the 45th is The Fourth US President to officially Face Impeachment.

[tstorm823]

That's funny, considering polls show about 10+ percent of Republican voters and 40+ percent of independents supporting impeachment.

I think you're wildly underestimating the antipathy towards him outside of his core base.

You're not realizing I'm not his core base. You're talking about me. I am the Republican who didn't vote for him. I'm the Republican who would say they should investigate the whistleblower complaint. I am the Republican you think isn't going to support him now.

Worth noting [https://news.gallup.com/poll/271691/trump-approval-inches-support-impeachment-dips.aspx].

Trump has framed the Democrats as "the enemy of the people" for years; making your idea that Trump has been a clown all this time unfounded. I don't know from where you got that he was a divide in the Republican party, since he steamrolled the primary elections. Anyone who saw Democrats as the enemy have been supporting Trump for years. There are lots of people who don't like the Democrats, but would rather die than support Trump (or most likely will die in a near future due to GOP's policies on healtcare). Similar arguments as yours were made about Nixon after Watergate happened, and they were mere delusions.

Trump can frame things any which way he likes, that doesn't make it true. Are we forgetting that Trump says dumb and dishonest things? Trump could have framed Democrats and the media as his enemies until the end of time, it wouldn't change reality. Democrats and the media are the ones that made it true.

 

[CaitSeith]

Democrats and the media are the ones that made it true.

Are we forgetting that it isn't true?

 

[CaitSeith]

Lol at the tweet Trump currently got pinned to his twitter feed. I wonder if the resemblance to the old Uncle Sam "We need you" posters is coincidental or intentional. I'm assuming the latter. He looks like a twit either way.

Spoiler: Seriously tho, what a ponce...

Although that's only to be expected. The common North American Trump is known to inflate its neckpouch and emit aggravated tweets when threatened.

That's USSR's level of shameless propaganda.

 

[tstorm823]

Are we forgetting that it isn't true?

Democrats and the media aren't Trump's enemies?

 

[CaitSeith]

Are we forgetting that it isn't true?

Democrats and the media aren't Trump's enemies?

No. They range from allies by convenience (like Fox News) to political adversaries at worst. But don't lose the perspective of the main lie: he frames democrats and the media as enemies of the people. All this time he has been pretending that democrats and the media are irredeemable, so he makes no effort to compromise (not even for the good of America).

 

[tstorm823]

No. They range from allies by convenience (like Fox News) to political adversaries at worst. But don't lose the perspective of the main lie: he frames democrats and the media as enemies of the people. All this time he has been pretending that democrats and the media are irredeemable, so he makes no effort to compromise (not even for the good of America).

1) We were not talking about "the main lie". We were talking about reality. Democrats are not acting as political adversaries in a rivalry with Trump's policies. Hell, the policy positions of Trump and the House are not that different on most things. They just passed the USMCA. Some of the things squeezed in the budget bill were things Trump has called for, like vaping regulations. Hell, they just extended Patriot Act policies for the rest of Trump's current term. Other than "the wall", they aren't really doing much to weaken his powers or stifle his policy wishes. Their conflict with him isn't political, it's personal. They oppose him, the person. They are impeaching him, the person. They are declaring him an enemy.

2) Trump doesn't frame the media as enemies of the people, he calls the "fake news" the enemy of the people. The strong implication here is that if they stop lying, they're not the enemy. I understand, the elephant in the room on this is that he calls everything bad for him "fake news" and praises the reporting that's good for him, but he does praise those things, and that's a different thing in kind to the media being irredeemable. Similarly with the Democrats, he says repeatedly that he wishes they would work with him and/or do good things for the country. Again, propaganda, I know. But the message isn't that Democrats can't be helped or compromised with, the message is that they could do good things but are choosing not to. Whether he makes genuine effort to compromise is something you're welcome to dispute, but the man is not making the argument that his opponents are inherently bad, but rather that they can choose to change their tune at any moment and don't.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Are we forgetting that it isn't true?

Democrats and the media aren't Trump's enemies?

No. They range from allies by convenience (like Fox News) to political adversaries at worst. But don't lose the perspective of the main lie: he frames democrats and the media as enemies of the people. All this time he has been pretending that democrats and the media are irredeemable, so he makes no effort to compromise (not even for the good of America).

It's actually amazing that Democrats aren't Trump's out and out enemies as it is. But here we are. Trump is definitely not their favorite person. He's not mine. But Trump is a danger to himself and the country. I feel while most democrats don't like him, they more feel like Psych Ward Orderlies trying to rein in an unhinged patient.

Does that comment not sit well with people who like Trump? To be compared as such? Here's your friendly reminder that it is nothing that Trump doesn't do on a regular basis [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump]. His insults are so common there's a Wiki Page devoted to his put downs.

And more to your point, it's not just Trump. The Republicans in Power have been doing everything they can to steal elections away from voters and then have the gall to say they represent the will of the people when they do anything. Millions of more votes were cast for Democrats [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/08/democrats-republicans-senate-majority-minority-rule] last year for the Senate races. 12 million more votes, to put a number on it. But Gerrymandering, as usual, made those votes mean almost next to nothing. And the Supreme Court won't touch the infamous "Redmap" [https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/dc/scotus-wont-rein-in-partisan-gerrymandering], with votes falling on Party Lines.

Meaning that the people affected by this can't even Appeal to the Supreme Court to have their rights restored and their votes matter because it benefits certain parties sensibilities.

Judges have already begun their process of Voter Suppression, purging 200,000 voters [https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/judge-orders-purge-of-200-000-voters-in-wisconsin.html] in a state where Trump only won it with not even 23,000 votes. And where 55% of these letters notifying voters of their purging going to districts that Hillary actually won in. Yup, that's officially over half.

But Wisconsin isn't alone. Georgia [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/16/stacey-abrams-georgia-group-files-motion-voter-purge], Ohio [https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/09/ohio-to-continue-with-voter-purge-friday-after-federal-judge-declines-to-block-it.html], Texas [https://prospect.org/civil-rights/texas-tried-mess-voting.-failed./] nearly had it done to them at the beginning of this year, we've always known about minority voter suppression [https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says], but now they are going after the Student Vote [https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/12/students-across-country-faced-voting-barriers-election-day].

And we have Republicans in the Senate who proudly declare their dereliction of Duty [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/theres-nothing-impartial-about-declaring-yourself-impartial/603658/] because they need to back their boy.

And yes, they have to swear by an oath that they will be impartial before actually taking place in the impeachment vote. Which is impossible if you already state you will not do such a thing.

It would be nice if it was just Trump. But we have to look around. The Republican Politicians are doing everything possible to rob differing people of their ability to self govern. Trump is the glaring symptom, to be sure, but it's wrong for anyone to think just ousting him will make this nation better.

The Republican Party in Power now is showing nothing but disdain for any thought that is not their own, and are doing massive steps to make sure only they have the ability to speak. In any other country, this would be considered signs of a political coup. But since they got in power and started rewriting the laws and voting districts, it's "Perfectly Legal" because they just wrote the damn bills saying that they are.

Trump is a distraction. He's a fool that messed up bad, but he's there by the will of the people who want to use him to get their agenda across. The current Democratic party is outdated and archaic. But they are not as bad as this current republican politician party in power now.

 

[tstorm823]

You're likely not going to respond to me, so I'll stick to the easiest refuted propaganda here:

And more to your point, it's not just Trump. The Republicans in Power have been doing everything they can to steal elections away from voters and then have the gall to say they represent the will of the people when they do anything. Millions of more votes were cast for Democrats [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/08/democrats-republicans-senate-majority-minority-rule] last year for the Senate races. 12 million more votes, to put a number on it. But Gerrymandering, as usual, made those votes mean almost next to nothing. And the Supreme Court won't touch the infamous "Redmap" [https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/dc/scotus-wont-rein-in-partisan-gerrymandering], with votes falling on Party Lines.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hating-gerrymandering-is-easy-fixing-it-is-harder/

"But it?s also true that Democratic gerrymanders tend to be less effective than Republican gerrymanders, and not for lack of greed or ingenuity.

First, more than in past decades, Democratic voters are inefficiently clustered in big cities and college towns. In 2012 and 2016, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton carried the popular vote while winning just 22 percent and 16 percent of America?s counties, respectively. That means that in many states, it?s easier for Republicans to pack Democratic voters into a few lopsided districts than vice versa ? a natural geographic advantage for the GOP.

Second, the Voting Rights Act limits the extent to which Democrats can spread their voters across many districts, because it provides safeguards against diluting majority-minority districts3 For example, if the Voting Rights Act didn?t exist, Illinois Democrats could theoretically ?unpack? Chicago?s three heavily African-American districts and spread out their overwhelmingly Democratic voters to obliterate the state?s GOP-leaning districts. Instead, the current Democratic gerrymander in Illinois has produced a modest 11-7 Democratic edge in congressional seats."

Gerrymandering is not a specifically Republican tactic to undermine the will of the people. The GOP gets more advantage out of democratic voters deliberately clustering themselves in with like-minded people than any mapmaking shenanigan could offer.

Judges have already begun their process of Voter Suppression, purging 200,000 voters [https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/judge-orders-purge-of-200-000-voters-in-wisconsin.html] in a state where Trump only won it with not even 23,000 votes. And where 55% of these letters notifying voters of their purging going to districts that Hillary actually won in. Yup, that's officially over half.

Wisconsin has had same-day voter registration for like 50 years, the voter rolls there are just bookkeeping and have no impact on who can and cannot vote.

And yes, they have to swear by an oath that they will be impartial before actually taking place in the impeachment vote. Which is impossible if you already state you will not do such a thing.

Impartial justice would acquit Trump of this impeachment, every Democrat in the Senate would be guilty of breaking that oath by the end. A significant amount of these people publicly called for impeachment, even well before the actual event being tried even occured. Do you think Elizabeth Warren, rival 2020 candidate, who called for impeachment based on the Mueller report, can legitimately swear impartiality? I don't know, maybe they'll surprise me. Maybe the Senate trial will happen and Democratic Senators will vote against removal. Maybe that's why Pelosi is balking at sending it to trial now. I would be genuinely proud of them for that honorable an act. But that doesn't seem very likely.

 

[Silvanus]

You're not realizing I'm not his core base. You're talking about me. I am the Republican who didn't vote for him. I'm the Republican who would say they should investigate the whistleblower complaint. I am the Republican you think isn't going to support him now.

Yes, but to be frank, I don't consider you representative. I think most casual observers in this thread would say you're approaching the entire question in a tremendously partisan way, and that no evidence could convince you.

Worth noting [https://news.gallup.com/poll/271691/trump-approval-inches-support-impeachment-dips.aspx].

Yeah, that's worth noting: approval for impeachment is higher than approval for Trump, and Trump's approval rating sits at a relative low.

Hey, after a quick Google, Trump's average approval rating is the lowest of any President since polling began! Even Nixon!

 

[tstorm823]

Yes, but to be frank, I don't consider you representative. I think most casual observers in this thread would say you're approaching the entire question in a tremendously partisan way, and that no evidence could convince you.

It doesn't matter what you consider me. You have to always keep in mind, this site is so far left there are as many communists as conservatives. I'm always going to look unflinchingly right-wing in this environment.

I'm not a partisan, I'm a rational human being. I suggest you be the same. Because when someone says this impeachment process is solidifying support for Trump, and gives you evidence of his approval going up since they started the hearings, and your response is "look at how bad it's been overall!", it's not me who is ignoring evidence in favor of dug in, one-sided viewpoints.

 

[Abomination]

Hey, after a quick Google, Trump's average approval rating is the lowest of any President since polling began! Even Nixon!

You don't understand, 4d chess, it's like golf - a low score is a good thing. He has the best score of any president ever.

 

[Silvanus]

[
I'm not a partisan, I'm a rational human being. I suggest you be the same. Because when someone says this impeachment process is solidifying support for Trump, and gives you evidence of his approval going up since they started the hearings, and your response is "look at how bad it's been overall!", it's not me who is ignoring evidence in favor of dug in, one-sided viewpoints.

You shared a site referring to a poll showing a slight-- read "statistically insignificant"-- shift, in the face of historical lows overall. If you're so easily convinced by such weak evidence, then it doesn't say much.

Hey, the polls in the lead up to the UK election showed a more significant shift than yours in favour of Jeremy Corbyn. I'm sure he'll be PM any day now!

Impartial justice would acquit Trump of this impeachment, every Democrat in the Senate would be guilty of breaking that oath by the end.

Rofl.

Ok, this is where I lost it. I'm out.

 

[tstorm823]

You shared a site referring to a poll showing a slight-- read "statistically insignificant"-- shift, in the face of historical lows overall. If you're so easily convinced by such weak evidence, then it doesn't say much.

Yes, a consistent upward trend reaching a 6% change over the course of the last 3 months coinciding exactly with the impeachment process in the house displayed by one of the most respected polling groups on the planet is a statistically insignificant shift that we should just ignore.

Shur.

 

[Trunkage]

Impartial justice would acquit Trump of this impeachment, every Democrat in the Senate would be guilty of breaking that oath by the end. A significant amount of these people publicly called for impeachment, even well before the actual event being tried even occured. Do you think Elizabeth Warren, rival 2020 candidate, who called for impeachment based on the Mueller report, can legitimately swear impartiality? I don't know, maybe they'll surprise me. Maybe the Senate trial will happen and Democratic Senators will vote against removal. Maybe that's why Pelosi is balking at sending it to trial now. I would be genuinely proud of them for that honorable an act. But that doesn't seem very likely.

What part of the oath do you think they are breaking?

So far is this thread, you have accused the Dems only doing this through bad faith and us not accepting your version of events as gospel as bad.
Yet, you post this somehow without understanding how you are doing the only seeing the negative in the whole Democratic Party and us.

Nah, you misunderstand. I'm not seeing only the negative of the whole Democratic Party. I understand their perspective. The Democrats leading the charge, and more importantly their constituents, see Trump as a serious threat to the entire country and will do anything in their power to weaken his position and avoid a repeat in 2020. And some of them have been pretty darn honest about that since the day he took office. I disagree with them, I think this impeachment is one of the dumbest moments in US history, but with the exception of Schiff who is an exceptional piece of crap, I think they're doing what they think is best for the country.
Does that have anything to do with Ukraine? Nah. Nothing at all. They're just using whatever excuse the can to make a case for impeachment, because they think it will help prevent Trump's reelection, because they think Trump is a terrible person doing real damage to America. It's very similar to the impeachment of Andrew Johnson: they basically made up a crime to charge him with, but they did so because they couldn't remove him from office for giving amnesty to confederate officers and vetoing civil rights legislation. Like, the means there weren't totally honest, but Andrew Johnson was terrible and deserved to be removed from office. The Democrats see Trump the same way: they hate all sorts of crap he does that they can't actually impeach him for, so they made up offenses to make it happen.
It's not all negative, I don't believe they're acting against their consciences here, I'm just not pretending for a second that any politician in DC genuinely felt mandated by the Constitution to remove the president from office over that phone call.

Ah yes, completely never about anything Trump did. Always only ever about the Democrats hatred.

Yes, this seems like a reasonable stance. Covers the complete nuance of the situation. /sarcasm

If it isn't clear, I think you are being completely tunnel vision and hating Democrats by finding all the evidence that proves your point and ignoring that which dispels your narrative. Maybe relook at that Iroh quote.

 

[tstorm823]

What part of the oath do you think they are breaking?

None, but if people are going to disqualify Republicans based on a lack of impartiality, Imma disqualify everyone who votes to remove Trump based on these charges. Bias is the driving factor there.

Ah yes, completely never about anything Trump did. Always only ever about the Democrats hatred.

Yes, this seems like a reasonable stance. Covers the complete nuance of the situation. /sarcasm

If it isn't clear, I think you are being completely tunnel vision and hating Democrats by finding all the evidence that proves your point and ignoring that which dispels your narrative. Maybe relook at that Iroh quote.

It's not about nothing that Trump did. It's just not about Ukraine. Trump's crime was running as a Republican with the rhetoric of a Democrat. That's why they want to remove him. The effort to impeach Trump started before he was even in office, like I was telling people here a year or so ago when they were saying Pelosi would never impeach, the plan was always to impeach but they were waiting for it to have election implications. It has nothing in the slightest to do with Ukraine.

 

[Silvanus]

What part of the oath do you think they are breaking?

"I'm so innocent, the entire jury is guilty!"

It's like a Steve Martin film.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

What part of the oath do you think they are breaking?

"I'm so innocent, the entire jury is guilty!"

It's like a Steve Martin film.

Take that Back!

... Steve Martin is funny. There's nothing funny about this life now.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Man, these charges had better be fucking bulletproof. Indeed if I may paraphrase ?The Newsroom? for a moment.

?If you?re wrong about Trump, that is the first chapter of your autobiography?

If this fails, the Democratic Party has resigned itself to political oblivion for the next fifty years.

 

[tstorm823]

Man, these charges had better be fucking bulletproof. Indeed if I may paraphrase ?The Newsroom? for a moment.

?If you?re wrong about Trump, that is the first chapter of your autobiography?

If this fails, the Democratic Party has resigned itself to political oblivion for the next fifty years.

The charges are not bulletproof, but people are still calling Trump a Russian puppet, so it doesn't look like a case not being bulletproof dissuades people from accepting it.

 

[Avnger]

but people are still calling Trump a Russian puppet, so it doesn't look like a case not being bulletproof dissuades people from accepting it.

I mean Trump only listens to Putin over his own intelligence agencies...
He only hired 2 now convicted Russian foreign agents to be his campaign manager and National Security Adviser...
He only relies on Russian oligarchs for business funding after every US bank blacklisted him for not paying back loans...
He only discloses classified intelligence to the Russian government against the advice of senior officials...
He only hosts closed door meetings with senior Russian government officials and Russian media members while excluding US media...
He only follows a foreign policy that largely is a wish-list for advancing Russia's geopolitical goals...
He only had his son meet with a known Russian government agent during the 2016 election to obtain dirt on his political rival...
He only called out on live national television for the Russian government to hack into the information systems of his political rival...

Now, he has not been formally charged with "conspiracy against the United States" or for acting as a foreign agent of the Russian government; that is true. Though he did provably obstruct the special counsel investigation into just that topic, funnily enough...

I'll just leave you with Trump's own words describing his oh-so-loyal supporters:

I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn?t lose voters.

We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated.