Jump to content

U.S. Politics: I Did Nazi That Coming


Manhole Eunuchsbane

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, dmc515 said:

See, the fundamental flaw in your logic is Pence's apparent resolve.  There is no way he would invoke the 25th and directly take on Trump unless he knew Congress was going to vote to remove him.  If he did so without reassurances, and the GOP voted down his attempt to oust Trump, that is political self-immolation.  I'm not over-estimating MCs' resolve, I'm continuing in my position that they lack any.  If enough GOP members are going to vote to remove Trump, this is not only because they are not worried about electoral backlash, it is because these members are more worried about electoral backlash if they don't vote to convict.  In which case, the 25th is completely pointless.

There is one thing that the 25th helps - it lacks any kind of actual trial and doesn't have to be particularly public. There doesn't even have to be debate, as far as I know. Impeachment proceedings basically lock up the entire congressional wing for a year, they are absurdly public and are about as big of an actual trial as you can get; in theory the 25th has nothing of that.

If Democrats wanted to compromise with Republicans to get Trump out, that would be likely a more palatable solution to them. But again, that assumes Pence would be willing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

See, the fundamental flaw in your logic is Pence's apparent resolve.  There is no way he would invoke the 25th and directly take on Trump unless he knew Congress was going to vote to remove him.  If he did so without reassurances, and the GOP voted down his attempt to oust Trump, that is political self-immolation.  I'm not over-estimating MCs' resolve, I'm continuing in my position that they lack any.  If enough GOP members are going to vote to remove Trump, this is not only because they are not worried about electoral backlash, it is because these members are more worried about electoral backlash if they don't vote to convict.  In which case, the 25th is completely pointless.

You're right that Pence also needs assurances, and Ryan and McConnell couldn't give him any concrete ones. But the potential upside, becoming President, may be enough to get him to go with it so long as Ryan and McConnell promise him (secretly of course) that they will push their members as hard as they can to uphold his move. They can also give him their best-guess whip counts on where things stand.

Also, Republicans will always face some backlash over voting to impeach/convict/25th amendment Trump; it may at some point be less than the backlash over noting voting to, but the backlash will always be there (and it will be more tangible because it comes from the right, which means primary trouble). As such, they will always be interested in minimizing that backlash to whatever extent they can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

What is the basis by which you find these college students arguments about the Jefferson statue to be invalid?

That college students typically lack power to effectuate change. I don't see that movement catching momentum nationally even if successful on some campuses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

There is one thing that the 25th helps - it lacks any kind of actual trial and doesn't have to be particularly public. There doesn't even have to be debate, as far as I know. Impeachment proceedings basically lock up the entire congressional wing for a year, they are absurdly public and are about as big of an actual trial as you can get; in theory the 25th has nothing of that.

While the length of proceedings is a known unknown in this hypothetical, they would not necessarily lock up Congress for a year at all.  Clinton was impeached in about two months:

Quote

On October 8, the House authorized a wide-ranging impeachment inquiry, and on December 11, the House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment. On December 19, the House impeached Clinton.

His Senate trial lasted 5 weeks.

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

But the potential upside, becoming President, may be enough to get him to go with it so long as Ryan and McConnell promise him (secretly of course) that they will push their members as hard as they can to uphold his move. They can also give him their best-guess whip counts on where things stand.

I do not see a scenario in which Pence would make such a move without a virtual guarantee they'd vote to uphold.  The risk for him is going to in history as essentially attempting a failed coup.  Which, again, raises the question of if the situation has gotten to the point where 2/3s of the House is willing to remove the president, why bother with the 25th at all?

8 minutes ago, Fez said:

As such, they will always be interested in minimizing that backlash to whatever extent they can. 

Again, in this scenario their electoral prospects would inherently look very, very porous.  The best hope they would have is for Pence to step in and try to regain the public's trust as much as possible.  Further, impeach/convict would still, obviously, include all the Dems voting against the president.  If the GOP is worried about their base, this is far better blame attribution than having Pence initiate Trump's ouster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dmc515 said:

While the length of proceedings is a known unknown in this hypothetical, they would not necessarily lock up Congress for a year at all.  Clinton was impeached in about two months:

His Senate trial lasted 5 weeks.

The actual articles did, yes - but congress did almost nothing previous to that, and impeachment dominated the news cycle for more than a year. 

1 minute ago, dmc515 said:

I do not see a scenario in which Pence would make such a move without a virtual guarantee they'd vote to uphold.  The risk for him is going to in history as essentially attempting a failed coup.  Which, again, raises the question of if the situation has gotten to the point where 2/3s of the House is willing to remove the president, why bother with the 25th at all?

Again, in this scenario their electoral prospects would inherently look very, very porous.  The best hope they would have is for Pence to step in and try to regain the public's trust as much as possible.  Further, impeach/convict would still, obviously, include all the Dems voting against the president.  If the GOP is worried about their base, this is far better blame attribution than having Pence initiate Trump's ouster.

Yep. Though again, I don't see how either thing happens. 24% of the US believes in what Trump is saying right now and is still on board with him, and that 24% overwhelmingly is Republican voting. The GOP isn't going to risk that easily no matter what happens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Week said:

That college students typically lack power to effectuate change. I don't see that movement catching momentum nationally even if successful on some campuses

Why not?  Unless you disagree with the substance of their argument, I can't think of any reasons why it wouldn't catch on.  Rape and racism/slavery are serious hot button issues in this country, and for good reason.

So I'll ask again, what is it about the substance of their argument that you disagree with?

Or if you agree with the substance of their argument, why should the statues be allowed to stay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Week said:

That college students typically lack power to effectuate change. I don't see that movement catching momentum nationally even if successful on some campuses

The article was also 2 years old and I'd venture to guess that many of those students don't even attend college any more.  It's a non-story that really has no bearing on current events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The actual articles did, yes - but congress did almost nothing previous to that, and impeachment dominated the news cycle for more than a year. 

My point was it didn't lock up Congress for that long.  In terms of news cycles and chatter, this depends on what the hypothetical is based off of.  If it's Russia, we're already in the midst of that.

11 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

24% of the US believes in what Trump is saying right now and is still on board with him, and that 24% overwhelmingly is Republican voting. The GOP isn't going to risk that easily no matter what happens. 

If he's gets down to consistent 25% approval, I think it's possible - if very unlikely.  It would be dependent on a lot of variables, most importantly, ya know, the actual case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aceluby said:

The article was also 2 years old and I'd venture to guess that many of those students don't even attend college any more.  It's a non-story that really has no bearing on current events.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

Why not?  Unless you disagree with the substance of their argument, I can't think of any reasons why it wouldn't catch on.  Rape and racism/slavery are serious hot button issues in this country, and for good reason.

So I'll ask again, what is it about the substance of their argument that you disagree with?

Or if you agree with the substance of their argument, why should the statues be allowed to stay?

Unnecessary Whataboutism that is all the more unnecessary by the date of the article. Make a separate thread if you want to launch into a discussion on each and every statue of a historical figure (named buildings as well?)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like someone's having a temper tantrum.

For reference, the 3M CEO resigned from the Council just a couple hours ago, which I believe put the final tally at 7 CEOs leaving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Fez said:

If this works out, maybe we can give these guys Jared's mideast peace portfolio.

While this is a great story, I feel like entering alcohol into the equation cold make things worse....or I suppose better if there's moderation.  3 beer limit fellas!

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Ok, here's one for you. Which cabinet secretary is most likely to follow Stauffenberg's path?

Heh.  That's not the type of hypothetical I'd like to engage in.  But I won't cop out - I guess...Carson?  He has the best mix of insanity, ambition, and self-righteousness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Fez said:

Looks like someone's having a temper tantrum.

For reference, the 3M CEO resigned from the Council just a couple hours ago, which I believe put the final tally at 7 CEOs leaving.

"You can't quit, you're fired!" So much winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Fez said:

Looks like someone's having a temper tantrum.

For reference, the 3M CEO resigned from the Council just a couple hours ago, which I believe put the final tally at 7 CEOs leaving.

 

CNN's graphic just now also had a picture of the Campbell's CEO, so evidently it was up to 8.

P.S. And here's a link to a news story about her quitting:

http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south-jersey/2017/08/15/campbell-soup-trump-morrison/568659001/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Week said:

Unnecessary Whataboutism that is all the more unnecessary by the date of the article. Make a separate thread if you want to launch into a discussion on each and every statue of a historical figure (named buildings as well?)..

Ha.  I understand completely why you'd prefer to dodge those questions.  The date of the article has no bearing on the substance of the arguments being presented..

Time will tell which of us is correct I guess.  This isn't the 'confederate statue' thread, so I see no reason why a new thread would be required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Heh.  That's not the type of hypothetical I'd like to engage in.  But I won't cop out - I guess...Carson?  He has the best mix of insanity, ambition, and self-righteousness.

Nor do I, but for the first time in modern American history, and maybe in the entirety of U.S. history, it's actually something that is possible.

And the correct answer is Mattis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Quote

 

  23 minutes ago, Fez said:

If this works out, maybe we can give these guys Jared's mideast peace portfolio.


 

Good luck! Netanyahu's son announced that Black Live Matter is far worse than neo nazis:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-junior-says-leftists-more-dangerous-than-neo-nazis/

http://jewishjournal.com/news/israel/223133/netanyahus-son-says-neo-nazis-dying-us-leftist-thugs-becoming-dominant/

Yet those dying out nazis stood at a Charlotteville synagogue during Sabbath services (Saturday) fully armed:

http://www.newsweek.com/charlottesville-police-refused-protect-synagogue-nazis-so-it-hired-armed-651260

http://reformjudaism.org/blog/2017/08/14/charlottesville-local-jewish-community-presses

Yah, you betcha that Black Lives Matter is just the same and worse than nazis.  Nobody's heard of anything remotely like this coming out of the left, antifa, Black Lives Matter, etc., targeted against anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...