especially when it is taken at gospel and accepted at face value without any consideration of what we are advocating for, compared to what the Republicans are advocating for.
that they would only support it if the public and minimum amount of GOPers support it? In that case, he might as well say that he just won't do it because if those are his standards, that ain't never happening. Which raises another question, is it Congress' job to act as our representatives and lead and do things that are potentially unpopular or controversial- or are they just supposed to just follow the polls and do things only if most of them are in agreement or if the votes are already there?
I hear this so frequently but I'm very unclear as to the actual reasoning behind it. I think that Pelosi, et. al argue that the Clinton Impeachment hurt the Republicans in the 1998 midterms, although I feel like that situation wouldn't be analogous, because Republicans were going way overboard on it with the Lewinsky-related perjury charge whereas I don't think that people will see Impeachment charges against Trump as being as "trumped up" (pun intended). Also, as a counterargument to impeachment, some people say that Trump will be "vindicated" or "exonerated" because the Senate would never vote to convict and, while I get that on some logical level, I don't understand why refusing to impeach him doesn't do the same exact thing (or worse). Impeachment (even without conviction) would IMHO, like with Clinton, leave a black mark on his Presidency and he would have the notoriety of being one of only four Presidents in American History to have been charged with it. I'm interested in hearing everybody's thoughts on this.
and if so, why? Legitimately curious about this, since I've heard it talked a lot about in terms of not impeaching Trump. Most polling I've seen has him around low-to-mid forties with still 50+% disapproving of him (which is pretty much where he has been sitting nearly his entire Presidency- with some variance). Is that not still the case?
have some new unreported explosive information about the FBI, what are they waiting for?
once we are back in control of both chambers and Presidency?
One MAJOR thing IMHO we need to instutionalize (write into law) IMHO is ensuring that the Senate leadership can't unilaterally decide to ignore/table a Supreme Court nomination for as long as a particular person is President. At the minimum, the Senate should be REQUIRED to hold the requisite hearings and hold final votes. Obviously, if a Supreme Court Justice dies a day or two before a new one is inaugurated, I get that this can't realistically happen, but, obviously, there is no excuse for not filling a vacant seat with more than a half of a year left in a sitting President's term. Personally, I also think that something has to be done to redress the wrong that President Obama suffered by being denied a final pick for SCOTUS. I'm in favor of adding a new seat for the new Democratic President to fill.
Any other thoughts or ideas? Should we reinstate the filibuster for Judges/nominees?
None of our bills are going anywhere in the Senate and the House just voted for the Senate's "no strings" Immigration funding bill. And the ACA? Nothing we can do to fix it while the Senate sits on its hands and Trump is President anyway. And whether or not anybody "voted for" Impeachment, that doesn't mean that we just ignore wrongdoing by this (mis-)Administration.
are also taking derogatory swings at "The Squad", which is equally reprehensible IMHO, because they make it seem like he was justified in his comments (and is still based on racism IMHO)
Trumpublicans frequently govern as though they are the only ones whom matter in this country and pretty much ignore or squelch any dissent. We see this on a smaller scale in many states as well. While some people can and do move to other areas in the country, it is prohibitive in several ways for many of us to do so and, frankly, things shouldn't be so bad that somebody feels that they should *have* to move from where they are born and raised their entire lives- if they want to stay put. The problem that I see is that, in some areas, people's true needs and grievances aren't being adequately addressed and their leaders, instead of trying harder to listen, basically shut them down and make it so that they can't express themselves politically by gerrymandering and other forms of voter suppression. Local communities try to exert themselves and state governments turn around and shut them down. The ultimate point is that we all should have the ability to express ourselves politically and work to make our environments, states, communities better for ourselves and others and that "just leaving" isn't a realistic solution for most people.
Profile InformationName: Mara Alis Butler
Hometown: Indianapolis, Indiana
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Member since: Sat Feb 28, 2004, 12:13 AM
Number of posts: 24,196
About Mad_Machine76Transgender Woman /Social Worker/Case Manager working for State of Indiana. Huge Sci-Fi/Anime Geek and music lover. Hopeless \"political junkie\" and aspiring writer.
- 2023 (42)
- 2022 (84)
- 2021 (111)
- 2020 (95)
- 2019 (141)
- 2018 (176)
- 2017 (254)
- 2016 (163)
- 2015 (267)
- 2014 (447)
- 2013 (374)
- 2012 (755)
- 2011 (36)
- December (36)