Difference between revisions of "Talk:Roy Moore"
From Conservapedia
(" – these accusations mirrored the Access Hollywood recording The Washington Post released one month and two days prior to Donald Trump's election") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
"(T)hese accusations mirrored the Access Hollywood recording The Washington Post released one month and two days prior to Donald Trump's election." The wording of this appears unfortunate, in that nobody disputes the truth of the Access Hollywood tape, just its implications vis à vis Trump's purported sexism. The wording here suggests that the accusations against Moore are also true (in the same way that Trump did engage in locker-room talk), but that their truth should not be read as a disqualifying failure of character, as with Trump. Moore says that the accusations are false, while Trump's position was that his comments were taken out of context and blown out of proportion, but not falsified. This problem is compounded in my opinion by the later sentence "Moore, like Trump before him, stayed strong and refused to step down" in that it draws a parallel between a true but overblown report in Trump's case, and a denied report in Moore's case. I doubt that it is Conservapedia's intention to imply that Moore did engage in the reported contact, but that said contact does not represent a disqualifying failure of character - but then again there is the statement here that three of the accusations "did not even involve lewd acts", which implies that even if they were true (which Moore denies), they are immaterial in Conservapedia's view. "Moore says that the accusations are false" should be sufficient. If you wish to draw a parallel to some other accusation against a politician, it would be better to choose a known false accusation rather than an accusation that was true in its particulars but overblown in its interpretation.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 13:02, 10 November 2017 (EST) | "(T)hese accusations mirrored the Access Hollywood recording The Washington Post released one month and two days prior to Donald Trump's election." The wording of this appears unfortunate, in that nobody disputes the truth of the Access Hollywood tape, just its implications vis à vis Trump's purported sexism. The wording here suggests that the accusations against Moore are also true (in the same way that Trump did engage in locker-room talk), but that their truth should not be read as a disqualifying failure of character, as with Trump. Moore says that the accusations are false, while Trump's position was that his comments were taken out of context and blown out of proportion, but not falsified. This problem is compounded in my opinion by the later sentence "Moore, like Trump before him, stayed strong and refused to step down" in that it draws a parallel between a true but overblown report in Trump's case, and a denied report in Moore's case. I doubt that it is Conservapedia's intention to imply that Moore did engage in the reported contact, but that said contact does not represent a disqualifying failure of character - but then again there is the statement here that three of the accusations "did not even involve lewd acts", which implies that even if they were true (which Moore denies), they are immaterial in Conservapedia's view. "Moore says that the accusations are false" should be sufficient. If you wish to draw a parallel to some other accusation against a politician, it would be better to choose a known false accusation rather than an accusation that was true in its particulars but overblown in its interpretation.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 13:02, 10 November 2017 (EST) | ||
| + | :You're right, I have no intention of-of implying that these *''accusations''* are true. When I compared the two events, I was also thinking about the many accusations of sexual assault that popped up against Trump around the same time (interesting that they've all disappeared now). | ||
| + | |||
| + | :However, even when just including the Access Hollywood tapes, there are several similarities that make this story against Moore very suspicious: | ||
| + | :*Both stories were released by ''The Washington Post'', which endorsed Moore's far-left Democrat opponent | ||
| + | :*This story was released 1 month and 3 days before the special election (by contrast, the Access Hollywood tape was released 1 month and 2 days before the presidential election -- coincidence? I don't think so) | ||
| + | :*Both stories are accusations of sexual misconduct that did not involve intercourse (but yes, one is true and on tape, while the other is unproven) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I doubt that this story is true because of the timing and source, but even if it does happen to be true, it would not change my vote if I were an Alabama resident. Not only are these accusations 34 years ago -- when Jimmy Carter was still president -- but they are significantly less serious than what we've been seeing in Hollywood in the past few months (and those actors have admitted to their acts). Also, even if this story is true, Moore would still be one of the most moral people in Washington D.C. (and how do we know he was already a Christian back in 1979?). ''More importantly,'' Moore is still the most conservative candidate with excellent political views facing off against a candidate who is very left-wing even by national Democrat standards. These leftists, including the GOP establishment, hate Moore and are trying to bring him down. The RINOs are even OK with losing AL's Senate seat to accomplish this. I have '''zero''' sympathy for those RINOs (including McCain, McConnell, Romney, and Kasich). | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Still, I will try to improve the article based on your constructive criticisms. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:05, 10 November 2017 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 21:05, November 10, 2017
"(T)hese accusations mirrored the Access Hollywood recording The Washington Post released one month and two days prior to Donald Trump's election." The wording of this appears unfortunate, in that nobody disputes the truth of the Access Hollywood tape, just its implications vis à vis Trump's purported sexism. The wording here suggests that the accusations against Moore are also true (in the same way that Trump did engage in locker-room talk), but that their truth should not be read as a disqualifying failure of character, as with Trump. Moore says that the accusations are false, while Trump's position was that his comments were taken out of context and blown out of proportion, but not falsified. This problem is compounded in my opinion by the later sentence "Moore, like Trump before him, stayed strong and refused to step down" in that it draws a parallel between a true but overblown report in Trump's case, and a denied report in Moore's case. I doubt that it is Conservapedia's intention to imply that Moore did engage in the reported contact, but that said contact does not represent a disqualifying failure of character - but then again there is the statement here that three of the accusations "did not even involve lewd acts", which implies that even if they were true (which Moore denies), they are immaterial in Conservapedia's view. "Moore says that the accusations are false" should be sufficient. If you wish to draw a parallel to some other accusation against a politician, it would be better to choose a known false accusation rather than an accusation that was true in its particulars but overblown in its interpretation.--Brossa (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2017 (EST)
- You're right, I have no intention of-of implying that these *accusations* are true. When I compared the two events, I was also thinking about the many accusations of sexual assault that popped up against Trump around the same time (interesting that they've all disappeared now).
- However, even when just including the Access Hollywood tapes, there are several similarities that make this story against Moore very suspicious:
- Both stories were released by The Washington Post, which endorsed Moore's far-left Democrat opponent
- This story was released 1 month and 3 days before the special election (by contrast, the Access Hollywood tape was released 1 month and 2 days before the presidential election -- coincidence? I don't think so)
- Both stories are accusations of sexual misconduct that did not involve intercourse (but yes, one is true and on tape, while the other is unproven)
- I doubt that this story is true because of the timing and source, but even if it does happen to be true, it would not change my vote if I were an Alabama resident. Not only are these accusations 34 years ago -- when Jimmy Carter was still president -- but they are significantly less serious than what we've been seeing in Hollywood in the past few months (and those actors have admitted to their acts). Also, even if this story is true, Moore would still be one of the most moral people in Washington D.C. (and how do we know he was already a Christian back in 1979?). More importantly, Moore is still the most conservative candidate with excellent political views facing off against a candidate who is very left-wing even by national Democrat standards. These leftists, including the GOP establishment, hate Moore and are trying to bring him down. The RINOs are even OK with losing AL's Senate seat to accomplish this. I have zero sympathy for those RINOs (including McCain, McConnell, Romney, and Kasich).
