I see you rewrite political history too.
Yes, the votes were there just fine until these accusations came out. Moore was polled 15 points ahead or more of Doug Jones. Moore was going to win decisively till these accusations came out, and party officials used them as an excuse to dump him.
They would rather lose than have a man who espouses Moores beliefs and attitude in the Senate.
Moore was not a "flawed candidate". He was a perfectly good candidate that was torpedoed from both sides of the Uniparty running Washington.
They weren't sitting in boardrooms with Rockefellers or vacationing in Maine with the Bushes or reorganizing corporations with Romney.
Moore lost enough votes from ordinary Alabama Republicans to lose the election.
Second, the Alabama GOP stood by Moore, so far as I can see, though Washington Republicans didn't.
And Moore was running as an anti-Establishment maverick: it was to be expected that he'd alienate the party Establishment in Washington.
If he hadn't been a #flawedcandidate, he would have won and maybe picked up votes by campaigning against the Washington Establishment and the DC Swamp.
Moore was not a "flawed candidate". He was a perfectly good candidate that was torpedoed from both sides of the Uniparty running Washington.
Voters in his state didn't think so.