Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Yeah I agree with wisewillow. No one thinks it will be easy. I certainly don't. I've weighed the same facts you guys have and come to the conclusion it's better to go the impeachment route, based on what I'm seeing.
And yes, there is a risk if the impeachment fails. There's also a risk with no impeachment at all. These are all a game of risks and what we think is the safer one and some people are going to disagree.
Read my stories!This is wrong.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:33:11 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.I don't want anyone misunderstanding what my own stance is. I'm not against impeachment in theory, but I do feel that there are too many assumptions that voters will react a certain way in either direction. Sure, many may be motivated by seeing the attempt, but just as many may have the exact opposite reaction.
And there is something I suspect that there is a point of contention based out of miscommunication. Do we want to impeach Trump to remove him from office, or to hold him accountable? If it is the former than it is a lot more understandable, but the latter seems unhelpful since impeachment is a long process.
Don't catch you slippin' now.I mean, personally I don't think there is really a substantial chance that the impeachment proceedings will get the ideal results people want or anything close to that. I'm not saying that to argue against the idea of impeachment or to sound defeatist, it just seems obvious with the GOP controlling the Senate. To me the debate isn't really about "should we do this if there is a chance of failure", it's "should we do this despite the fact that it will not go as it should, because it's the right thing to do regardless of the end result?".
Edited by Draghinazzo on Apr 19th 2019 at 9:37:38 AM
To get back to current action, I think that what Warren is doing is the right move, for her to do.
An impeachment win is for the majority of the country to back impeachment, if that leads to a successful impeachment/conviction, a failed conviction that republicans are hated for, a resignation or just people being angry enough to vote Trump out in 2020, it’s a win.
We get there by people having a serious talk about impeachment and serious investigations being done. But the paths needs to be treated with caution.
I still remain convinced that Trump won’t leave office peacefully, I’m very afraid of what damage Trump could do in a transition after either loosing in 2020 or not running in 2024.
Edited by Silasw on Apr 19th 2019 at 1:39:05 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranWell, if Mc Connell can't be moved at all, then going the path of trying to just oust Trump through an election and then prosecuting him as a private citizen might well be the more effective route.
BUT, we have yet to see how the House proceedings will go. I would honestly not be surprised if the whole impeachment thing gathers some steam among the party in the next year, depending on how the investigations go. (Also maybe protests against Mc Connell, I'm not convinced that enough people know that he's the prime mover in most of these cases. I'd like it if Democrats put a little more light on that part of the situation, honestly. It seems like the public both things the president is all powerful and blind to how other positions in the government are extremely powerful.)
At this point, going for impeachment does come across as carefree. It’s politically dangerous even the the best case scenario, has very little chance of succeeding, and doesn’t have significant public support. When (or if) the situation progresses, for example with upcoming cases and hearings, then it should be brought to the table.
Edited by archonspeaks on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:43:09 AM
They should have sent a poet.Dems should do everything in their power to find a great opponent for Mc Connell and then run a dynamite campaign. He’s very well funded but not invincible.
“Carefree” is not in any way, shape, or form an accurate summary of what I’ve posted here. I do not appreciate your mischaracterization.
Edited by wisewillow on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:43:57 AM
Even if you don't credit him with being stupid, he is extraordinarily childish and vindictive.
The scenario to me isn't - Trump states outright he won't leave office, it's Trump stating that he can't believe that he is being forced out of office by traitors and criminals, thus inciting violence.
Edited by nombretomado on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:44:11 AM
It depends on how exactly you think he'd react. Him throwing a tantrum and refusing to leave office, only to be dragged by the secret service doesn't seem that unlikely to me.
They're working on it, but they don't have a definitive candidate yet.
There's a famous DJ and radio personality who's interested in running and seems like maybe he could have a shot because he's reasonably well-liked, but he's waiting to see if Amy Mc Grath will run or not before he commits 100%.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Apr 19th 2019 at 9:47:56 AM
Shoot, I had an internet friend who was seriously suggesting to me once that BUSH would declare martial law or some shit to stay in office. I'll believe it when I see it. (Not that I think Trump would leave gracefully, but there isn't anything he can legally do to not leave office if he's voted out or simply serves two terms.)
And Democrats haven't been doing this already? Dems have denounced Trump at every turn without trying to impeach him, but what, an impeachment hearing is supposed to make it "official"?
Also, as I've said, the general public will not see a "moral stand". They will see that Dems couldn't oust Trump and think them to be useless, and may even it out the next election for all we know.
A "moral stand" is worth bullfuck nothing if the guy who wouldn't know morals if it grabbed him by the balls is still in office, resuming business as usual when all's said and done.
And if you're the type to say that a failed impeachment will bring swaths of angry Democratic voters to the polls in 2020, you are demonstrating a generous amount of faith in the American people.
Edited by PhysicalStamina on Apr 19th 2019 at 9:48:45 AM
i'm tired, my friendCarefree is putting a doomed moral stand over impeachment over actual political progress, and most likely screwing Dems in the process. And in anger that’s what a lot of people seem to be doing.
Again, when the situation progresses then impeachment should be brought back up. At this point it’s simply not a realistic, or useful, path forward.
Edited by archonspeaks on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:46:58 AM
They should have sent a poet.I do think we might be talking in too many absolutes here. The only thing we can be (probably) be absolutely certain of is that if Trump is impeached, he won't be convicted with the Senate being how it is. Anything else is just speculation that could go either way.
At that point it just becomes about whether you're willing to take a risk on whether the symbolic stand will help or hurt in the long run.
It's interesting how, as far as I can tell, no one has argued that it wouldn't primarily be a symbolic stand, though.
@Wisewillow: Going by what Charles has said of his state, that's easier said than done. Like, by an entire planet's worth of miles. A better solution is basically get out the vote in 2020 to vote more Democrats into office in general so that a Democrat is the Senate Majority Leader and forcing Mc Connell into a less influential role.
You really want to utter that sentence?
I suspect that the Secret Service are good enough at their job that it would come to nothing, they’d bundle Trump into a car and drive him back to Trump Tower, likely with nobody noticing.
My real concern is the damage he’d do on the way out, Trump is incredibly petty, he’d have the full power of the president for almost three months and nothing to do with said power but try and make a mess for his successor.
Most legal things would probably be stopped by people refusing to follow order, but I’m not ruling out Trump trying to start a spite war via twitter so as to get at his successor.
I’m also not ruling out supper petty stuff, you ever heard the stories of shitty tenants being evicted and the damage they do on their way out? I’m talking that kind of stuff, shit in the resolute desk, a fire in the Lincoln bedroom, broken mirrors in the residence, real petty shit.
Edited by Silasw on Apr 19th 2019 at 1:54:18 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranI don't think calling each other cowards or carefree is exceptionally helpful. I would hope that even if you come to a different conclusion to at least try to understand why one may come to a different conclusion. Pragmatism and visionary acts both are needed in politics, and I find it narrow minded to believe otherwise.
Don't catch you slippin' now.I think the main issue is figuring out which act is More pragmatic than the other. I'd find the impeachment accusations more pragmatic and calculated than not doing it, but hey.
Read my stories!And I, for one, cannot stress enough how tired I am of "symbolic" stands and victories. I want some fucking concrete results already.
This goes beyond impeachments. How am I supposed to care about some bill, for example, that a House Dem is propsing when I know it's dead in the Senate before it even gets there? Sure, it has a lot of good things in it and it'll probably boost their cred, but since it has no chance of becoming law under this Congress, I'm just left wondering what the point is.
I'm tired of having to settle for Dems looking like the good guys. I want good shit to happen.
Edited by PhysicalStamina on Apr 19th 2019 at 9:53:56 AM
i'm tired, my friendI mean, there is the old trope " evil only has to succeed once" and you can argue it follows the same logic of a lot of bills. Most will fail, but even one succeeding is better than not trying. —shrug—
Read my stories!

OK.
Things are getting fairly close to heated.
Please be mindful moving forward. It's not as if the goals here are different, even as the opinions regarding impeachment are.
Let's not eat each other, alright?
ETA: love a good page-topper.
Edited by nombretomado on Apr 19th 2019 at 6:31:55 AM