What has Pres. Trump done wrong so far.

biochem wrote:The Republican leadership didn't support Moore. They supported Strange. Moore was (pre scandal) was popular in Alabama but most of the rest of the GOP disliked him. Incidentally the "gross misconduct" he was removed for was his refusal to remove the 10 commandments from his courtroom. In deeply religious Alabama, it increased his popularity. They felt that he was right and the evil godless outsiders were wrong. Outside Alabama it played differently.

Well, no. He was removed for his refusal to follow court orders, abuse of authority, and improper behaviour for a judge on the Alabama supreme court.

You can frame this as principled objection to unjust orders on religious grounds all you like, but that still doesn't change the fact that Moore was unsuitable to the office he was elected to. It quite literally does not matter how much public acclaim he got for his actions.

Furthermore, if you think that christianity is the only valid source of ethical thinking and morality, if you think that non-christians, LGBTQ people, people of color are lesser than heterosexual white christians, you really have no place in this world anymore.

The E wrote:

biochem wrote:The Republican leadership didn't support Moore. They supported Strange. Moore was (pre scandal) was popular in Alabama but most of the rest of the GOP disliked him. Incidentally the "gross misconduct" he was removed for was his refusal to remove the 10 commandments from his courtroom. In deeply religious Alabama, it increased his popularity. They felt that he was right and the evil godless outsiders were wrong. Outside Alabama it played differently.

Well, no. He was removed for his refusal to follow court orders, abuse of authority, and improper behaviour for a judge on the Alabama supreme court.

You can frame this as principled objection to unjust orders on religious grounds all you like, but that still doesn't change the fact that Moore was unsuitable to the office he was elected to. It quite literally does not matter how much public acclaim he got for his actions.

Furthermore, if you think that christianity is the only valid source of ethical thinking and morality, if you think that non-christians, LGBTQ people, people of color are lesser than heterosexual white christians, you really have no place in this world anymore.

Sound like you don't like Alabama.

biochem wrote:Sound like you don't like Alabama.

If Alabama sees fit to elect a judge with no respect of the law, then I don't see why Alabama should be respected.

I mean, it's a good thing that Moore didn't get away with his schemes; seems like there are at least some people interested in good governance in the Alabama judiciary, but still. It's kinda hard to respect voters who think that open discrimination, open bigotry and open disrespect for the rule of law, however.

But then again, we're talking about GOP voters here. It's not like there's any expectation of decency or moral behaviour there.

biochem wrote:The Republican leadership didn't support Moore. They supported Strange. Moore was (pre scandal) was popular in Alabama but most of the rest of the GOP disliked him. Incidentally the "gross misconduct" he was removed for was his refusal to remove the 10 commandments from his courtroom. In deeply religious Alabama, it increased his popularity. They felt that he was right and the evil godless outsiders were wrong. Outside Alabama it played differently.

After his 4 year term the Democrat will be soundly defeated by a Republican challenger, most likely a very religious conservative. The current leading candidate is Representative Mo Brooks.

What "outsiders"? wasn't he removed by the Alabama judiciary?

And then in 2016 they removed him again for various ethical violations stemming from his objection to SSM, up to and including threatening to have Alabama judges who complied with the Supreme Court ruling prosecuted.

Furthermore, while the Republican leadership supported Strange in the primary, and initially opposed Moore in the general, once it started looking like he could actually mooved the RNC moved to support him and a number of GOP senators (including Mcconnel and Collins) started to water down the GOP leadership's previous stance that if he won he would be expelled.

Eyal wrote:

biochem wrote:The Republican leadership didn't support Moore. They supported Strange. Moore was (pre scandal) was popular in Alabama but most of the rest of the GOP disliked him. Incidentally the "gross misconduct" he was removed for was his refusal to remove the 10 commandments from his courtroom. In deeply religious Alabama, it increased his popularity. They felt that he was right and the evil godless outsiders were wrong. Outside Alabama it played differently.

After his 4 year term the Democrat will be soundly defeated by a Republican challenger, most likely a very religious conservative. The current leading candidate is Representative Mo Brooks.

What "outsiders"? wasn't he removed by the Alabama judiciary?

Yep.

But it was for disobeying a Supreme Court ruling.... so you know... THOSE "outsiders".

The problem isn't supporting Moore.
Given the state of the Senate they had too.

The problem was publically bussing him when he lost.

Annachie wrote:The problem isn't supporting Moore.
Given the state of the Senate they had too.

The problem was publically bussing him when he lost.

There exists no political circumstance that results in anyone "having to" support seating a child molester in the US Senate.

And the GOP knew this, because they all started off saying he should drop out, nobody should support him, and they shouldn't seat him if he won.

THEN Trump decided Moore was his kind of guy. And they all reversed course. But the political situation in the Senate didn't suddenly change between them rejecting him and them backing him. Just Trump's guidance did.

Really GC?

Thing is, the President is well known for supporting child molesters. Hell he's probably one himself.

In his mind, it was something that didn't matter in the slightest.

What does matter to him is loyalty and usefulness TO HIM.

Lose either, and you get tossed asside. With avengance.

With Moore, the President just rubbed every potential GOP candidates face in it.
Those potential candidates have to be concerned by that.
Especially if they're in a tight race.
Even in pre-selection races.

Real politik would be to quietly pressure Moore to shut up and go away, and for the WH to subtly push that they were supporting Alabama's GOP nominee, while honting that he wasn't their prefered candidate.

But yeah, Trump and subtle don't get near each other.

Apparently a N.Y. Times reporter got introduced to Trump at Mar a Lago and ended up getting a half hour impromptu interview.

Guess how happy everyone at the White House was when they found out Trump gave an unscripted interview to a reporter who wasn't from Fox.


In 30 minutes Trump denied colluding with Russia 16 times (at a certain point "methinks thou dost protest too much" just doesn't say it) and also felt compelled to once again throw out the "There is no collusion, and even if there was, it's not a crime." line.


You know who feels compelled to volunteer explanations that "even if I did do 'X' it's not technically illegal!" over and over? People who did 'X'. He makes it clearer every day he knew the Russians were helping him.

(And while he's right there is no statute covering "collusion" there is definitely one covering criminal conspiracy)

Annachie wrote:The problem isn't supporting Moore.
Given the state of the Senate they had too.

The problem was publically bussing him when he lost.

The problem was and is supporting Moore. The GOP told the world that they would welcome a child-abusing religious maniac who refuses to abide by the rule of law, as embodied in the First Amendment to the Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court, for the sake of partisan political power.

When you lie down with dogs, you rise up with fleas.