Social Question

rojo's avatar

Why do Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and other Republican politicians believe the women who spoke out about Roy Moore but refuse to believe those who spoke out about the actions of Donald Trump?

Asked by rojo (22127points) 3 weeks ago

What is the difference? Is there a difference?
Will these women have their accusations re-examined and will they ever live to hear Mitch McConnell say “I believe the women, yes,’’ about them?
Will Jeff Sessions ever say that he has “no reason to doubt” the statements made by them as well?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

19 Answers

zenvelo's avatar

Moore is not liked by the GOP mainstream. One of his “selling points” as a candidate was that he would not “go along” with McConnell and the GOP leadership. That is why Bannon and Breitbart have been backing Moore.

Trump is in office and can cause a lot more headaches for McConnell and Ryan.

josie's avatar

Same reason Democrats stuck up for Bill Clinton and Republicans impeached him. Partisan politics and a double standard.

Look, I understand the question.

But it is getting tiresome that people continue to act naive about the very real existence of double standards and down and dirty politics, even though they both clearly exist. Every special interest group engages in it, every perceived minority engages in it, nearly all politicians engage in it.

Duh.

kritiper's avatar

Because Donald Trump is their boy and who is their ultimate leader at the moment. One might sniff the crumbs offered by the inconsequentials along the way but pay special heed to that main fodder source!

SergeantQueen's avatar

Because they recanted their statements. Which means they are admitting it never happened. So when it comes to the law he is innocent.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

^^ Huh @SergeantQueen ? ? ?
You mean threatened ? ?

SergeantQueen's avatar

The victims recanted

johnpowell's avatar

Got a credible link for that?

filmfann's avatar

No victims recanted.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Oh they believe the women, just like the rest of us. That doesn’t mean they will admit it.

Patty_Melt's avatar

@josie, on what day was President Clinton impeached?

JLeslie's avatar

Do they believe some of the women and not others? They just say whatever will make their own base happy. It’s all politics. Hypocrites everywhere. They say terrible things about a presidential candidate in the primaries, but then the one who wins the primary all of a sudden gets support from some of those same people. It’s a crazy system.

A lot of evangelicals voted for Trump when they really didn’t want to. Politicians coming out on moral issues against other politicians pleases their own base. Plus, republicans have been getting accused of being anti-women, and this provides a chance to change that image.

Interestingly, I heard a study that said many evangelicals now believe that being amoral in your personal life doesn’t necessarily affect your ability to do a good job in political office. Lol. They said just the opposite when Clinton was in office. Well, at least a lot of them were saying the opposite. It was all evangelicals in the recent study either, I don’t remember the percentages.

@Patty_Melt Clinton was impeached in 1998–1999.

CWOTUS's avatar

I do not pay close attention to any of these old stories. (And to be fair, I also did not pay close attention to the stories of Hillary Clinton’s alleged malfeasance while in the State Department, nor to the harassment, abuse and rape charges brought against her husband before or while he was president, either. I know that the charges were made, and I suppose there is a good chance that there is merit to all of them – but only a full and fair investigation or a proper trial can determine whether that is really so.)

But that last sentence about President Clinton is somewhat telling – or should be to a relatively disinterested observer.

I don’t know what the charges are against the current sitting president. But “harassment” and “abuse” are not necessarily the same thing, and neither of them carries the weight of a charge of “rape” and “rape of an underage victim” is more serious, still.

Aside from that, what @josie said is also true. Many times charges are exaggerated by others who have no specific concern for the victim, but only want to score points against the accused individual – and by the same token, many charges that have complete merit are also brushed aside – also by people with no interest in justice (or victims) – but who only seek to advance a competing political agenda.

I’d be more apt to take seriously those who strive to keep all dishonorable people away from high political office – or who work to limit the political power of anyone who might be in any office. Too bad there aren’t many of either kinds of folks around.

seawulf575's avatar

@Patty_Melt 10/8/98. The House impeached Clinton. The senate did not convict him which is why he was not removed from office. “Impeachment” is sort of like “indictment”. In this case, the House said there was enough evidence to hold the trial. He was impeached. The Senate holds the trial and did not convict him…but that is separate from impeachment.

NomoreY_A's avatar

Come on now Rojo, you’re a smart guy and I’d wager you’ve been around the mulberry bush a few times. Heres the deal – these RepubliCON politicos will never, ever call out their Golden Boy on anything, no matter how hideous or disgusting. Yeah, they might toss a few lesser lights under the bus, but they’ll do anything humanly possible to save Chump. If a Dem POTUS had a fraction of the skeletons in his closet that Chump does it would be mandatory 24/7 wing nut talking points for the rest of this decade and beyond.

chyna's avatar

@Jleslie Do you have a source for your statements on evangelicals?

JLeslie's avatar

^^I’ll look for it. It was quoted on The View and they referenced the source of the study. It was a majority if I remember, but enough that it was an interesting stat. I said the same when Clinton was under fire, that I didn’t care if he was cheating on his wife, I felt that was her problem. I kind of ignored all the women who had accused him of misconduct so to speak.

It’s the hypocrisy that bothers me, not the statement itself. I know evangelicals who still hold to morality matters in all realms. I will say, at least some of my friends who feel that way, evangelical friends, still voted for Trump even though they hated doing it. I don’t judge them harshly. I’d venture that the same liberals who are saying that surely a democrat is better than someone who preys on teenagers, would vote for someone accused of preying on teenagers if they were going to work hard on getting socialized medicine through, or pick whatever issue really matters to them.

JLeslie's avatar

@chyna They cited a study from www.prri.org
research group, but I can’t locate the specific study yet. Maybe you will have better luck than me. I can spend more time on it in a little while. I’m not asking you to do the work, just thought you might be interested in the website anyway.

Edit: I found it. It links from the site above to “this”:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/11/21/christianity-is-political-but-americas-politically-active-christians-seem-to-be-forgetting-that/?utm_term=.4b6b0f0f5fc1 article when I searched under religion and politics.

josie's avatar

@Patty_Melt
December 28, 1998

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther