Roy Moore / Alabama Special Senate Election Megathread

[Washington Resistance Army]

Racist ad?

Yes, here's a link:

https://www.theroot.com/a-racist-flyer- ... 1821065764

Oh jeez, I hope that isn't real lol

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Yes, here's a link:

https://www.theroot.com/a-racist-flyer- ... 1821065764

Oh jeez, I hope that isn't real lol

Sadly for Doug Jones, it is lol. I saw the fake news network reporting on it. And when CNN reports on Democratic scandals and the hosts express dismay, as a Democratic candidate you know you done fucked up.

[Corrian]

Sauce?

https://imgur.com/DMd1iOw

It's obvious she added everything past "Roy" on the signature...and she did a piss poor job at it, using a different color pen...

http://archive.is/alZmy

She also admitted to adding part of the signature. Not all, but she probably did this because she knew that people figured out she is bulshitting.

I'll take the accusation against Moore seriously once the accuser turns over her yearbook for a third party independent investigation. New York State Attorney Gloria Allred refuses to, which is another red flag, as she and her client probably have something major to hide.

That fake yearbook is about all the "evidence" she has against Moore. So, I (and every levelheaded person should) assume Roy Moore to be innocent.

She wrote something at the end, the signature is still real. And there is no indication it is "fake". And that is one accusation, so no, any level headed person should not assume Roy Moore is innocent.

[Corrian]

Don’t Blame Black Voters If Roy Moore Wins. Blame Alabama’s Secretary of State.

In recent years, Alabama Republicans have taken steps to protect their grip on power by making it harder for African Americans and Latinos to vote. They passed a law requiring voters to show a government-issued photo ID, a measure that has been found to disproportionately disenfranchise African Americans and Latinos, who are more likely to lack such an ID and face impediments to getting one. The ID law also applied to absentee voting, which is used by many elderly black voters in rural counties, who now must mail in copies of their photo IDs with their ballots. They reformed campaign finance laws to weaken the political organizations that mobilize African American voters. They closed 31 DMV offices across the state, disproportionately affecting rural majority-black counties. In every county in which African Americans made up more than 75 percent of registered voters, the local DMV was slated for closure. Since the US Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, allowing states like Alabama to change voting procedures without federal approval, Alabama has closed about 200 voting precincts, creating longer lines and sowing confusion among voters.

These kinds of tactics are so annoying. It's clear they know they're losing a grip on everything, so they just go about as shitty as they can.

[Corrian]

I'll say Moore by 2-5, I'm very confident he'll win but I don't think the margin will be massive.

Personally, I believe it's going to be over 10 points for Moore, Doug Jones screwed up big time with that racist ad he put out.

Aswell, Alabama, being a sane state put in voter ID laws so the democrats can't play their usual tricks of having illegals and dead people vote for them, and aswell out-of-state residents, like they did to the state of New Hampshire in 2016, (Almost 5,000 NH voters were out-of-state who were required to get a New Hampshire driver's license or register a vehicle in the state of New Hampshire within a few months of the election, and upwards of 4,500 did not, quite possibly stealing a US senate seat (Democrat defeated incumbent Republican by less than a thousand votes, and Hillary beat Trump by less than 3,000 votes))

The "Illegals and dead vote" thing is overblown bullshit. This shit barely happens if at all.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

https://imgur.com/DMd1iOw

It's obvious she added everything past "Roy" on the signature...and she did a piss poor job at it, using a different color pen...

http://archive.is/alZmy

She also admitted to adding part of the signature. Not all, but she probably did this because she knew that people figured out she is bulshitting.

I'll take the accusation against Moore seriously once the accuser turns over her yearbook for a third party independent investigation. New York State Attorney Gloria Allred refuses to, which is another red flag, as she and her client probably have something major to hide.

That fake yearbook is about all the "evidence" she has against Moore. So, I (and every levelheaded person should) assume Roy Moore to be innocent.

She wrote something at the end, the signature is still real. And there is no indication it is "fake". And that is one accusation, so no, any level headed person should not assume Roy Moore is innocent.

Fake news. I'll try and find a source, I believe I was watching Fox at the time I saw this come up, but Roy Moore's signature looks different on every document he signed at the time, his alleged signature on the yearbook stands out from the rest. Also, "D.A" was added to the end of his signature. He never signs like that, it's only when his assistant signed a document that she put "D.A" beside the signature. Aswell, on the date signed in black ink compared to the date that is signed in blue ink, the two number sevens look very different from each other aswell. What probably happened is some unrelated dude named Roy wrote the inscription in 77, and she added the rest.

And yes there is an indication, the fact that LITERALLY EVERYTHING PAST HIS FIRST NAME IS IN A DIFFERENT COLOR OF INK. Unlike what the rape-culture spouting feminists want, what we have in America is the presumption of innocence. Innocent until proven guilty.

So until Gloria Allred stops covering up the fact the yearbook is fake and submits it to an an independent third party for examination, or starts criminal proceedings against Moore (If it's within the statute of limitations, no clue), and Moore is incriminated in either, then he should be assumed as guilty.

With only a fake yearbook to go by, any levelheaded person should assume Moore is innocent until we see some damn evidence.

[Corrian]

I don't give a shit what Fox News thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Personally, I believe it's going to be over 10 points for Moore, Doug Jones screwed up big time with that racist ad he put out.

Aswell, Alabama, being a sane state put in voter ID laws so the democrats can't play their usual tricks of having illegals and dead people vote for them, and aswell out-of-state residents, like they did to the state of New Hampshire in 2016, (Almost 5,000 NH voters were out-of-state who were required to get a New Hampshire driver's license or register a vehicle in the state of New Hampshire within a few months of the election, and upwards of 4,500 did not, quite possibly stealing a US senate seat (Democrat defeated incumbent Republican by less than a thousand votes, and Hillary beat Trump by less than 3,000 votes))

The "Illegals and dead vote" thing is overblown bullshit. This shit barely happens if at all.

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

I don't give a shit what Fox News thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

And I don't give a shit what CNN thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

EDIT: and aswell, just because you don't like Fox doesn't mean everything they say is fake. Keeping to just your liberal news sources is a logical fallacy, it's called confirmation bias.

To steer clear of that fallacy, I watch certain Liberal outlets like CNN and MSNBC sometimes. I disagree with a lot of what they say, but they do say factual information aswell (usually when it's not politically related, but whatever)

[Liriena]

Unless there is an unexpected surge in rural white turnout like the one that helped get Trump elected in the first place, I think it's a tossup slightly leaning in Moore's favor. The polls have wavered between a narrow Jones victory and a relatively small Moore victory, and Moore has given every voter who isn't a right-wing fanatic ample reason to reject him by either voting for Jones or just not voting at all. As the good people of FiveThirtyEight put it, Jones is just one "normal" polling error away from victory.

If pressed to choose between the two candidates, I'd definitely prefer Jones. The fact that Roy Moore may be a child molesting pile of scum is only the rotten cherry on top of his long career of being an upwards-failing, profoundly stupid religious fundamentalist and self-victimizing douchebag.

[Insaeldor]

Checking out recent fox polls I'm going to put Moore and 0-2%

[Bombadil]

Regardless of polls, regardless of what people say on the question of supporting a pedophile, those who've flipped on principle from Moore to Jones.. when it comes down to ticking that box or pushing that button.. in that moment too many will revert to voting Republican and so I think he'll almost certainly win barring God suddenly appearing and booming over Alabama 'don't vote for the pedophile people'.. and even then it might be dismissed as a liberal conspiracy, or God is RINO..

[Corrian]

I don't give a shit what Fox News thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

And I don't give a shit what CNN thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

EDIT: and aswell, just because you don't like Fox doesn't mean everything they say is fake. Keeping to just your liberal news sources is a logical fallacy, it's called confirmation bias.

To steer clear of that fallacy, I watch certain Liberal outlets like CNN and MSNBC sometimes. I disagree with a lot of what they say, but they do say factual information aswell (usually when it's not politically related, but whatever)

Never said I like those, either.

[Corrian]

The "Illegals and dead vote" thing is overblown bullshit. This shit barely happens if at all.

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

Yeah, I doubt it.

[Bombadil]

Oh.. an actual election thread.. I'll post this here then..

Regardless of polls, regardless of what people say on the question of supporting a pedophile, those who've flipped on principle from Moore to Jones.. when it comes down to ticking that box or pushing that button.. in that moment too many will revert to voting Republican and so I think he'll almost certainly win barring God suddenly appearing and booming over Alabama 'don't vote for the pedophile people'.. and even then it might be dismissed as a liberal conspiracy, or God is RINO..

[Liriena]

And I don't give a shit what CNN thinks. Wanna talk about Fake News? They fit the definition quite well.

Wrong, actually, despite what the douchebags in far right circlejerks and their cult leaders might claim.

CNN has an obvious political slant (definitely not a left-wing one, though), but their worst practices have little to do with the factual aspect of their news reporting, and more to do with how they handle commentary, discussions and coverage to maximize ratings (particularly, in treating political news like sports news, with all that that often entails).

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

Yeah, I doubt it.

Would you mind actually providing an argument to refute mine? Because your consistent failure to provide one, such as here and dismissing an entire paragraph I wrote with "muh fake news" makes it seem that you don't have any.

[Liriena]

The "Illegals and dead vote" thing is overblown bullshit. This shit barely happens if at all.

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

Can you actually prove the "illegals and dead vote" thing in California? Speculation and vague allusions are not proof. There is far more proof of widespread Republican voter suppression and its effects on elections than there is of Democrat-backed "illegals and dead vote" ocurring in any significant numbers.

[Major-Tom]

I'm gonna say Moore by 5-10%, I support Jones, and the GOP doesn't have the spine to expel Moore if he wins. They'll get their vote and they'll be happy about it.

Us Dems can easily use it to batter the entire RNC for the 2018 midterms. Paint them as corrupt and spineless just as they did to us in 2010 and 2014.

Edit: That being said, I am totally unsure as to who will win at this point. I think Moore may win by a slim margin, but there is also a good chance Jones wins by a small margin too.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

Can you actually prove the "illegals and dead vote" thing in California? Speculation and vague allusions are not proof. There is far more proof of widespread Republican voter suppression and its effects on elections than there is of Democrat-backed "illegals and dead vote" ocurring in any significant numbers.

There is no official proof on behalf of the authorities because California wont break it's stupid Politically Correct agenda and actually run an inquiry into it. But neither you and I can speak on the behalf of the millions of aliens in the US illegally right now, right? The threat of a Trump administration deporting illegals unlike Barry's administration could have driven illegals to the polls. The fact that almost every damn county on the Mexican border voted Democrat should be alarming, as locals don't really take kindly to a bunch of people running across their land and destroying their crops, and not even to mention the fact that drugs flow through their property aswell.

In fact, evidence for alleged "Republican voter supression" is inconclusive. Contrary to what Democrats think, Republicans are not racist. They voted overwhelmingly in favor of black civil rights in the day.

The Democrats, on the other hand...well... let's just refer to exhibit A, shall we?

https://imgur.com/5lSsTS5

[Colbert Super PAC]

Well, in a state like California, which does not need voter ID and is a "sanctuary state", it's a fair assumption to assume some of the hundreds of thousands of illegals walked up to the voter booth, said "I'm Juan Martinez and I am a US citizen", signed that paper saying he solemnly swears that he is one (even though he aint and they have no way of proving it that very moment), and ticked off the Clinton/Kaine boxes on the ballot.

Not enough to flip the state of California, definitely (CA be liberal af), but perhaps a county.

Can you actually prove the "illegals and dead vote" thing in California? Speculation and vague allusions are not proof. There is far more proof of widespread Republican voter suppression and its effects on elections than there is of Democrat-backed "illegals and dead vote" ocurring in any significant numbers.

But both parties are the same! So if Republicans are preventing blacks from voting, that means Democrats must be letting illegals vote in return. Yup, that's totally how it goes.

Also, my 2 cents: Once they're actually in the voting booth, people are just going to vote for the guy with the R next to his name despite him being a kiddy diddler, because REEEE DEMOCRATS!!!!!111

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Can you actually prove the "illegals and dead vote" thing in California? Speculation and vague allusions are not proof. There is far more proof of widespread Republican voter suppression and its effects on elections than there is of Democrat-backed "illegals and dead vote" ocurring in any significant numbers.

But both parties are the same! So if Republicans are preventing blacks from voting, that means Democrats must be letting illegals vote in return. Yup, that's totally how it goes.

Also, my 2 cents: Once they're actually in the voting booth, people are just going to vote for the guy with the R next to his name despite him being a kiddy diddler, because REEEE DEMOCRATS!!!!!111

Would you be as kind as to provide a sauce other than his accuser's fake yearbook as proof Roy Moore is a kiddy diddler?

[Liriena]

Can you actually prove the "illegals and dead vote" thing in California? Speculation and vague allusions are not proof. There is far more proof of widespread Republican voter suppression and its effects on elections than there is of Democrat-backed "illegals and dead vote" ocurring in any significant numbers.

There is no official proof on behalf of the authorities because California wont break it's stupid Politically Correct agenda and actually run an inquiry into it. But neither you and I can speak on the behalf of the millions of aliens in the US illegally right now, right? The threat of a Trump administration deporting illegals unlike Barry's administration could have driven illegals to the polls. The fact that almost every damn county on the Mexican border voted Democrat should be alarming, as locals don't really take kindly to a bunch of people running across their land and destroying their crops, and not even to mention the fact that drugs flow through their property aswell.

So you have no proof. Only politically biased assumptions. Got it.

In fact, evidence for alleged "Republican voter supression" is inconclusive. Contrary to what Democrats think, Republicans are not racist. They voted overwhelmingly in favor of black civil rights in the day.

The Democrats, on the other hand...well... let's just refer to exhibit A, shall we?

https://imgur.com/5lSsTS5

Imagine having such a low opinion of your audience that you think they're ignorant enough to fall for the "Democrats are the real racist party because pre-civil rights" meme.

Neither major party has remained ideologically static over the course of the past two centuries (never forget that the Southern Strategy was a thing, y'all). If you knew actual history, rather than just regurgitate simplistic memes and cherry-picked, decontextualized examples, maybe you'd know that by now. Or maybe you already know, and you just don't care, because your political agenda trumps the need for historical truth.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

Given all the factors, I change my predication to 8-10% for Moore. Perhaps if Jones wasn't as stupid as he was by releasing that ad, he would have seen higher margins tomorrow.

Anyways, heading off to bed, excited to see the results tomorrow, genuinely intrigued as to what he actual results will look like.

[The Union of Crown Kingdoms]

There is no official proof on behalf of the authorities because California wont break it's stupid Politically Correct agenda and actually run an inquiry into it. But neither you and I can speak on the behalf of the millions of aliens in the US illegally right now, right? The threat of a Trump administration deporting illegals unlike Barry's administration could have driven illegals to the polls. The fact that almost every damn county on the Mexican border voted Democrat should be alarming, as locals don't really take kindly to a bunch of people running across their land and destroying their crops, and not even to mention the fact that drugs flow through their property aswell.

So you have no proof. Only politically biased assumptions. Got it.

In fact, evidence for alleged "Republican voter supression" is inconclusive. Contrary to what Democrats think, Republicans are not racist. They voted overwhelmingly in favor of black civil rights in the day.

The Democrats, on the other hand...well... let's just refer to exhibit A, shall we?

https://imgur.com/5lSsTS5

Imagine having such a low opinion of your audience that you think they're ignorant enough to fall for the "Democrats are the real racist party because pre-civil rights" meme.

Neither major party has remained ideologically static over the course of the past two centuries (never forget that the Southern Strategy was a thing, y'all). If you knew actual history, rather than just regurgitate simplistic memes and cherry-picked, decontextualized examples, maybe you'd know that by now. Or maybe you already know, and you just don't care, because your political agenda trumps the need for historical truth.

I have fact-based assumptions, yes. You on the other hand are the peddler of the politically-biased assumptions.

And don't even start. Anyone with knowledge of basic US political history knows, for example only TWO GODDAMN democrats voted for the thirteenth amendment.

"The Senate passed the amendment on April 8, 1864, by a vote of 38 to 6; two Democrats, Reverdy Johnson of Maryland and James Nesmith of Oregon voted 'aye.'"

There are other examples, I'm just tired and heading off so I don't want to search for them.

The Democrats have been the racist party in the past, and whilst they are now masquerading under the guise of progressiveism, their history has been forever tainted as slavers and slave supporters.