So What You Have Here This Morning…

…are a whole lot of people who thought Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton were just dreeeeamy…

…patting themselves on the back as they virtue-signal about Roy Moore.

(You also have a lot of people who ishould known better calling last night’s Alabama special election a “referendum on Republican policy”.  It wasn’t.  Polling showed Alabamians support the GOP (Hillary came in slightly below “None of the Above” in Alabama last year) but were uncomfortable with the allegations against Moore.

But I’ll tell you what, Democrats; pump a lot of money into Alabama for the midterms.

Side Bet:  Any action on the statement that “The allegations against Moore will fall apart shortly, but that’s OK, because they were only intended to last until December 12?

32 thoughts on “So What You Have Here This Morning…

  1. this was a textbook implementation of Alinsky’s
    Rule 13“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
    with assists from rules 4,5, 6, & 8.
    The write in votes tell the story.

  2. As opposed to those who thought Donald Trump is just dreamy…

    The sun has risen, a bright light shines down on Alabama and the US, God helped Doug Jones defeat a vile pedophile. I suppose we’ll need to yet see if the corrupt Republicans try to steal it back and deny God’s will by lying about the vote totals in a recount. Don’t they have voter ID laws in Alabama? How could it possibly be that illegal aliens cheated and elected Jones? Why didn’t God help Moore, more?

  3. Mitch, what is amazing is that you Republicans wring hands about Moore’s loss rather than look at yourself and feel ashamed that many MANY people in Alabama actually said, “Better a pedophile than a Democrat.” That your hate runs that deep is putrid, that your morals are so cheap, is damning. Where is your outrage at your party?

  4. Last Mitch, listening to people from Alabama today, they voted against Moore MUCH less because of his alleged criminal misconduct, than he was simply FAR too extreme, even for many conservatives. He trampled the constitution, he was clearly a bigot, and equally clearly profoundly dishonest. He proposed policies which most people, including most Republicans, were far less than comfortable with. In short, the “move the country as far to the right as possible,” movement, is short on real ideas and even shorter on decency and compassion and it showed. Moore was a first class asshat and many conservatives didn’t like him.

  5. No bet, Mitch. I don’t bet against a sure thing.

    One of my old classmates on FB is touting the fact that blacks voted overwhelmingly for Jones like it was some sort of bellwether of the end of the GOP. Apparently she slept through all other elections.

    To the left, in my opinion, defeating Moore by slinging accusations against him validates their belief that they can bring Trump down. If they were to succeed, maybe they don’t yet realize that they would then have to scream that Mike Pence is not their president.

    An interesting side-show could develop from this: Now with the accusers emboldened by Moore’s defeat, there could be a race between two factions on the Left: The sexual-misconduct crowd and the Russian-collusion crowd. I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the sexual-misconduct camp believes getting Trump impeached and removed from office would result in an electoral do-over, as some in the Russian-collusion camp seem to indicate they believe. Might we see the Russian-collusion crowd go after the sexual-misconduct crowd by attacking the accusers’ credibility with such high stakes?

    If so, I’m going to invest in popcorn futures.

  6. I’m waiting for the story to not only fall apart, but for someone to have a crisis of conscience and reveal that it was all a setup. And then when that happens, the Democrats will not do squat, just like with Bill Clinton and Teddy Kennedy.

    Not sad at all to see Roy Moore’s career in politics ending, but this just REEKS.

  7. Just heard (on NPR no less) that Dayton is going to appoint his infanticide loving Lt., Tina “hoik ’em out” Smith to replace Stuart Smalley. They also say she intends to run for the office when Smalley’s term expires.

    Alabama rejected a candidate that had been accused of child abuse; Minnesota will be presented with one that celebrates and made a lucrative living in the infanticide industry. Will they surprise everyone by applying the standards of decency they demand of others?

    I doubt it, but I’ve been wrong before.

  8. Character is a very subjective thing. Where’s the objective standard that rates one person’s character against another? There isn’t one. That’s why making any election about character is a losing issue for Democrats. People claiming to vote for character in reality are voting for people who look like them, talk like them, were educated like them, grew up in their kind of neighborhood. Voting for character is not significantly different than voting for your tribe. Tribalism is not a winning basis for the Democrats. They are a coalition of many tribes; the GOP is mostly one tribe.

  9. It is the old story of modernism, Emery. International socialists believe ideology is more important than tribe, nationalists believe tribe is more important than ideology. There is far more ideological diversity on the Right than there is on the Left, and far more ethnic diversity on the Left than on the Right.
    The game isn’t finished, yet. Both national socialism and international socialism have failed spectacularly, both have their adherents.

  10. Addendum: many on the Left believe international socialism supercedes national socialism. Not true, both arose at about the same time (Garibaldi & Marx were contemporaries). Both were reactions against empire.

  11. They are a coalition of many tribes; the GOP is mostly one tribe.

    That’s what you get when you spend so much time on identity politics.

    Emery just summed up the main issue with the Democrats: They’re chaotic, compared to a GOP more unified behind a set of principles. Last year during the caucuses in Iowa, I saw that with crystal-clear clarity: A Democratic caucus took votes by having people stand in certain locations to show their support for a delegate for a candidate. The Republican caucus did it by simple secret paper ballot. The Democratic caucus looked like an exercise in herding cats, where the GOP was able to get their supporters in, collect the votes, and people could head home at a reasonable hour, their duty done.

    It’s fitting the Democratic Party has “democratic” in it. They seem to want the chaos of mob rule inside their own party, and they want to impose it on share it with the rest of the country.

  12. That’s why making any election about character is a losing issue for Democrats.

    And yet they just won. You can’t even get it right when your side wins!

  13. Mitch, when and where do I collect on a bet that Smith will be named to replace Frankenstein? Although I think there may still be some comedy left since Frankenstein did not actually resign yet.

  14. Do you really not get it? Moore’s supporters were not voting for Trump or Moore. They were voting against the establishment. They would prefer it if the status quo had not changed after 1965, economically, socially, politically, or demographically, but it has been changing a lot. They blame the people who run the federal government and vote for free trade, immigration and progressive social change. They are voting against those people who tell them that most of those changes are really for the best, They disagree, and would like time reversed 50 years. It won’t happen, but that’s what they’re voting for.

    They’re voting on issues, as they see it. You want them to vote on the character of the candidate. They care about character, but not in the way you want them to.

  15. Wow, what a delusional maroon if you think a vote for Moore was a vote for establishment. Really. Wow, just wow.

  16. “Moore’s supporters were not voting for Trump or Moore. They were voting against the establishment.”

    You were saying….. 😂

  17. “They would prefer it if the status quo had not changed after 1965, economically, socially, politically, or demographically, but it has been changing a lot.”

    1965 is too late. By then, we had the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid, Title I in elementary schools, chain migration (family reunification based immigration) and the Ford Mustang, at which point civilized society had been pushed over the edge of the cliff. We’ve been sliding downhill and picking up speed ever since.

    1963 is the cut-off.

  18. You could pick many different dates. Some other popular ones are 1984 (morning in America), or for that matter 1860 (seems to be a favorite with Moore). Democrats have their own favorite dates that they wish the world would return to — Hilary campaigned on nostalgia for 1968. Some Democrats want to return to 1946, in the idealistic afterglow of FDR. No doubt we’ll soon hear some wax nostalgic for the halcyon days of 2008 when we elected the first black president. None of us are immune to the temptation of looking at the past through rose-colored glasses. The last time we collectively rejected the past, the past was a Depression and a world war. Most people are naturally conservative; they fear change; they long for the imagined security of their youth, or their ancestor’s youth.

  19. “Moore’s supporters were not voting for Trump or Moore. They were voting against the establishment.”

    You were saying…..

    Yes, I misread your quote. But unlike you, who spouts lies and spreads manure a la Jacob Roberts without any acknowledgment of the facts nor admissions to spreading false information (ie lies), I do not have an issue with admitting when I am wrong. So away with you, troll. Don’t you have goalposts to move?

  20. Peev the words you are desperately searching for that more accurately describe Judge Moore’s alleged behavior are hebephile and/or ehebophile! No published account of Judge Moore’s alleged misbehavior describes the typical behavior of a paedophile. nor does any MSM outlet label his behavior as paedophilia.

    Peev, On another issue; is God now talking to you?

  21. “Better a pedophile than a Democrat”

    That’s a choice that doesn’t require a moment’s thought.

    With a pedophile, you know what you’re getting. With a leftist reprobate, you can never tell what manner of filth they are dragging in with them.

    Most Democrats are pedophiles at the very least, anyway. We know Peevee is.

  22. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 12.13.17 : The Other McCain

  23. If you have taken the wrong fork in a road, the proper thing to do is return to the fork, then proceed on the other branch. There are some things I like about 1963, some I don’t. People in 1963 had a better chance of advancement than they do today; a college degree was cheap and almost a guarantee of at least a middle class lifestyle. The poor hadn’t been concentrated into housing projects, yet (though that was coming fast). I’ve told this story before, but in 1975, a close relative was a plumber by trade. His wife worked part time at a clerical job. They had a house in the Minneapolis suburbs (paid for), two cars (paid for) and a lake cabin within an hour’s drive of Minneapolis. All this on < $40k/year in income. How much would it take to live that lifestyle today?

  24. “All this on < $40k/year in income. How much would it take to live that lifestyle today?"

    if you’re using 1963 as a reference point for the same purchasing power roughly $260k give or take

  25. I didn’t include Feminism in my list, because that didn’t become the rage until 1973 or so. But that’s the reason for the wage stagnation, not immigration.

    Pretend there are 100 jobs in town. Men hold those jobs, women stay home to raise children. The supply of laborers equals the demand for laborers. Suddenly, 50 women turn their kids over to day care centers so women can compete for those 100 jobs. The supply of available laborers has increased. Casting our minds back to basic Econ, we know that when Supply exceeds Demand, the Price goes down. That’s the real reason for wage stagnation.

    Yes, there are also 10 new jobs created – nannies to watch the kids in the day care centers – but 150 candidates for 110 jobs remains the problem.

    Why doesn’t anybody talk about it? Because discussing economics is sexist man-splaining, which is a hate speech and no reporter would dream of doing that, even if they understood the concepts. But ignoring the truth doesn’t make the truth untrue, it just makes it a surprise when it’s revealed.

  26. The cultural revolution as shown in the career of a single actress:
    Mary Tyler Moore, from 1961 to 1966, played Laura Petrie, the stay-at-home wife & mother of careerist Rob Petrie on the Dick Van Dyke show.
    From 1970 to 1977, Moore played the single, childless career woman Mary Richards.


    Everything is about seizing government no matter what the cost: financial, character, whatever. It’s our new system.

  28. Mitch McConnel spent 30 million to defeat Mo Brooks because he was a Freedom Caucus member.

    This is all about getting YOUR socialist (left or right) or corporatist thugs in control. This is our new system.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.