Jump to content

Impeachment Hearings

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You feel I should be personally responsible for the Republicans?

No, republicans need to be personally responsible for their actions.

It's incumbent upon their supporters to assure they take personal responsibility.

The republicans did that to Nixon for the better of the party and the country and it's at the Republican's peril (not democrats) to think that's not the case today.

Share this post

Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rangerx said:

No, republicans need to be personally responsible for their actions.

It's incumbent upon their supporters to assure they take personal responsibility.

The republicans did that to Nixon for the better of the party and the country and it's at the Republican's peril (not democrats) to think that's not the case today.

I think the Democrats could make a better case for this if they were any better.

Trump is as much, or more, a symptom of the Democrat's apparent loathing of half their citizens than he is a symptom of the values of that other half.

Share this post

Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I think the Democrats could make a better case for this if they were any better.

Trump is as much, or more, a symptom of the Democrat's apparent loathing of half their citizens than he is a symptom of the values of that other half.

Nonsense.

Trump is corrupt because he's an asshole. It has nothing to do with democrats.

It's just a narrative to side step the issue and completely off topic.

Edited by rangerx

Share this post

Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Nonsense.

Trump is corrupt because he's an asshole. It has nothing to do with democrats.

It's just a narrative to side step the issue and completely off topic.

You seem to struggle with my intended context. Consistently. I can't believe it is entirely my fault.

Trump was Trump long before he became a democrat target.

15 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Trump is as much, or more, a symptom of the Democrat's apparent loathing of half their citizens than he is a symptom of the values of that other half.

Try reading that as "the election of Trump" was as much, or more, a symptom...

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post

Share on other sites
On 11/25/2019 at 2:10 AM, iNow said:

As far as I know, last week was the last of the currently scheduled hearings. Are you sure you have the date right, or maybe there’s a delay before you can see them in your country?

Are you questioning my fiber channel connection? Do you think my ping is higher then yours?!

Edited by koti

Share this post

Share on other sites

I think something (someone?) is higher than me

Share this post

Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, koti said:

Are you questioning my fiber channel connection? Do you think my ping is higher then yours?!

We can all use a little extra fibre right now...

Share this post

Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Trump was Trump long before he became a democrat target.

Try reading that as "the election of Trump" was as much, or more, a symptom...

Eeeny meenie minnie moe, because there's too many SWJs running the ship as opposed to we know Trump's a crook who'll throw out the rule book, so we can be crooks too?

Share this post

Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iNow said:

I think something (someone?) is higher than me

Yeah well, thats like your opinion man.

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

We can all use a little extra fibre right now...

I will use our Natuzzi since I'm not allowed to use the bed sometimes. Like tonight ( I worked the weekend)

Share this post

Share on other sites

And let us get back to the OP and Devin Nunes actual part in that.

Lev Parnas, the indicted friend of Rudy Giuliani, has now implicated Nunes in the Ukraine scheme.

Do you find a committee co-chair (or whatever his proper title) going to Vienna on taxpayer money to meet with an indicted conspirator at the very least a little disquieting?

Share this post

Share on other sites

I prefer to ask it this way: Would you be okay if Obama or Hillary or anyone from their team did any of these things?

Share this post

Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rangerx said:

Eeeny meenie minnie moe, because there's too many SWJs running the ship as opposed to we know Trump's a crook who'll throw out the rule book, so we can be crooks too?

I'm not a US citizen but it seemed like the last election went a bit like this:

"USA, this election you have to drink piss. We have this stale, slightly rancid cup of piss, very similar to the piss we've served for decades. It's not particularly palatable to many of you, but we know what we're getting and if you hold your nose as you sip, you'll be fine for the next four years. Or we have this big gulp of steaming walrus piss. It smells awful and it might give you syphilis, but honestly, we're really not sure what it's going to do."

"Give us the Walrus big gulp. We're sick of being fed the same old piss. Drain the Walrus! Lock up the cup!"

"OK..."

Now we're three years into the Walrus piss big gulp. It's been a ride. Some of us are tripping balls and think the walrus piss is better than champagne, even though we might actually have mouth chlamydia and explosive diarrhea. Some of us hated it from day one. Many of us are not yet ready to go back to the same old, lobbyist corrupted, stale piss we had before, and want to swig more Walrus piss just to see where we end up.

So now we're doing an MIC test on the Walrus piss to see if should even be an option.

Share this post

Share on other sites

Technically, 3 Million more people chose the same old piss, but a broken plumbing system led to the walrus piss being crammed down our throats... though I certainly take your point.

Share this post

Share on other sites
On 11/24/2019 at 2:32 PM, MonDie said:

Here is a battle plan.

1.  We rule by consensus, and we have consensus goals for society.

Except we don't.

Gerrymandering skews representation, and voter suppression means that our representation (the rule) is not representative of the people. To some extent we rule by consensus of representation.

But people have rights that can't be abrogated by this consensus. It's one reason Trump has often been a loser in court after trying to implement policy based on GOP "consensus"

Share this post

Share on other sites

Even a great society sometimes needs a restart, if only we had an off switch.

impeachment is a diagnostic tool that suggests we need a restart.

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post

Share on other sites
4 hours ago, swansont said:

Except we don't.

Gerrymandering skews representation, and voter suppression means that our representation (the rule) is not representative of the people. To some extent we rule by consensus of representation.

But people have rights that can't be abrogated by this consensus. It's one reason Trump has often been a loser in court after trying to implement policy based on GOP "consensus"

That makes it a top-down consensus rather than a bottom-up consensus.  See #2.  If nobody respected a law, nobody would uphold it.  See prohibition.  P.S. I might have included this link about another way to manipulate consensus:  Trump Jrs NYT Bestseller Scam Confirmed

I think you might have been onto the same idea with "consensus of representation."

Again, this top-down influence is upheld through bottom-up support, and we might defy it if we learned that what we accepted by default was actually deeply flawed.  In reality, our low-level social affairs tend to be guided by why a thing was wrong, whereas we will accept that lawfully illegal behavior is wrong - by default - without any reason why it should be wrong.

P.S. you might not have seen this if you're watching mainstream media.  MSM'S Embarrassing impeachment Coverage.  Oh, and Bezos and Amazon making the faulty facial recognition tech used by ICE (Beyond The Valley).

... Wrong video link...

Share this post

Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 1:56 PM, J.C.MacSwell said:

Trump is as much, or more, a symptom of the Democrat's apparent loathing of half their citizens than he is a symptom of the values of that other half.

Trump's base is about 1/3 of US citizens.  To this 1/3 base, it no longer matters what Trump says or does.  They simply LIKE HIS ACT.  They appreciate an entertaining con, like fans of pro wrestling.

Trump is now setting a NEW standard.   IF a political party has control of congress and the presidency, then the president should have the license to lie constantly.  The ends (make America great) justify the means (constant lying).  Burn the constitution and bring on the new dictator for life.

Edited by Airbrush

Share this post

Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Trump's base is about 1/3 of US citizens.  To this 1/3 base, it no longer matters what Trump says or does.  They simply LIKE HIS ACT.  They appreciate an entertaining con, like fans of pro wrestling.

...and why do they like his act?

Do you think calling this third of Americans racist and deplorable might weigh in on it...for them and other Americans that see it, at least in part, as self righteous and self serving?

43 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Trump is now setting a NEW standard.   IF a political party has control of congress and the presidency, then the president should have the license to lie constantly.  The ends (make America great) justify the means (constant lying).  Burn the constitution and bring on the new dictator for life.

Right. Should be easy to make America a better offer. Like...really easy.

Share this post

Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

...and why do they like his act?

Do you think calling this third of Americans racist and deplorable might weigh in on it...for them and other Americans that see it, at least in part, as self righteous and self serving?

Right. Should be easy to make America a better offer. Like...really easy.

So long as 1/3 of the population never gets past being criticized for their speech and behavior (often absent of so-called personal responsibility), they're the ones holding everyone else back. Moving on means.... actually moving on.

That's what happened when conservatives dropped the progressive part of their agenda. As a Canadian, that ought to be glaringly obvious.

Share this post

Share on other sites
20 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Do you think calling this third of Americans racist and deplorable might weigh in on it...for them and other Americans that see it, at least in part, as self righteous and self serving?

Honey attracts more flies then Vinegar.

20 hours ago, Airbrush said:

Trump is now setting a NEW standard.   IF a political party has control of congress and the presidency, then the president should have the license to lie constantly.

Nothing is new here.

(Numbers from Politifact)

Obama told the Truth/Mostly the truth only 47% of the time.

Trump tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 15% of the time.

Hillary Clinton tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 49% of the time.

Bill Clinton tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 47% of the time.

Nancy Pelosi tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 25% of the time.

Mitch McConnel tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 36% of the time.

Elizabeth Warren tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 52% of the time.

Joe Biden tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 37% of the time.

A single person on this list of some high profile political candidates tells the truth more then half the time. And even then, by a pathetic 2%. Never be surprised if a politician lies. It's not some new standard, it's just the way things are.

Some people will look at this list and be like "Hey! My candidate only lies x% of the time, and XYZ lies >x% of the time."

I really don't care. Until these numbers start creeping towards the 90%-95% range, hell, even the low 80s range, it's just plain disgusting.

Would you be friends with somebody who told you the truth only 75% of the time, let alone less then half?

18 hours ago, rangerx said:

So long as 1/3 of the population never gets past being criticized for their speech and behavior (often absent of so-called personal responsibility), they're the ones holding everyone else back. Moving on means.... actually moving on.

This is a broad, sweeping generalization of 100 million people that is lacking evidence.

20 hours ago, Airbrush said:

To this 1/3 base, it no longer matters what Trump says or does.  They simply LIKE HIS ACT.  They appreciate an entertaining con, like fans of pro wrestling.

This is also a broad, sweeping generalization of 100 million people that is lacking evidence.

Vast majority of Trump supports I know usually lament about how much of an absolute asshole he is. Some support him mostly because they don't like the other party. Some support him because they lost their jobs due to Democratic policies(or due to them believing thats why they lost it). Some support him because they wanted to see something different. Some support him because they think his policies are better. Some support him merely because of his position on Abortion. Some support him merely because of his position on Guns. Etc. 100 million people certainly don't support Trump simply because "they appreciate an entertaining con". And the faster the democratic party realizes and understands this, the faster they can begin making headway in shifting public support behind impeaching this man.

If impeaching Trump is the way to go, and i think it is, it will not be accomplished by dismissing the opinions of 1/3rd of the population with a wave of the hand and a muttering of "Racist Idiots."

Edited by Raider5678

Share this post

Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

If impeaching Trump is the way to go, and i think it is, it will not be accomplished by dismissing the opinions of 1/3rd of the population with a wave of the hand and a muttering of "Racist Idiots."

Indeed, but what mutterings would you prefer?

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post

Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Honey attracts more flies then Vinegar.

I seriously doubt that this is what's keeping 1/3 of Americans from embracing the democrats. Trying to be nice hasn't gotten results.

19 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Nothing is new here.

(Numbers from Politifact)

Obama told the Truth/Mostly the truth only 47% of the time.

Trump tells the Truth/Mostly the truth only 15% of the time.

Airbrush's statement was "the president should have the license to lie constantly" and you 1) aren't citing the statistics on lying, and 2) are omitting one of the categories on truth (which makes Trump look even worse, as he scores but 14%, while Obama scores 26%)

Trump: 71% mostly false + lie + pants on fire

Obama: 25% mostly false + lie + pants on fire

Bill Clinton: 24% mostly false + lie + pants on fire

Can't find a scorecard for GW Bush

The others aren't presidents

Share this post

Share on other sites
22 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Do you think calling this third of Americans racist and deplorable might weigh in on it...for them and other Americans that see it, at least in part, as self righteous and self serving?

Racism is a complicated and often misunderstood concept. However, specific to the 2016 electorate an increasing body of literature (I have referenced a number of those elsewhere) suggest that racial resentment, anti-immigrant sentiments and sexism are major predictors for Trump voters. That does not mean that all of them harbour racist tendencies, but it is a stronger indicator than other parameters typical for protest voters (such as distrust for politicians, dissatisfication with democracy) or economic hardship. A study from Mutz showed, for example that folks actually losing jobs or were impacted by stagnant wages were not the ones most likely to vote Trump. Rather, folks that felt under threat by social change (e.g. those that think that white folks are more discriminated against). The studies also imply that actual economic improvement will not change sentiments and indicates that the "left-behind-theory" most commonly presented by the media will not really address the needs of a significant size of the voters. Other studies also found that anti-establishment sentiments ("drain the swamp", hostility against "elites")

While it does not mean that it is a third (or more or less) of Trump voters, but it means that they are biggest coherent group driving the election for Republicans.  There is of course a big chunk of partisanship voters, who will vote Republican regardless of the candidate, those may or may not fall into the above group, but certainly they are not sufficiently adverse to them, nor are they a viable group for recruitment for the opposing party, either.

Thus, these sentiments are major drivers of elections , even if it may be considered distasteful to be discussed publicly, compared to other narratives. This poses a fundamental problem in politics as it there are likely only a limited number of ways to engage with these voters, which, as the stats show, were key to the 2016 election.

One, is to pretend that these issues do not exist or engage in alternative narratives, such as the "left-behind" or "we are better" rhetoric (which to some degree seems to be the case with the Democratic party) and pretty much lose this voter potential. The basic idea is probably to split off those that vote Republicans for other reasons, but it is unclear whether that would be numerically relevant (or even possible).

Another one is to engage and demonstrate overlapping values (which happened in 2016 and it appears to be even stronger in 2020 in the Republican party) and thereby capture that voter base. That is not really that new, it is more that at least overt anti-immigrant sentiments have been retreating from the Democratic party (which makes them unvotable for said part of the electorate). That has the advantage of not rallying the base, but also recruit otherwise Democratic voters which harbour similar sentiments (a bit of that was observed also under Obama).

There are indeed papers looking into vote switching and found that in that group again, racial and immigration attitudes were the key factors (Reny et al. Pub Op Quart, 2019 83:1) and that these attitudes sort White voters into increasingly polarized groups.

However, Democrats cannot (luckily?) play the same game, as they would then more likely lose a significant chunk of minority voters, which have become a crucial voter base for them.

In other words, playing up racial sentiments are a win-win game for Republicans and lose-lose for Democrats (even mentioning racism in whatever context is often enough to shore up resentment). This, incidentally, is a sentiment that Bannon picked up and tries to sell hard as election strategy (not only in the US, but also in Europe, where we see similar mechanisms at play).

Share this post

Share on other sites
On 11/29/2019 at 8:23 AM, Raider5678 said:
Vast majority of Trump supports I know usually lament about how much of an absolute asshole he is.  Some support him mostly because they don't like the other party.  Some support him because they lost their jobs due to Democratic policies (or due to them believing that's why they lost it).  Some support him because they wanted to see something different.  Some support him because they think his policies are better.  Some support him merely because of his position on Abortion. Some support him merely because of his position on Guns. Etc. 100 million people certainly don't support Trump simply because "they appreciate an entertaining con". And the faster the democratic party realizes and understands this, the faster they can begin making headway in shifting public support behind impeaching this man.

If impeaching Trump is the way to go, and i think it is, it will not be accomplished by dismissing the opinions of 1/3rd of the population with a wave of the hand and a muttering of "Racist Idiots."

I never ever heard ANY lamenting about Trump being an ahole on Fox news during the last 3 years.  I check on them periodically.  Fox News and Trump supporters simply ignore his obnoxious mannerisms.  To them it looks normal because in their local bar there is someone with a big mouth like that.  They think Trump is funny, just Trump being Trump, big deal.

I agree that people voted for Trump NOT ONLY because he is a skilled con, although that WAS clearly a factor.  But it is more than just agreeing on policy.  It is a personality cult, and members are trying to ignore reality, watch only Fox News or listen to Rush, and accept Trump's delusional interpretations.  "Don't believe the lame stream media, believe me!"

Edited by Airbrush

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
• Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.