U.S. Politics: Trump of the Will

[DMC]

18 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Congress hasn't read the report. That's pretty clear by almost everyone in Congress saying they haven't.

This doesn't really matter - larry's original point is exactly right.  The only way to move MCs' position taking on the issue is to change public opinion.  This is very unlikely to do so in any meaningful way.

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

This doesn't really matter - larry's original point is exactly right.  The only way to move MCs' position taking on the issue is to change public opinion.  This is very unlikely to do so in any meaningful way.

And this is wrong. The public opinion shouldn't be what directs Congress to do the right thing. They should start the impeachment inquiry and cause the public to talk about it repeatedly. As has been noted a 100x in this thread, public opinion was not against Nixon until the Watergate hearings actually happened. You can't shift public opinion in this news environment by doing nothing.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Mexal said:

And this is wrong. The public opinion shouldn't be what directs Congress to do the right thing. They should start the impeachment inquiry and cause the public to talk about it repeatedly. As has been noted a 100x in this thread, public opinion was not against Nixon until the Watergate hearings actually happened. You can't shift public opinion in this news environment by doing nothing.

Um, this isn't Watergate.  It's a feckless Congress and intractable polarization among the public.  I'm all for endless hearings drowning out anything Trump wants to do, but to think it's going to lead to impeachment, or even have much of an effect on his approval?  You haven't been paying attention.

[Gertrude]

Personally, I want impeachment proceedings because it's the right thing to do. I understand the talk about the optics and fear of backlash, and the futility with a R senate, but apparently it's too much to ask that our reps just do the right thing because it's right.

[Mexal]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Um, this isn't Watergate.  It's a feckless Congress and intractable polarization among the public.  I'm all for endless hearings drowning out anything Trump wants to do, but to think it's going to lead to impeachment, or even have much of an effect on his approval?  You haven't been paying attention.

It's not going to lead to impeachment (McConnell) and maybe it doesn't lead to much effect on his approval rating (his base is locked in) but if Congress uses their Article 1 power to open an impeachment inquiry, has the full force of the Constitution behind them when they investigate rather than hoping the Executive does what they want (they have provided no documents or witnesses), then maybe, just maybe, the public will start to understand the extent to the issues as it's all that will be talked about. And you don't have to get to Trump supporters who would rather kill themselves than vote for anyone else but enough independents and enough to red meat to motivate the base.

If you would rather do nothing at all because Congress is feckless, the public is polarized and right now the public as a whole has very little understanding of what's in the Mueller report, then fair enough. I get it. I still think it's wrong.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

51 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

I mean, personally that sounds pretty tangible to me. But then he apparently looks "confused" which means it won't matter to Republicans. Because Republicans greatest tools are projection and hypocrisy.

So much for this.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

33 minutes ago, Gertrude said:

Personally, I want impeachment proceedings because it's the right thing to do. I understand the talk about the optics and fear of backlash, and the futility with a R senate, but apparently it's too much to ask that our reps just do the right thing because it's right.

This begs a greater philosophic question. In these troubling times, what does doing the right thing mean? Because I would argue that doing the right thing is taking a course of action that makes it most likely that Democrats hold the House and win the WH and the Senate, and impeachment likely doesn’t aid that ultimate goal.

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This begs a greater philosophic question. In these troubling times, what does doing the right thing mean? Because I would argue that doing the right thing is taking a course of action that makes it most likely that Democrats hold the House and win the WH and the Senate, and impeachment likely doesn’t aid that ultimate goal.

I guess we're going to find out because I tend to believe that the American people voted Dems into the House to hold Trump accountable, for which they have done absolutely nothing. I guess we'll see what happens in 2020 and whether Americans continue to reward their passivity.

[Zorral]

You are frackin' predictable, ya know? This has nothing to do with philosophical definition, but criminal actions, by legal definitions, and with him proving himself unfit and a liar every second of every day he exists, while still committing one illegal act after another.  Also lying to congress, refusing to appear to testify, etc. is also illegal. 

We as a nation absolutely NEED impeachment proceedings.  He and his fellow criminal-traitors are immune otherwise to continue taking the wrecking ball to the US and the whole world otherwise.

Get out on the streets every day demanding this and this will happen.  Surely if poor Puerto Ricans can do this with their governor, white middle-class people in the mainland can do it too (though the chants, music and dancing may not be the same quality -- but hey, we've got loads of latinx US citizens on the mainland too).

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I guess we're going to find out because I tend to believe that the American people voted Dems into the House to hold Trump accountable, for which they have done absolutely nothing. I guess we'll see what happens in 2020 and whether Americans continue to reward their passivity.

And they are doing just that. Holding this Administration accountable does not directly mean impeachment. In a better world should Dems impeach Trump? Of course, but we live in the real world, and the most likely results of impeachment is the Republican senate giving Trump a complete exoneration followed by the Republican Party unifying around him.

[DMC]

47 minutes ago, Mexal said:

you would rather do nothing at all because Congress is feckless, the public is polarized and right now the public as a whole has very little understanding of what's in the Mueller report, then fair enough. I get it. I still think it's wrong

To clarify I'm not saying what I think should happen, I just think it's overwhelmingly likely nothing comes of it.

[Mexal]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And they are doing just that. Holding this Administration accountable does not directly mean impeachment. In a better world should Dems impeach Trump? Of course, but we live in the real world, and the most likely results of impeachment is the Republican senate giving Trump a complete exoneration followed by the Republican Party unifying around him.

Are they holding him accountable? I must have missed it in between every subpoena, document  and interview request being ignored or dismissed by the WH Council or DOJ. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, Zorral said:

You are frackin' predictable, ya know?

Shocking, I know, that the person with a background in campaigns and elections wants to take the most tactical route.

Quote

We as a nation absolutely NEED impeachment proceedings.  He and his fellow criminal-traitors are immune otherwise to continue taking the wrecking ball to the US and the whole world otherwise.

Get out on the streets every day demanding this and this will happen.  Surely if poor Puerto Ricans can do this with their governor, white middle-class people in the mainland can do it too (though the chants, music and dancing may not be the same quality -- but hey, we've got loads of latinx US citizens on the mainland too).

A younger me would go full Les Grossman on you here. Wake up dude. The president’s approval went up after being openly racist. What do you think impeachment and riots would do?

[Larry of the Lawn]

Of course, of they did begin impeachment, Trump would absolutely lose his shit and start doing all sorts of crazy shit.  Might give him an embolism, or maybe he invades some 'shithole' country 

[Gertrude]

25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This begs a greater philosophic question. In these troubling times, what does doing the right thing mean? Because I would argue that doing the right thing is taking a course of action that makes it most likely that Democrats hold the House and win the WH and the Senate, and impeachment likely doesn’t aid that ultimate goal.

Again, this is why people hate politics and politicians. The country I want to live in does not take political calculations into account over holding criminals accountable. I know that's not the country we live in right now, but how are we supposed to get there if we don't act when we can?

I totally understand it might be a political miscalculation. I completely get that 4 more years of Trump is unthinkable. This is where I'm drawing my line. Do the god-damn right thing because it's right. If letting Epstein go so he can continue to do what he does would up our odds of taking back the White House, would that be an acceptable trade-off for you?

[Jace, Extat]

2 minutes ago, Gertrude said:

Again, this is why people hate politics and politicians. The country I want to live in does not take political calculations into account over holding criminals accountable. I know that's not the country we live in right now, but how are we supposed to get there if we don't act when we can?

I totally understand it might be a political miscalculation. I completely get that 4 more years of Trump is unthinkable. This is where I'm drawing my line. Do the god-damn right thing because it's right. If letting Epstein go so he can continue to do what he does would up our odds of taking back the White House, would that be an acceptable trade-off for you?

Can't speak for Tywin but if you throw in the Senate I would take that deal.

[Gertrude]

No. Fuck that, no.

[Kalbear]

I think we need a country that is willing to hold impeachment hearings more often, and that congress (especially the House) needs to wield that more often and more regularly. If we can't get congress and the executive branch to get along more regularly via carrots, we need to use sticks. Anything that brings us closer to the parliamentary system would be good, and I think that kind of power is the closest we'll get.

[sologdin]

intractable polarization among the public

is there evidence that supports the thesis that the polarization of political opinion in the US is qualitatively or quantitatively different than it had been in the past?

the allegation is often made; i am suspicious, however, insofar as it seems similar to prior laments that the present moment is a crisis of one sort or another in comparison to a past golden age--ayn rand bemoans a 'bankrupt' present, fascists seek to cure a degenerate modernity, and conservatives think back to the good old days of segregation.

on the other hand, assuming arguendo that the conclusion that polarization exists is warranted, what is the argument that it is a nail upon which a nostalgic complaint might hang? a lack of polarity might be considered both undesirable and unrealistic.

[Zorral]

22 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Shocking, I know, that the person with a background in campaigns and elections wants to take the most tactical route.

Indicted by your own words as a  member of the class that has made this situation; certainly not a member of the class that can or will or even wants to remedy it.  That's why voters went for others than the established moderates, and want new people.  

Impeachment proceedings.  If Puerto Ricans can put a backbone of fear into those assholes in their legislature, surely, we here on the mainland can do the same thing.