this up on my own?

The ironic thing to me is that anyone is upset about this election. All of us thought Moore was a bad idea . . . so now we're arguing over why we thought he was a bad idea?

I think the outcome of the election is hilarious. The Democrats won; the GOP avoided a mess; Trump enjoyed his "I told you so" dance. How many more winners do you want out of a single election?
Back to top

Fox




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, Dec 14 2017, 2:32 pm
I'll leave on this note:

What do snakes do when they have a fight?

They hiss and make up.
Back to top

imasoftov




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Dec 17 2017, 8:29 am
Fox wrote:
Do you think it strengthens your case to make up things about me? Do you think it's okay to tell posters on Imamother what they're thinking?

It is fine not to like me for whatever reasons. Most of us have posters we don't care for very much. Set your account to ignore me if you find me so bothersome.

But when you resort to personal attacks, you are essentially admitting that you have nothing to say. In fact, you literally have to make up things and claim to know what I'm thinking in order to justify all that rage.

Well, here's what I'm thinking right now: naps and a cool-off period for everyone!

Yes, I think it's entirely appropriate as well as accurate. I do admit however not having yet made up my mind if you actually prefer the world the way it is becoming or are willing to go down with the rest of us as long as we get triggered.

After your nap do point out where I spoke about rage.
Back to top
Page 4 of 4 Previous  1  2  3  4 Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

Related Topics Replies Last Post
10 HRS LEFT!! Win a 1 MILLION Dream Yerushalayim Apartment!
by Yael
0 Sun, Mar 10 2024, 9:38 am View last post
by Yael
3 DAYS LEFT!! Win a 1 MILLION Dream Yerushalayim Apartement!
by Yael
0 Wed, Mar 06 2024, 5:16 pm View last post
by Yael
5 DAYS LEFT!! Win a 1 MILLION Dream Yerushalayim Apartment!
by Yael
0 Tue, Mar 05 2024, 9:36 am View last post
by Yael
Win 11 computer wakes up only from power button. how wake
by amother
14 Sat, Jun 10 2023, 11:58 pm View last post
Can I share a real win?
by amother
16 Tue, Apr 25 2023, 3:30 pm View last post