10 ms·

I'm concerned that given Roy Moore's example, we'll have more people that decide their best course of action is to continually deny everything in the face of st

I'm concerned that given Roy Moore's example, we'll have more people that decide their best course of action is to continually deny everything in the face of strong evidence. Maybe this only works for people of a certain charisma, but I worried this will become the new way to respond to allegations. > In a CBS poll (which gives Moore a 6-point lead), 71 percent of likely Republican voters say the misconduct allegations against him are false. And of that group, 92 percent say the Democrats are behind the charges, and 88 percent say newspapers and the media are behind them. Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/06/turnabout-why-trump-gop-leaders-are-now-backing-roy-moore.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/06/turnabout-why-tru...

goatherders 9y ago
Yes, but the battle isn't won in a day. The first step is creating an environment where women can speak up. To me that is a remarkably large first step. 71% of likely Republican voters think the allegations are false. Maybe true, but that means 29% think they are true which is 29% more than there were 10 weeks ago. One step at a time is an infinitely faster pace than no steps at all.
- kendallpark 9y ago
  I understand the battle isn't won in a day and I am very encouraged that the environment is improving for women and men to speak up. I am, however, concerned that we'll see more people that choose to simply deny credible allegations in the face of solid evidence (and rally others to do the same).
  - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
    This doesn't seem new, or confined to sexual harrasment and assault allegations. So while it's concerning, and I'd like to see it fixed, it's kind of orthogonal to this particular issue, and affects e.g. climate change, the impacts of the tax bill, the healthcare discussion and so on.
  - quesera 9y ago
    Blanket denial, and character attacks on the accuser, has been the status quo for eternity. Bill Clinton, Clarence Thomas, ... This has recently started to change, because people recognize how unbelievable it is, and because accusers can have larger voices in today's media environment. Roy Moore is using the old playbook. If it succeeds, in the face of all evidence, it will be a very bad thing.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      I think his election would be a bad thing but I don't think it would foretell much or have much impact elsewhere, it'd just be bad because of the credible allegations against him and his otherwise being a miserable candidate.
      - quesera 9y ago
        I disagree. The ultimate goal is to stop the behaviour, and the first step is to make it clear that a) your behaviour has a good chance of being exposed, and b) you'll suffer consequences for it. If the offenders think they can keep secrets, or that no one will care, there is no disincentive to continuing the behaviour. Aside from the whole morality problem of being an awful person, which seems not to be a big factor for some people. It's possible that the Moore situation, however it breaks, will only apply to political figures, or only in Alabama. But the idea is chilling.
        maxerickson 9y ago
        I understand what the concern is, I just don't think it applies more generally at all. For instance, whatever else happens, I don't think Moore will win another primary in Alabama.
        quesera 9y ago
        Senators serve for six years. It will be a loong time before that theory is tested, and the lessons derived from the election results will have weight until at least that time. Moore could also reasonably retire or die of old age before running in another primary. I agree that this election in Alabama is difficult to generalize from though, there are many factors at play. Still, I'd prefer less ambiguity here.
  - goatherders 9y ago
    I would be shocked it this didn't happen. Calling accusers "liar" is pretty much exactly what everyone has initially done for, well, pretty much as long as people have been accusing each other or anything. I understand your point and am hopeful that at some point it goes the other way and the rightfully accused say "ugh...better to just admit it and try to move on with my life too."
- rainbowmverse 9y ago
  Not just women. The statistics vastly understate the problem for all genders, for the same reason. The fact that people still argue that men can't be sexually assaulted (and omit them from discussions) after Terry Crews came out about his experience and was even featured in this Time article is evidence. Plus, nonbinary and agender people are pretty much ignored in mainstream discussions. It's a bad situation all around.
a254613e 9y ago
Are you proposing we assume people are guilty until proven innocent? What if they _are_ innocent, and therefore keep denying it? Are you worried that innocent people will insist they're innocent, or what? Note: I'm not saying that Moore is innocent, I honestly don't know pretty much anything about that case. But being worried that people who aren't convicted of anything will deny they did something wrong just sounds... weird, regardless of the topic.
- minimaxir 9y ago
  > I honestly don't know pretty much anything about that case. You should read about the case.
  - talmand 9y ago
    I've read about it and I'm still waiting for the definitive proof that his denials about sexual misconduct are false. Although, I understand the standard of proof required for the court of popular opinion is much lower than an actual legal court.
    - heartbreak 9y ago
      Innocent until proven guilty is a fine principal for a court of law, but I feel no obligation to apply it to my own decisions. I see enough evidence (not proof, evidence) to make my own decision that Moore’s accusers are telling the truth. To each his own.
    - minimaxir 9y ago
      This is an ironic comment for this particular HN submission, as it’s a story about women whose single testimony brought down industry leaders. And Roy Moore has eight independent accusers to date.
      - insickness 9y ago
        While eight may seem like a lot, it's not that hard to find people willing to lie. If eight women came forward and said that a guy in the shipping department had harassed them, I may question it less because there is less motivation for eight women to say that. With a senate seat at stake there is a lot more reason to question it without any accompanying evidence.
kapauldo 9y ago
Well said. Rejecting evidence is religion and conservatives have sadly become a religious cult.
- kendallpark 9y ago
  > Rejecting evidence is religion and conservatives have sadly become a religious cult. I definitely did not say this. You'll find evidence-rejecters of all shapes and sizes. Anti-vax, no-GMO, etc, etc.
  - swagtricker 9y ago
    Given those examples, I think you're actually strengthening his argument that they're a 'religious cult' - even if you didn't say it...
    - Shivetya 9y ago
      then how do we explain that most anti-vaxxers come from states that voted for President Obama? this is all a matter of choosing to believe what we want to believe is true. it is not uncommon for us to want to paint those we don't agree with as wrong and even better if we can find a way to ridicule them, stereotype the whole, and what not. it certainly has nothing to do with the truth. based on the initial accusations and where they came from with regards to sexual harassment I would have to believe the left is willing to ignore it if they win on other fronts, am I right? I don't think so but you can argue it
- sctb 9y ago
  We've asked you many times already not to post like this so we've banned the account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dominotw 9y ago
>In a CBS poll Hillary was going to win 275 seats according to those polls. I wouldn't pay any attention to those anymore.
- heartbreak 9y ago
  Why would someone reject the fundamentals of applied statistics?
  - dominotw 9y ago
    Because inputs are not tightly controlled. we don't know who exactly is answering these polls and we have no idea if preferences of poll answering population can be extrapolated to "republicans". There is nothing "fundamental" about these polls, throwing a web widget in front of a self selected group of audience is not scientific or fundamental. Why do you continue to assert that these polls are "fundamental" when they are proven to be to be totally bogus time after time.
    - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
      "The CBS News 2017 Alabama poll is conducted by YouGov using a representative sample of 1,067 registered voters in Alabama between November 28–December 1, 2017. The margin of error based upon the entire sample is 3.8 percent and for likely voters is 4.8 percent." This is a poll done by a standard polling company. You seem to be mischaracterising how they are done and, two comments up the chain, you attack even professional polls based on their performance in the last presidential election, where they were very accurate in predicting the popular vote.
      - dominotw 9y ago
        >This is a poll done by a standard polling company. Ok thats fair. I might have dismissed them without good reason. I have a blocker for all news sites so i can't access them without going through like 20 steps. >where they were very accurate in predicting the popular vote. My comment was about their predictions about number of seats each candidate will win. What does that have to do with "predicting the popular vote." .
_Codemonkeyism 9y ago
The problem is women can't see themselves for various reasons to involve the police. Unless society changes to make that possible, rich/self employed people/politicians will get away with it. Others will get fired.
- minimaxir 9y ago
  Justifiably so, given the immense professional risk in publically outing the harasser. (e.g. Weinstein’s attempts to dig up dirt on the accusers)
  - _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
    I did not want to imply it was unjustified.
    - rbanffy 9y ago
      Then, maybe, the problem lies elsewhere.
- _zachs 9y ago
  Really...? If someone sexually assaults you you aren't developed enough to realize a crime was committed and you need to go to the police? Also, this problem doesn't only just affect women.
Clubber 9y ago
People believe what they want to believe, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
galobtter 9y ago
I was going to say something about partisanship, but Republicans are also less likely to believe allegations in general - even say the one against Conyers, 39% of dems believe it vs 32% of republicans. I don't think it's to do with the denial though - trump did initially admit to his, and 34% of republicans believe in his allegations vs 30% for moore. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/sexual-misconduct-democrats-poll-267201 https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/sexual-misconduct-...
- dogruck 9y ago
  Some Politico statistics about Conyers and Moore cannot be used to make the conclusion that “Republicans are also less likely to believe allegations.”
  - galobtter 9y ago
    "Poll: Democrats more likely to believe allegations of sexual misconduct" that's the title of the article..
stillhere 9y ago
I don't care about Republican voter opinions on Moore. Similarly, I don't care about Democrat voter opinions on Moore. It isn't up for us to decide, but the courts. I'm so glad we don't live in a system where a party's opinion would land me a prison sentence.
danso 9y ago
> I'm concerned that given Roy Moore's example, we'll have more people that decide their best course of action is to continually deny everything in the face of strong evidence. It is disconcerting, OTOH it's a reminder that not everything is about merit. Most of the other famous people brought down recently faced allegations with less evidentiary support, but Moore survives because of politics. Even as much as the rest of the GOP despises him, he represents an important vote on matters (as far as the GOP is concerned) far bigger than his personal integrity and sexual morality. Think of how the bills on healthcare and taxes have come down to 1 or 2 votes in the Senate. Had even a hint of these allegations came up during the primary, when it was between Moore and the incumbent, Lester Strange (who was backed by Trump and the rest of the GOP establishment), no doubt Moore would have been demolished in the primary. I'm somewhat surprised that given the GOP's dominance in Alabama that they didn't make a bigger attempt at staging a write-in campaign. After all, one of Trump's biggest Republican opponents, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, won via write-in and her last name is a fuckton harder to remember and spell than "Strange": https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/murkowski-writein-campaig_n_733299.html https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/murkowski-writein-campa...
- rectang 9y ago
  If a candidate is more likely than their opponent to vote for policies you favor, then supporting them despite their personal failings is rational. Moore is an extreme example, but all humans are fallible. People's expectations are too high -- our representatives are nowhere near as consistently virtuous as the facades they present.
  - kendallpark 9y ago
    Isn't this exactly the problem we're seeing in sexual harassment and sexaul assault cases outside of politics, though? Simply put, some institutions have judged that the pros of keeping a sexual harasser around outweigh the cons. For example, the Uber harassers were swept under a rug by HR because they were "high performers."
    - rectang 9y ago
_zachs 9y ago
Ah yes, I'm concerned as well that "innocent until proven guilty" will get in the way of our witch hunts!
edraferi 9y ago
Victory in the Alabama Senate race is a binary signal that can hide a lot of information. If Moore wins, compare the margin of victory to pre-revelation polling. It's entirely possible that there's a major shift in public opinion, just not one large enough to make Alabama(!) blue.
w0m 9y ago
> Maybe this only works for people of a certain charisma Honestly; it depends on the audience - are you willing to ignore the person being grossly abhorrent/immoral because they say something about some unrelated thing that you agree with? (Build a wall! Tax Cuts! No Baby Slaughter!). Roy Moore is being framed to voters as, 'Would you rather a (potential) child molester in office or someone actively advocating for murdering Babies? When framed like that; it's much easier to bite your lip and vote for the molester because really - what are the chances he'll do it again now that he's in his 70s? The other guy will actively murder babies if he gets elected.
mcguire 9y ago
Keep in mind that Moore was removed from the bench for failing to follow higher judicial decisions. Twice. We are talking about a judge who does not believe in the rule of law. The fact that Alabama voters don't care about sexual harassment allegations is not surprising.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Mountain_Skies 9y ago
  It's not that they don't care, it's that they care more about what they perceive as wholesale baby murder. Abortion is an extremely important issue in Alabama and to much of the state it is state sponsored genocide on a scale that exceeds anything Stalin or anyone else has committed. It can be difficult for people living in areas where abortion is not seen in this way to understand but in a state like Alabama, to them it really is a matter of being in a constant state of being horrified by the daily murder of thousands of babies. Those who don't see a fetus as being a baby have a hard time understanding beyond the most superficial that this is a deeply held belief by those opposed to abortion. Understanding this point of view on abortion is essential to understanding why so many cannot even conceive of voting for Moore's opponent.
anon11082016 9y ago
The accuser just admitted to forging the yearbook
- bpicolo 9y ago
  No she didn't, that's fake news courtesy of fox. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-cor...
  - anon11082016 9y ago
    Oh my bad, you're right. Manually adding key and leading into isn't a forgery, it's "notes". Good catch.
  - anon11082016 9y ago
    https://i.redd.it/ygovceracw201.png https://i.redd.it/ygovceracw201.png

goatherders 9y ago

Yes, but the battle isn't won in a day. The first step is creating an environment where women can speak up. To me that is a remarkably large first step. 71% of likely Republican voters think the allegations are false. Maybe true, but that means 29% think they are true which is 29% more than there were 10 weeks ago. One step at a time is an infinitely faster pace than no steps at all.

kendallpark 9y ago
I understand the battle isn't won in a day and I am very encouraged that the environment is improving for women and men to speak up. I am, however, concerned that we'll see more people that choose to simply deny credible allegations in the face of solid evidence (and rally others to do the same).
- ZeroGravitas 9y ago
  This doesn't seem new, or confined to sexual harrasment and assault allegations. So while it's concerning, and I'd like to see it fixed, it's kind of orthogonal to this particular issue, and affects e.g. climate change, the impacts of the tax bill, the healthcare discussion and so on.
- quesera 9y ago
  Blanket denial, and character attacks on the accuser, has been the status quo for eternity. Bill Clinton, Clarence Thomas, ... This has recently started to change, because people recognize how unbelievable it is, and because accusers can have larger voices in today's media environment. Roy Moore is using the old playbook. If it succeeds, in the face of all evidence, it will be a very bad thing.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    I think his election would be a bad thing but I don't think it would foretell much or have much impact elsewhere, it'd just be bad because of the credible allegations against him and his otherwise being a miserable candidate.
    - quesera 9y ago
      I disagree. The ultimate goal is to stop the behaviour, and the first step is to make it clear that a) your behaviour has a good chance of being exposed, and b) you'll suffer consequences for it. If the offenders think they can keep secrets, or that no one will care, there is no disincentive to continuing the behaviour. Aside from the whole morality problem of being an awful person, which seems not to be a big factor for some people. It's possible that the Moore situation, however it breaks, will only apply to political figures, or only in Alabama. But the idea is chilling.
      - maxerickson 9y ago
        I understand what the concern is, I just don't think it applies more generally at all. For instance, whatever else happens, I don't think Moore will win another primary in Alabama.
        quesera 9y ago
        Senators serve for six years. It will be a loong time before that theory is tested, and the lessons derived from the election results will have weight until at least that time. Moore could also reasonably retire or die of old age before running in another primary. I agree that this election in Alabama is difficult to generalize from though, there are many factors at play. Still, I'd prefer less ambiguity here.
- goatherders 9y ago
  I would be shocked it this didn't happen. Calling accusers "liar" is pretty much exactly what everyone has initially done for, well, pretty much as long as people have been accusing each other or anything. I understand your point and am hopeful that at some point it goes the other way and the rightfully accused say "ugh...better to just admit it and try to move on with my life too."
rainbowmverse 9y ago
Not just women. The statistics vastly understate the problem for all genders, for the same reason. The fact that people still argue that men can't be sexually assaulted (and omit them from discussions) after Terry Crews came out about his experience and was even featured in this Time article is evidence. Plus, nonbinary and agender people are pretty much ignored in mainstream discussions. It's a bad situation all around.

a254613e 9y ago

Are you proposing we assume people are guilty until proven innocent? What if they _are_ innocent, and therefore keep denying it? Are you worried that innocent people will insist they're innocent, or what? Note: I'm not saying that Moore is innocent, I honestly don't know pretty much anything about that case. But being worried that people who aren't convicted of anything will deny they did something wrong just sounds... weird, regardless of the topic.

minimaxir 9y ago
> I honestly don't know pretty much anything about that case. You should read about the case.
- talmand 9y ago
  I've read about it and I'm still waiting for the definitive proof that his denials about sexual misconduct are false. Although, I understand the standard of proof required for the court of popular opinion is much lower than an actual legal court.
  - heartbreak 9y ago
    Innocent until proven guilty is a fine principal for a court of law, but I feel no obligation to apply it to my own decisions. I see enough evidence (not proof, evidence) to make my own decision that Moore’s accusers are telling the truth. To each his own.
  - minimaxir 9y ago
    This is an ironic comment for this particular HN submission, as it’s a story about women whose single testimony brought down industry leaders. And Roy Moore has eight independent accusers to date.
    - insickness 9y ago
      While eight may seem like a lot, it's not that hard to find people willing to lie. If eight women came forward and said that a guy in the shipping department had harassed them, I may question it less because there is less motivation for eight women to say that. With a senate seat at stake there is a lot more reason to question it without any accompanying evidence.

kapauldo 9y ago

Well said. Rejecting evidence is religion and conservatives have sadly become a religious cult.

kendallpark 9y ago
> Rejecting evidence is religion and conservatives have sadly become a religious cult. I definitely did not say this. You'll find evidence-rejecters of all shapes and sizes. Anti-vax, no-GMO, etc, etc.
- swagtricker 9y ago
  Given those examples, I think you're actually strengthening his argument that they're a 'religious cult' - even if you didn't say it...
  - Shivetya 9y ago
    then how do we explain that most anti-vaxxers come from states that voted for President Obama? this is all a matter of choosing to believe what we want to believe is true. it is not uncommon for us to want to paint those we don't agree with as wrong and even better if we can find a way to ridicule them, stereotype the whole, and what not. it certainly has nothing to do with the truth. based on the initial accusations and where they came from with regards to sexual harassment I would have to believe the left is willing to ignore it if they win on other fronts, am I right? I don't think so but you can argue it
sctb 9y ago
We've asked you many times already not to post like this so we've banned the account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dominotw 9y ago

>In a CBS poll Hillary was going to win 275 seats according to those polls. I wouldn't pay any attention to those anymore.

heartbreak 9y ago
Why would someone reject the fundamentals of applied statistics?
- dominotw 9y ago
  Because inputs are not tightly controlled. we don't know who exactly is answering these polls and we have no idea if preferences of poll answering population can be extrapolated to "republicans". There is nothing "fundamental" about these polls, throwing a web widget in front of a self selected group of audience is not scientific or fundamental. Why do you continue to assert that these polls are "fundamental" when they are proven to be to be totally bogus time after time.
  - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
    "The CBS News 2017 Alabama poll is conducted by YouGov using a representative sample of 1,067 registered voters in Alabama between November 28–December 1, 2017. The margin of error based upon the entire sample is 3.8 percent and for likely voters is 4.8 percent." This is a poll done by a standard polling company. You seem to be mischaracterising how they are done and, two comments up the chain, you attack even professional polls based on their performance in the last presidential election, where they were very accurate in predicting the popular vote.
    - dominotw 9y ago
      >This is a poll done by a standard polling company. Ok thats fair. I might have dismissed them without good reason. I have a blocker for all news sites so i can't access them without going through like 20 steps. >where they were very accurate in predicting the popular vote. My comment was about their predictions about number of seats each candidate will win. What does that have to do with "predicting the popular vote." .

_Codemonkeyism 9y ago

The problem is women can't see themselves for various reasons to involve the police. Unless society changes to make that possible, rich/self employed people/politicians will get away with it. Others will get fired.

minimaxir 9y ago
Justifiably so, given the immense professional risk in publically outing the harasser. (e.g. Weinstein’s attempts to dig up dirt on the accusers)
- _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
  I did not want to imply it was unjustified.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    Then, maybe, the problem lies elsewhere.
_zachs 9y ago
Really...? If someone sexually assaults you you aren't developed enough to realize a crime was committed and you need to go to the police? Also, this problem doesn't only just affect women.

Clubber 9y ago

People believe what they want to believe, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

galobtter 9y ago

I was going to say something about partisanship, but Republicans are also less likely to believe allegations in general - even say the one against Conyers, 39% of dems believe it vs 32% of republicans. I don't think it's to do with the denial though - trump did initially admit to his, and 34% of republicans believe in his allegations vs 30% for moore. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/sexual-misconduct-democrats-poll-267201 https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/sexual-misconduct-...

dogruck 9y ago
Some Politico statistics about Conyers and Moore cannot be used to make the conclusion that “Republicans are also less likely to believe allegations.”
- galobtter 9y ago
  "Poll: Democrats more likely to believe allegations of sexual misconduct" that's the title of the article..

stillhere 9y ago

I don't care about Republican voter opinions on Moore. Similarly, I don't care about Democrat voter opinions on Moore. It isn't up for us to decide, but the courts. I'm so glad we don't live in a system where a party's opinion would land me a prison sentence.

danso 9y ago

> I'm concerned that given Roy Moore's example, we'll have more people that decide their best course of action is to continually deny everything in the face of strong evidence. It is disconcerting, OTOH it's a reminder that not everything is about merit. Most of the other famous people brought down recently faced allegations with less evidentiary support, but Moore survives because of politics. Even as much as the rest of the GOP despises him, he represents an important vote on matters (as far as the GOP is concerned) far bigger than his personal integrity and sexual morality. Think of how the bills on healthcare and taxes have come down to 1 or 2 votes in the Senate. Had even a hint of these allegations came up during the primary, when it was between Moore and the incumbent, Lester Strange (who was backed by Trump and the rest of the GOP establishment), no doubt Moore would have been demolished in the primary. I'm somewhat surprised that given the GOP's dominance in Alabama that they didn't make a bigger attempt at staging a write-in campaign. After all, one of Trump's biggest Republican opponents, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, won via write-in and her last name is a fuckton harder to remember and spell than "Strange": https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/murkowski-writein-campaig_n_733299.html https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/murkowski-writein-campa...

rectang 9y ago
If a candidate is more likely than their opponent to vote for policies you favor, then supporting them despite their personal failings is rational. Moore is an extreme example, but all humans are fallible. People's expectations are too high -- our representatives are nowhere near as consistently virtuous as the facades they present.
- kendallpark 9y ago
  Isn't this exactly the problem we're seeing in sexual harassment and sexaul assault cases outside of politics, though? Simply put, some institutions have judged that the pros of keeping a sexual harasser around outweigh the cons. For example, the Uber harassers were swept under a rug by HR because they were "high performers."
  - rectang 9y ago

_zachs 9y ago

Ah yes, I'm concerned as well that "innocent until proven guilty" will get in the way of our witch hunts!

edraferi 9y ago

Victory in the Alabama Senate race is a binary signal that can hide a lot of information. If Moore wins, compare the margin of victory to pre-revelation polling. It's entirely possible that there's a major shift in public opinion, just not one large enough to make Alabama(!) blue.

w0m 9y ago

> Maybe this only works for people of a certain charisma Honestly; it depends on the audience - are you willing to ignore the person being grossly abhorrent/immoral because they say something about some unrelated thing that you agree with? (Build a wall! Tax Cuts! No Baby Slaughter!). Roy Moore is being framed to voters as, 'Would you rather a (potential) child molester in office or someone actively advocating for murdering Babies? When framed like that; it's much easier to bite your lip and vote for the molester because really - what are the chances he'll do it again now that he's in his 70s? The other guy will actively murder babies if he gets elected.

mcguire 9y ago

Keep in mind that Moore was removed from the bench for failing to follow higher judicial decisions. Twice. We are talking about a judge who does not believe in the rule of law. The fact that Alabama voters don't care about sexual harassment allegations is not surprising.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Mountain_Skies 9y ago
It's not that they don't care, it's that they care more about what they perceive as wholesale baby murder. Abortion is an extremely important issue in Alabama and to much of the state it is state sponsored genocide on a scale that exceeds anything Stalin or anyone else has committed. It can be difficult for people living in areas where abortion is not seen in this way to understand but in a state like Alabama, to them it really is a matter of being in a constant state of being horrified by the daily murder of thousands of babies. Those who don't see a fetus as being a baby have a hard time understanding beyond the most superficial that this is a deeply held belief by those opposed to abortion. Understanding this point of view on abortion is essential to understanding why so many cannot even conceive of voting for Moore's opponent.

anon11082016 9y ago

The accuser just admitted to forging the yearbook

bpicolo 9y ago
No she didn't, that's fake news courtesy of fox. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-cor...
- anon11082016 9y ago
  Oh my bad, you're right. Manually adding key and leading into isn't a forgery, it's "notes". Good catch.
- anon11082016 9y ago
  https://i.redd.it/ygovceracw201.png https://i.redd.it/ygovceracw201.png