Sen. McConnell mocks Steve Bannon's 'political genius'

Associated Press ^ | Dec 22, 2017 12:35 PM EST | Alan Fram

[TChad]

A lot of people feel that a 30 year old man dating teenagers has a big "ick" factor, but without the molestation accusation, the dating of teenagers would have been a big nothing.

A big "ick" factor is not nothing. A big "ick" factor is a big political liability, UNLESS the candidate confronts it head on and pushes back.

Hannity gave Moore an absolutely perfect opportunity to do that, and Moore blew it badly. That's entirely on Moore -- not on the Washington Post or Hannity.

Moore could have distanced himself from his younger self, saying clearly that he DID date teenage girls, and that he now regrets doing it. There were many ways to handle the situation, but it needed to be handled, and Moore failed to handle it.

A competent candidate with Moore's record could have won the election.

[DiogenesLamp]

I have addressed this point multiple times. Hannity linked dating teenagers with molesting a 14 year old, and put Moore in an untenable position.

It is beside the point. In the absence of the accusations, Moore would have won handily. In the absence of the backstabbing Moore would have won marginally.

The problem therefore was not with Moore as a candidate, it was with these out of the dark accusations, and the fact that Republicans deliberately put a knife in his back.

The premise that "Moore was a bad candidate" is just wrong. He was just fine as a candidate without these accusations or the backstabbing.