Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

by **momadance** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 14:45:50

"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office." -Little Marco

by **CalvinBall** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 14:49:49

JUburton wrote:It doesn't matter. There are no repercussions.

Can work and knock doors and hand out lit and phone bank to give Ds a better shot at taking the majority.

by **CalvinBall** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 14:52:01

Nadler not there today. Home with his wife who has cancer. Have to imagine that played into his I am closing this moment last night.

by **thephan** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:03:03

so with a no vote on witnesses the STOU turns into a victory party

by **thephan** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:07:47

Marco Rubio - “Six weeks ago I announced that, for me, the question would not just be whether the President’s actions were wrong, but ultimately whether what he did was removable,” he writes. “The two are not the same. Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office.”

------------

"The House chose to send articles of impeachment that are rushed and flawed," Murkowski said in a statement. "I carefully considered the need for additional witnesses and documents, to cure the shortcomings of its process, but ultimately decided that I will vote against considering motions to subpoena."

She added, "Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don't believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed."

Look, they are who you thought they were

by **Werthless** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:08:52

How do we have an impeachment and trial of a sitting President where the president is not subject to discovery, is not put under oath for written or oral testimony, and can reject subpoenas for his staff to testify. What a farce. Nixon would have skated under these rules.

by **CalvinBall** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:14:29

Werthless wrote:How do we have an impeachment and trial of a sitting President where the president is not subject to discovery, is not put under oath for written or oral testimony, and can reject subpoenas for his staff to testify. What a farce. Nixon would have skated under these rules.

AND one of his lead counsel was literally in the room when the ukraine pressure campaign was started. v cool.

by **Soren** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:22:02

I mean. w/e. Is there a point in pretending like this is still a government in any way concerned with representing the people?

by **philliesphhan** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 15:34:06

CalvinBall wrote:He used the sure it was wrong but there's an election soon argument. Man these people are fucking awful.

"Sure, he was trying to rig the election again but let's wait for the election" is such a fucking ridiculous take. I really don't know how we've gotten here as a country but like 35% of the country apparently needs to be committed

by **momadance** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 16:04:01

Hope the next Democrat President goes scorched fucking earth. Do whatever you want.

by **traderdave** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 16:15:16

momadance wrote:Hope the next Democrat President goes scorched #$!&@ earth. Do whatever you want.

Well, the parameters set by the GOP through this process essentially mean that when the WH and the Senate are aligned, the President, short of murdering someone, has carte blanche. And I am even questioning that exception at this point.

by **The B1G Piece** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 16:17:44

I wish these spineless senators would get more angry at a corrupt president rather than said corrupt president threatening them if they didn't comply and get called out by Adam Schiff. Fucking pathetic.

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 16:24:35

The B1G Piece wrote:I wish these spineless senators would get more angry at a corrupt president rather than said corrupt president threatening them if they didn't comply and get called out by Adam Schiff. Fucking pathetic.

The calculus for any GOP senator is simple: are the consequences for me personally more dire if I stick with the President, or vote the facts?

The bulk of them are practicing self-preservation:

62% of Trump voters say nothing he could do would change their opinion

These are called primary voters. Mitt Romney is a hero - because he is senator from Utah, where Trump is significantly disliked for a pure red state. If he were a senator from the South or most of the rust belt, his moral courage would evaporate.

Well, maybe not him, he's got his $$$$. But for most of them - yep.

by **TenuredVulture** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 16:50:07

If I'm right, and I'm probably not, these Senators aren't even putting party before country. What I'm getting at is that I still think long term, Trumpism is going to be the end of the Republican Party. Even if Trump himself holds his base, the problem for the Republicans eventually (if we make it that far) he's going to die one day and his personality cult dies with him. There's simply no one else out there who can do what Trump has done.

by **thephan** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:01:29

First I've heard any of the trail live in two days. Bad time to jump in. Seklow is making an insipid argument. Basically saying that he needs to cross everyone and anyone who the house deposed. His method, delivery, and repetitiveness is painful. I am not even sure you talk to a child this way to get your point across.

by **CalvinBall** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:04:30

our only hope

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/12 ... 3554709506

by **Grotewold** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:14:46

CalvinBall wrote:our only hope

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/12 ... 3554709506

damn

by **swishnicholson** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:15:14

Latest American Research Group poll for Iowa caucus, taken January 27-30. Interesting to me that Klobuchar has surged equal to or above Warren here. And how much old people dislike Sanders, though he leads by a fair margin in this poll..

by **slugsrbad** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:16:26

swishnicholson wrote:Latest American Research Group poll for Iowa caucus, taken January 27-30. Interesting to me that Klobuchar has surged equal to or above Warren here. And how much old people dislike Sanders, though he leads by a fair margin in this poll..

They're apparently a weird pollster. They had a Kasich surge in Iowa that never materialized.

by **swishnicholson** » Fri Jan 31, 2020 17:30:16

slugsrbad wrote:
swishnicholson wrote:Latest American Research Group poll for Iowa caucus, taken January 27-30. Interesting to me that Klobuchar has surged equal to or above Warren here. And how much old people dislike Sanders, though he leads by a fair margin in this poll..

They're apparently a weird pollster. They had a Kasich surge in Iowa that never materialized.

538 has them rated as a B. Yeah, be interested to know how others see it, but right now they're one of the few that are up to date. Definitely a Klobuchar surge out there (thanks, NYT!) but the degree to which it exists, and how or if it will be reflected in causcuses is certainly an unknown.

Archived

Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over

Re: Politics: Iowa-nt this to be over