MOORE(More) Winning by Trump

Discussion in 'Current News & Events' started by Original Happy Camper, Dec 4, 2017.

  1. Original Happy Camper One of GODS Children

    +504
    SDA
    Married
    RNC Jumps Back into Alabama Race Behind Judge Roy Moore

    Exclusive — RNC Jumps Back into Alabama Race Behind Judge Roy Moore - Breitbart

    The RNC’s decision to now publicly support Moore again comes in the wake of President Donald Trump’s wholehearted endorsement of Moore on Monday morning.
    “We stand with the president,” a senior RNC official told Breitbart News.

    The RNC notified the RNC members from Alabama on Monday afternoon that the national party would resume financial support to back the state party in its efforts to elect Moore to the U.S. Senate. At this time, since this development is fresh, it remains unclear exactly what that means, but sources close to RNC leadership told Breitbart News that it would become apparent in the coming days.
     
  2. brinny everlovin' shiner of light in dark places Supporter

    +89,369
    Non-Denom
    Private
    US-Constitution
    Hmmmmmm......

    why the sudden change?
     
  3. Basil the Great Well-Known Member Supporter

    +813
    Christian
    Private
    US-Green
    This is news to me, but it would seem to be a mistake for the RNC.
     
  4. Go Braves Well-Known Member

    +1,911
    United States
    Baptist
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    This is extremely shameful of Trump & the RNC. Can't say it's in the least bit surprising though. Totally within Trump's character to not concern himself in the least with morality but instead only care about what's best for himself. I have no doubt in my mind that the ladies who've said Trump sexually harassed them are telling the truth. I believe Moore's accusers too. Plenty of evidence has come out about that. Boy, will Satan be delighted if the folks in Alabama vote Moore. I'm very proud that my own relatives there, they are Bible-believing Christians, decent people, of course they won't vote for Moore.

    Edited on account of a typo.
     
  5. redleghunter Abide Boldly! Supporter

    +14,025
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    All recent polls save a Washington Post poll( ^_^) has Moore up 3 to 5 points. RNC figures I guess they want to be on the winning side.

    Welcome to politics folks.
     
  6. redleghunter Abide Boldly! Supporter

    +14,025
    United States
    Christian
    Married
  7. redleghunter Abide Boldly! Supporter

    +14,025
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    They voting for a write in?
     
  8. brinny everlovin' shiner of light in dark places Supporter

    +89,369
    Non-Denom
    Private
    US-Constitution
  9. brinny everlovin' shiner of light in dark places Supporter

    +89,369
    Non-Denom
    Private
    US-Constitution
    That makes perfect sense LOL!
     
  10. SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    RNC Jumps Back into Alabama Race Behind Judge Roy Moore ~

    Facts:

    RNC supported a Republican from Alabama ~
    SHOCKING!

    Women made PUBLIC ALLEGATIONS against the Republican candidate from Alabama ~
    SHOCKING!

    The supposed "victims" DID NOT pursue their "victim" claim UNTIL a Republican candidate was running for office some 40 years later ~
    SHOCKING!

    The President stated;

    President Donald Trump believes Republican Senate nominee Roy Moore should step aside if allegations he had sexual contact with teenage girls in the 1970s are true, White House officials said.
    ~ SHOCKING!

    QUESTION ~

    Has Moore been lawfully arrested?
    Has Moore been lawfully charged?
    Has Moore had a lawful court hearing?
    Has Moore had a lawful court trial?
    Has Moore had a lawful court judgement?
    Has Moore had a lawful court sentence?

    No.
    ~ SHOCKING!

    ~ For they WHO, find no need for lawful proceedings to CONVICT of man of GUILT BEFORE GUILT is proven ~

    Whoopie ~
    They can dismantle the Court System, (because it has no needful purpose).
    They can stop pretending Attorney's are a needed profession.
    They can continue as they do, being self-appointed JUDGES, pronouncing whomever as GUILTY based on their OPINIONS, and let the newspaper dictate the sentence.
    Then they can congregate with their banners, that they gots them some justice!

    SHAMEFUL ~ and totally Christian-like.....not!
    Shocking?
    No, expected.

    God help them.
    SBC
     
  11. SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    Perhaps, Because Nothing has been proven against Moore.

    God Bless,
    SBC
     
  12. SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    Obviously you do not comprehend the RNC is not the President.

    It was the RNC that supported Moore, then stopped supporting him when 40 years old allegations were made against him.

    The President supported Moore's candidacy, and continued, and would stop supporting Moore, IF the allegations were found to be true.

    When were the allegations found to be true?

    Right.....right.....right.....THEY HAVEN'T!!

    And you find it EXTREMELY SHAMEFUL to support a person with ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM, that have not been found to be true?

    There have been other PEOPLE of your same mind-set. You can read about them in Scripture.
    They made ALLEGATIONS AGAINST JESUS, and crucified Him.

    Kudos ~

    Ditto, concerning Liberal Democrats.

    What does that mean? Trump didn't join the public lynch squad? Trump stood with a man accused, BECAUSE there was no evidence the man was GUILTY?

    Shocking, a President cares about positioning people tough on crime. LOL
    Shocking, a President didn't join the local lynch mob.

    And you oppose that? LOL

    And "your mind" was appointed Judge, Jury, Executioner....when?

    Identify the Court, so we all can requisition copies of the evidence records and see if what you say is true.

    I'm sure he is pretty delighted with people NOW, who have convicted Moore, without the law and judiciary system.

    I find it interesting, and SHAMFUL you equate Bible-believing Christians, decent people, with the same who, CONVICT people outside of the legal and lawful judiciary system.

    :(
     
  13. brinny everlovin' shiner of light in dark places Supporter

    +89,369
    Non-Denom
    Private
    US-Constitution
    I believe you may have hit da nail on da head, sir.

    :oldthumbsup:
     
  14. redleghunter Abide Boldly! Supporter

    +14,025
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Maybe the RNC saw that nothing happened to Al Franken. Franken gave a press release and said he was going back to work.
     
  15. Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +1,979
    Christian
    Married
    Nonsense! We now assess guilt by means of accusation. To be accused is to be guilty. If you don't agree then you must be a racist, sexist, misogynist, Islamaphobe, homophobe, transphobe (feel free to add whatever other "ists" and "phobes" are the latest battle cries of the SJW community). You've got to be on the right side, man. Due process is over-rated.

    (denote sarcasm)
     
  16. redleghunter Abide Boldly! Supporter

    +14,025
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    The MSM judge, jury and executioner mentality:

     
  17. Yekcidmij Polymath

    +421
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    US-Others


    So before we vote against someone for ethical reasons, they first should be tried in a court of law? Even if a person hasn't been convicted of criminal activity in court, their actions could still be unethical and a good reason to vote against or withhold a vote for that person for public office. I don't know of a requirement for criminal trial before making a decision on voting for someone into a public office.

    Seems this would only apply if someone were trying to put Moore into prison. But I think the real issue is ethical behavior and fitness for a federal public office.
     
  18. Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +1,979
    Christian
    Married
    Perhaps we should actually conclude that the person in question is guilty of something before taking action against them for it. Accusations do not equate to guilt.

    I'm curious though, are you calling for Al Franken's removal from the Senate?
     
  19. Yekcidmij Polymath

    +421
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    US-Others
    I don't disagree, but that's not the way you just presented the problem. You presented is as if he must be tried in court before any judgment could be made about his behavior. But holding public office does not require one to go to civil or criminal court before a judgment can be made about ethical behavior. If Moore did all the things claimed (or perhaps just some....or maybe just one), and yet wasn't tried in court, a determination could (better yet, should) still be made about the ethics of is behavior when considering him for a public office.

    This is interesting since it's decidedly a red herring, but an all-to-often a go to sort of "rebuttal" where one side's counter to an argument amounts to, "oh yea, what about this other guy over here?!" So? What about him? This has nothing to do with the issue raised here. We were discussing an issue regarding Roy Moore and trial in court, not Al Franken's behavior. Surely you can see the fallacy in your comment, no?

    The only reason you could possibly resort to such a blatant red herring would be to attempt to somehow demonstrate an inconsistency, which you might label "hypocrisy" rather than "inconsistent." That might be relevant if we were examining my logical consistency, which we're not, yet if we were, demonstrating an inconsistency wouldn't invalidate the issue I brought up in regards to what you posted; it would only mean that if correct, I'm inconsistent. You may also be trying to make this some sort of us vs. them argument where I'm siding with the liberal club and you're with the conservative club, so I shouldn't be listened to because I'm a hypocrite hanging out in the other club who really just wants to see his own team win. But motivations don't invalidate an argument and neither does the group from which it originates.

    In any case, before you go down a rabbit hole of further red herrings, I think Franken should step down for his unethical behavior. I also have about an equal disdain for Republicans and Democrats though my views might overlap with a political party on various things. So if you're going to try to make this an us-vs-them/Republican-vs-Democrat thing with me, you're going to have tough luck.

    Now back to the issue you posted.....
     
  20. Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +1,979
    Christian
    Married
    Um, no. I said we should determine if he actually did the behavior before taking action against him on account of that behavior. Or do you believe people are presumed guilty based on accusations?

    That's really all you had to say, without all the prefacing gibberish.