Will Roy Moore Be Taken Down?

If you take a stance on something (for example, net neutrality) do you suddenly NOT have a message just because Trump’s message is the opposite? Can you be “anti Trump” and have a message at the same time?

Far lesser of 2 evils. Why give the tweeter in chief time to drum up his base about things like a foreign born Muslim sitting in the oval if you don’t have to.

No offense taken, and I didn’t mean to sound as snarky as I did in my response. lol

I am not discounting, at all, that the “Not Roy Moore” factor didn’t have a huge impact here. There’s no question about it. But there were a pretty large number of democrats there who did like his message.

I don’t know much but, from what I understand, he’s a career prosecutor (who convicted KKK members responsible for the '63 Birmingham church bombing) and he’s been outspoken about how hard hit the rural communities have been hit in recent years (a lot of hospitals have closed down, etc). I’ve seen a few campaign speeches by him and Roy Moore, and only Jones talked about what he wanted to do for Alabamians. Moore just talked about God. lol

I thought Jones’s victory speech was good too: hopeful, about what he intends to do for the people, etc. Now we get to see what kind of leader he is.

Dunno man, I am not predicting anything anymore. 2016 chastened me.

Believe me…I am one of the WORST at predicting elections!

1 Like

Depends on if what Trump does affects your stance on something. I’m guessing for a lot of the left, it does.Right now I think being against Trump is the larger message and motivation.

Like with the dem base in Alabama? Sure, with the base maybe. I certainly didn’t get that feeling from middle of the road folks. Like I think if Jones had even mildly appealed to the swing voter or even moderate republicans he could have won by a landslide. Like if he could have just had a more appealing stance on abortion alone he’d have won by 10+ points.

So for example, if the Dems message was, say, higher taxes on the rich, would it become an “anti trump” message simply because he wants to lower them?

Could be either. But what I hear is “Trump is trying to steal from poor people and give it to rich people with his tax plan!!! IMPEACH HIM!”

If you were in control of the Dem party, how would you phrase that message such that it’s not “Anti Trump?”

How to phrase opposition to Trump’s tax plan to not be anti-trump, how to phrase Trump Impeachment to not be about Trump, or how to phrase taking more money from the wealthy to not be anti Trump?

You could only do the last one, but I have serious doubts that’s the one that is getting dems on their feet at the moment.

I’m talking generally. What I see personally is a lot of people claiming Dems don’t have a message other than “Anti Trump.”

My argument is anything contrary to Trump is an “anti Trump” message, and that doesn’t invalidate the Dems having a message at all.

To me, that would mean ANY talking point worth pressing is going to inherently be anti Trump, as you wouldn’t push a message if the other side was pushing the same one.

To start, when you’ve lost all power and have the other guys dismantling what you just did, its tuff not to be the party of “no”. I’m not some strategist who knows how to better message. However, Dems right now seem to be especially adamant about being the party of “no”. Most of the messaging revolves around reacting to trump and priding themselves on being the “resistance” or who can hate Trump the most. Again, it’s a tuff spot politically anyway, but the open vitriol, crazy conspiracy theories, outlandish impeachment attempts, etc. are currently way louder than anything else from where I’m standing.

In my decidedly non-expert opinion, an end to all the insane non-policy based anti-trump nonsense would be a good start. Like shut up about the Trump-russia thing until there is actual evidence. Stop mocking trump’s kids and family (especially the young ones). Stop putting forward nonsense impeachment motions. Stop talking about Trumps evil ice cream and diet coke habits. Stop virtue signaling in speeches about getting trump impeached. Stop fear mongering about white supremacists and hate crimes. When that crap is in the news, no one is going to hear or care about your policy.

I mean there is honestly a news story right now about Trump Jr being abusive to women because of something he allegedly said to his teacher when he was 3. Seriously.

What does ANY message look like from the Dems. I can’t think of a single one that couldn’t immediately be phrased as being “anti Trump.”

You mean like his son tweeting proof of collusion? Or Trump staff taking plea deals and admitting to lying about Russia?

Agreed on the kid and what’shername. Imo, everyone else is fair game as they willingly stepped into the public arena.

Agreed. 100%

TBH I blame the news for this one more than the Dems. I see plenty of Dems with messages that don’t make their way to the media.

1 Like

I’m feelin’ you, Duce…I really am…

But your rant simply BEGS for a “What-about-ism”

The eight plus years (including his original campaign); of what happened to President Obama (IMO); was unprecedented…

One could argue that maybe (and that’s a strong “maybe”)…they both brought the criticism on themselves…but I just don’t think that President Obama almost “went out of his way” to create controversy and conflict the way Trump does (especially on Twitter).

Anyway…that’s how I see it.

A lot of what gets thrown Trump’s way is Self-Inflicted…

You are all assuming that Trump doesn’t want the negative attention. All attention is good attention in his world. If he grabs headlines with Trans bans or Lavar Ball fights then he “wins” the news cycle yet again.

Then the story about his latest executive order gets bumped to page 16. I’m trying to decide of Trump is a goldfish with ADD or if he puts out a constant flow of shiny baubles so the media doesn’t spend time on what he’s actually doing.

1 Like

I could see this, Gainz…

Trump is a lot of things…but dumb isn’t one of them.

I just always have this feeling that what is says and does is very calculated.

Right, but the dems are additionally pushing crap that is exclusively anti-trump, like impeachment nonsense.

A confession wouldn’t be proof, much less a tweet. But no one has admitted to actual collusion. An ex-staffer lied to the FBI during the investigation about something that wasn’t wrong to have done to begin with. And let me ask this, how long into the investigation before even that weak outcome? There actually seems to be more circumstantial evidence the Clinton campaign was working with the Russians. The whole Trump JR thing looks like it might have even been set up by Hilary.

The only serious thing turned up so far is that the investigation looks like it started as a conspiracy in the FBI among rabid anti-trumpers as a way to try and get rid of Trump if he managed to get elected. Yup, collusion among FBI agents to subvert the results of a free US election. The whole thing is so compromised, even if they actually found something at this point, it probably wouldn’t matter. Fruit of the poison tree.

Sure, legitimate criticism. Yelling about what JR did when he was 3, or all the sexist anti-woman flak the Trump women catch isn’t legitimate.

It’s certainly both. Though many in the media/entertainment still are party members who act and are respected as spokesman and are even directly supported by the party. They aren’t entirely unrelated.

It certainly was unprecedented against Obama. And it’s gone to an unprecedented level above that against Trump. College campuses are actually banning Trump hats and stuff. Congress members have actually attempted impeachment. The way the Trump kids have been attacked has happened in ways above and beyond the Obama kids. On top of the stuff actual party leaders and members are doing and saying, the media constantly falling all overthemselves (and the actual facts) to tear down Trump is unprecedented (Most of the media under Obama were in his camp).

Absolutely Trump trolls them and causes controversy. And the media and Dems constantly fall for the troll. He ticks them off and calls them fake news. They get mad and rush, ahead of the truth, to get him back and in doing so end up living up to the fake news accusation. You can’t win engaging with a troll.

I think nothing against Trump outdoes the birther movement.

There’s a ton to unpack here.

How is it nonsense? Do you believe Trump is fit for office? Was it “crap” when the GOP tried to repeal the ACA 60 times when they knew they didn’t have the votes during Obama’s presidency?

Don Jr. begs to differ. He received an email offering “dirt” on his father’s political opponent from a representative of an adversarial country and specifically replied, “I love it especially later in the summer.” Considering he attended the meeting, in the very least, it suggests he was open to colluding right there. Collusion, though, isn’t a legal term nor a formal charge. The charge would likely be conspiracy (to commit a computer crime, defraud the US by interfering in an election, etc.)

Wrong? Not necessarily (edit: unless they were discussing the lifting of sanctions, which it appears they were). Extremely suspicious? Absolutely. And he got pinched for lying to the FBI about it. So the huge question that’s hanging out there that Mueller is trying to get an answer to, is “Why?”. Why did all of them (Sessions, Flynn, Manafort, Kushner, Trump Jr, Page, Papadopolous, etc.) lie about their contacts with Russians if there’s nothing wrong with it?

This is utterly laughable.

Government officials are entitled to personal opinions and viewpoints (they were fucking stupid to be using government phones to espouse them though). It in no way indicates they didn’t do the job they were hired to do. They also tore into a lot of different people, including Eric Holder, Chelsea Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and others.

Most importantly, Mueller got rid of him as soon as he found out. He worked with him for only two months. You seem to be suggesting they tainted the entire investigation so far. Did they plant evidence? Mueller & Rosenstein are both registered Republicans. Should Ken Starr have been removed from the Clinton case because he was a Republican?

What do you think the whole purpose of the hearings yesterday were about? The GOP is doing anything it can to discredit Mueller because he’s getting closer and closer to Trump. They’re panicking. Flynn was staring at mountains of charges, yet got a slap on the wrist. He’s flipped and is giving Mueller everything he can to keep himself and his son out of jail. I’m betting the next indictment hits Trump’s inner circle.

And if you think Mueller is compromised, take a look at what the GOP thought of him when he was initially assigned:

If you actually read up on what’s currently publicly available, you might see that there’s plenty here that deserves to be looked into. Pretty much every point you hit on appears to come straight from Judge Jeanine and Hannity. There’s tons more to this story than they’re telling you on Fox News. (The day Michael Flynn’s plea deal was announced, every single major news outlet had it as the top story; Fox’s was about Clinton’s emails.)

2 Likes