I'm not so sure. I'm guessing that if Moore wins, he stays in the Senate, at least until his abbreviated term expires. He will be an albatross around the GOP's neck if that happens, but nevertheless, I think there's something right about it.
Not that there's anything right about Moore himself. I wouldn't vote for him, and I hope that Alabamans won't, either, but . . . if they do, shouldn't their voice be heard? After all, they've heard the worst; if they still want him, who is to say they can't have him?
I am groping (if you'll forgive the expression) for a principle here, and I think the will and wisdom of the voters is what matters. John Conyers is a clear case of corruption in office. His abuse has been carried on all through his career. He deserves the boot. As for someone who committed outrages before assuming office -- and beyond the statute of limitations' power to reach -- well, I'd still boot someone who had covered up his deeds all these years. But what if Franken or Conyers or whoever, instead of merely resigning, had resigned and then gone home to contest the special election? What if a bad apple resigned his seat in order to ask his voters if they still wanted him? And those voters said Yes?
Alcee Hastings was a federal judge. He was impeached by the House for corruption, found guilty by the Senate, and thrown out of office. He then ran for the House of Representatives and won. He now sits on the very Judiciary Committee that once voted Articles of Impeachment against him. And his district continues to re-elect him every two years. Hastings is a crook, but he has been elected to his office -- and the voters' will and wisdom is to be respected, so long as he now behaves himself.
Which means that if Moore wins his election, I predict he will be seated and the Ethics Committee will not recommend his expulsion, because the people of Alabama will have elected him, in full knowledge of all that has gone before. Now, it's an open question whether Roy Moore can last three years without doing something else outrageous enough to get him booted from the Senate, so we'll see. But that's how I see it.
As H.L. Mencken put it, democracy is the idea that the people know what they want, and they deserve to get it good and hard. But the alternative is to say someone else knows better than they do, and will not let them decide. And the name for that is tyranny.