Just Politics

[janice shell]

Alabama will be a better test for both parties.

I don't really think so. Alabama is very, very red. Last time they had a Democratic senator, he became a Republican (and is still a senator).

As we've seen, there're a ton of while evangelicals, and clearly most of them would rather elect Satan incarnate than a Democrat to any position. Many Alabama Republicans, including those in leadership roles, appear to be considerably to the right of the national Republican Party. Right now, they're all furious at McConnell and others who've been, shall we say, critical of Moore, because they feel those people are interfering with their own state politics.

Moore's been an extremist nutcase for at least 20 years. Yet he beat Luther Strange handily, despite Trump's endorsement of Strange. To their credit, some Alabamans seem to have been taken aback by the "sexual misconduct" allegations. But apparently most of his supporters are still supporters. They are, in penny stock parlance, holding Long and Strong.

That weird poll we saw yesterday is no help. The most important thing it told us is that 53% of the "likely voters" polled are over 65 years old. What does that really mean? We don't know, except that probably they're more likely to be "conservative" and "religious" than not.

But what about everyone else? Will all this persuade younger, more "liberal" people to turn out a month from now, and if they do, will they vote for Jones, or will they go with a possible write-in candidate? Of course a write-in candidate could split the Republicans and help Jones win with a plurality.

Whatever happens, Howard Dean was right when he said they don't need interference from outside the state. That would likely have a negative effect, as it evidently did in Georgia earlier this year.

And finally, don't forget that it's a special election. The Moore-Jones race is the only one on the ballot. The challenge for the Dems will be ginning up turnout.