7. This is yet another political race in this country where there are no good choices. In the presidential Election Hillary and Trump were the nominees and neither one deserved the job. In this race, you have a guy that imo would not represent the same values of AL voters, and a guy who is not qualified for the job. In the 1994 VA senate race, you had a Dem in a scandal over an affair with a beauty pageant contestant taking on a republican who lied a senate Committee under oath and was seeking election to that very body. You get candidates like these because good selfless people wont run because of the emotional abuse they would take from all the negative ads and publicity that comes with the Job. So you get races with no one qualified for the office and no other choices. IMO this is why, as WarRIi put it earlier in this thread, we have a 20 percent voter turnout. And both political parties designed it that way intentionally IMO.
I kinda take issue with this. What is it about Jones that makes him "unqualified" for the office other than being a Democrat in a ruby-red state or a bad candidate? If he had been his own brand of Democrat (pro-life, Christian, heterosexual marriage), there would still be complaints on how he doesn't fit the national mold or he doesn't fit the AL brand of politicians.
Unlike the presidential primaries, this primary was as straightforward as could be. Round one: if no ones reaches 50%, a run-off round happens with the top two. Moore won fair and square. Same on the Democrats' side. The whole thing about politics is that you'll seldom get the perfect candidate so you either go with the 70-90% you can get or you lose. It's likely the reason why Republicans hold a tight grip on a lot of seats: GOP voters know that even though their preferred candidate lost in the primary, they can get around the winner who will get them more than 50% of what the want as opposed to Democrats who if their preferred candidate loses, they'll sit out or vote against the winner.[/quote]
I didn't say that Jones was not qualified to serve as a senator. Of the two candidates he was by far the more qualified person to serve. What I simply said was that because Alabama is a very conservative state, and Jones is by all indications very liberal on a lot of issues, Jones would have a difficult time representing the interests of Alabama in the senate as well as the values of most AL voters. This is why a lot of GOP voters either stayed at home or cast write in votes in this election. All things being considered though, I still believe that the voters of AL did the right thing. I don't agree with Jones at all politically, but Moore has no business in public office, and if you follow these threads I said this after he got the nomination even before the allegations came out.
One thing I am sick of though is what you alluded to, cookie cutter politicians, who have to check every box on their parties platform or else the party doesn't welcome them. This attitude has actually kept the Democrats from making inroads into the south. I know a lot of people personally who would pull the lever for Democrats if they were pro life on the abortion issue. These people share a lot of other political views with the democrats, but the life issue is big with them, and these are votes the Democrats are leaving on the table. But if they compromised on these candidates, the party insiders from the Northeast and California would scream murder. Look what happened in one mayors race in Nebraska? Likewise, there are plenty of fiscally conservative republicans who are very sympathetic to LGBT issues and are very libertarian in their thinking, and could probably do well in Blue areas like New Hampshire or Maine, or some other blue state. Some of these guys do win and are popular. Look at the people who have served as Governor of Massachusetts. In the past 25 years, only one democrat, Deval Patrick, has held this office. And the republican governors who get elected often enjoy the highest approval ratings of any governor. Look at Bill Weld during his time as Governor. (The libertarian party really screwed up by putting Johnson and not him at the top of the ticket) Look at Charlie Baker now. That said, often if these guys run for office they get tagged as RINOs and get no support.
You are right though....Moore did win the nomination fair and square. I get why it happened. The GOP base is sick of the DC Establishment and Mitch McConnell and they thought that in a deep red state the GOP primary was the default general election. They wanted to stick it to these people. However, because of their blind emotional hatred, they didn't take as close a look at Moore as they should have and nominated him out of emotion rather than Logic. If they had been familiar with history, they would have seen Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Todd Akin, and Richard Mourduck. These were all very similar nominations by GOP parties, and in every case by nominating a whacko, they gave away seats they had no business losing. (In O'Donnell's case, Michael Castle was about as much a slam dunk for Republicans as you get) I agree with the thinking about McConnell and the establishment. But you address that by running smart, quality candidates for these offices. In this case, a Whacko was run.