General Discussion

uponit7771

(92,206 posts)

146. +1

Reply to gulliver (Reply #143)

Mon Jul 29, 2019, 08:18 PM

Jul 2019

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

190 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why is there an assumption that Impeaching Trump would HELP Trump? [View all] Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 OP

Makes no sense to me. Goodheart Jul 2019 #1

I cannot understand that rationale either... kentuck Jul 2019 #2

Well, if we go ahead with it Bettie Jul 2019 #5

I think it's because the senate won't convict, regardless of the evidence. rsdsharp Jul 2019 #3

This. NurseJackie Aug 2019 #185

It defintely helped Pres Clinton . . . Iliyah Jul 2019 #4

I agree customerserviceguy Jul 2019 #94

because the idiot media is under trump's thrall EveHammond13 Jul 2019 #6

Just for me wryter2000 Jul 2019 #7

So, you're just arguing for a slower roll? Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #9

Yes, scandals and investigations during an election year never helps incumbent uponit7771 Jul 2019 #18

Trump really could shoot someone and his base will stick by him. wasupaloopa Jul 2019 #102

His "base" wasn't enough to get him elected last time the dem base revolvted and 3rd parties uponit7771 Jul 2019 #103

it would 100% HELP Trump ! stonecutter357 Jul 2019 #8

There's no historical truth to that not at all. Dams didn't control the government for two election uponit7771 Jul 2019 #19

Every situation is different onenote Jul 2019 #21

Republicans did NOT take a hit, they stayed in control of the government. Gaining or losing uponit7771 Jul 2019 #23

Yes it is taking a hit Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #137

Again the context is controlling a branch of the government not gaining or losing seats uponit7771 Jul 2019 #141

That maybe your bar Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #142

That's realities bar, you don't control a branch of the government by just losing or gaining seats uponit7771 Jul 2019 #144

Again that is your bar Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #150

OK, the constitution does not assign control of a branch of government just off gaining or losing uponit7771 Jul 2019 #151

Actually Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #154

The impeachment vote on Clinton was in December of 1998 NewJeffCT Jul 2019 #46

+1, controlling the government is the goal not just gaining seats uponit7771 Jul 2019 #57

The OP was asking for explanation/rationale/logic for the argument. honest.abe Jul 2019 #82

!@#$%&*()_++-;:'"/?. stonecutter357 Jul 2019 #132

LOL.. honest.abe Jul 2019 #133

Because impeachment without removal will be viewed as a vindication of trump Gothmog Jul 2019 #10

Trump will say it's a vindication even if he's hauled off to jail in the orange jumpsuit in front of uponit7771 Jul 2019 #20

But in the real world, impeachment without removal could help trump win re-election Gothmog Jul 2019 #26

So, are Democrats like Peterson seriously saying Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #28

I do not want to give the GOP control of the House Gothmog Jul 2019 #42

What is driving the assumption that this *will* happen? Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #52

Nothing, no historical precedence ... NOTHING. uponit7771 Jul 2019 #63

Polling data says that this stunt will hurt Democrats in swing districts Gothmog Jul 2019 #68

Same as Nixon's post Saturday Night Massacre. Again, there's no precedence where impeachment has uponit7771 Jul 2019 #71

Yes there is polling that shows that Democrats could lose swing districts due to this stunt Gothmog Jul 2019 #64

Ok. Well there's that I suppose Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #70

It doesn't, the polling posted was from republicans not some trusted source and pre Nixon polling uponit7771 Jul 2019 #75

We are hopeful of flipping six seats in Texas Gothmog Jul 2019 #76

Bunk polling "...PER NEW GOP POLLING..." really !??! We're supposed to trust any of that?! tia uponit7771 Jul 2019 #73

This message was self-deleted by its author Gothmog Jul 2019 #77

Why do we want to put swing House seats at risk for a stunt that will not work? Gothmog Jul 2019 #78

Based on KGOP polling !?!?!? AGAIN, !?!? You're source is sourcing theHill.com!!!! WTF !? Seriously? uponit7771 Jul 2019 #85

Honey, The Hill is cited all the time on DU. You're reaching... ehrnst Jul 2019 #178

Agree with your assessment totally Thekaspervote Jul 2019 #104

There's no precedence where impeachment has helped a party control any branch of government ... uponit7771 Jul 2019 #62

In the real world, the polling shows that this stunt could cost the Democrats control of the House Gothmog Jul 2019 #79

Bunk ***GOP POLLING***, Again... who in their right mind trust that?! You're source is theHill.com!? uponit7771 Jul 2019 #81

Feel free to ignore the facts but I do not want to give the GOP control of the House Gothmog Jul 2019 #83

There are no facts with ***REPUBLICAN POLLING !!! *** uponit7771 Jul 2019 #88

Sweetie, if you bothered to read the source... ehrnst Jul 2019 #177

I do declah, Goth! You have given someone the very vapahs! ehrnst Jul 2019 #179

The Hill being cited right here on DU? Perish the very thought!!! ehrnst Jul 2019 #180

Trump absolutely dreads being impeached, watoos Jul 2019 #11

What do you think he would do if impeached? ehrnst Jul 2019 #38

Sit on thumbs brutus smith Jul 2019 #44

"Sit on thumbs" ehrnst Jul 2019 #95

Correctly timed? he'd look at his poll numbers tank along with the people who enable him. uponit7771 Jul 2019 #93

Yes, Correctly timed.(nt) ehrnst Jul 2019 #114

OK, is your position that there should be NO impeachment or correctly timed impeachment? tia uponit7771 Jul 2019 #127

No. That is not correct. ehrnst Jul 2019 #148

So no Impeachment? tia uponit7771 Jul 2019 #149

If you read my post you would know that's not correct. Nice try at a straw man, though. ehrnst Jul 2019 #157

Soooooo impeachment at the right time? uponit7771 Jul 2019 #162

*If* there is a right time, where the benefits would outweigh the drawbacks ehrnst Jul 2019 #170

you stated this a number of times stopdiggin Jul 2019 #51

I think many want it because of it would be a catharsis for them. ehrnst Jul 2019 #131

+1, not only that look at Red Dons hysteria post beginning of the impeachment process uponit7771 Jul 2019 #65

I originally thought that based upon the Clinton impeachment aftermath. Vinca Jul 2019 #12

that is my fear as well Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #32

I have not met a SINGLE voter that would meet that definition stopdiggin Jul 2019 #56

Neither have I Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #139

What evidence is there for that? Trumpocalypse Jul 2019 #138

I think the sooner the better for Trump.. stillcool Jul 2019 #13

Because HE started that assumption and controls the narrative. Claritie Pixie Jul 2019 #14

Who knows with this crazy felon - But here's a Help/Hurt analysis Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #15

Thanks for the thoughtful response. Caliman73 Jul 2019 #25

+1 Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #34

He would claim "exoneration" when the Senate refuses to remove him. ehrnst Jul 2019 #39

He'll claim that anyway, he already has with the Mueller report. He's not sane, so there's no uponit7771 Jul 2019 #67

Actually this discussion is very much about what Trump will or will not do. ehrnst Jul 2019 #159

He'll do crazy crap ... That we know uponit7771 Jul 2019 #161

He seems to get crazier as he feels more cornered. (nt) ehrnst Jul 2019 #171

Way over thinking it :) Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #153

Just because I'm not wringing my hands in despair doesn't mean I'm overthinking it. ehrnst Jul 2019 #158

Instead of tearing into what I said, it would be much Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #155

Would you be helpful and explain to all of us what "the help him position" is? ehrnst Jul 2019 #160

Defend not impeaching please. It is super easy Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #165

So Democrats/Dem leaders who are not calling for impeachment are "helping Trump?" ehrnst Jul 2019 #166

Waiting for your defence points of no Impeachment Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #168

Is that a yes or no? Seems like a simple question. (nt) ehrnst Jul 2019 #169

Crickets... I guess that means the answer is yes. (nt) ehrnst Jul 2019 #172

It sure does seem like you are having a hard time Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #173

You sure are having a hard time with a simple question... ehrnst Jul 2019 #175

You're correct Laura brutus smith Jul 2019 #48

Limp ehrnst Jul 2019 #156

Please defend your position not to impeach Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #174

Please clarify the statement I asked you to clarify before you started evading ehrnst Jul 2019 #176

Get your pro-do-not-impeach defense out there Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2019 #181

Still evading the question, I see. ehrnst Aug 2019 #182

I give up. Doesn't sound like any of us will ever know Laura PourMeADrink Aug 2019 #183

Still won't answer the question. Afraid to? ehrnst Aug 2019 #184

More obfuscation. Just defend your side...think plenty Laura PourMeADrink Aug 2019 #186

See post #187 and #170, then answer my question. If you have the courage. ehrnst Aug 2019 #188

Here's an example setting up a faulty premise or false dilemma, and why it usually fails ehrnst Aug 2019 #187

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2019 #59

The reasoning goes like this: If the Republican majority in the Senate vote against removing Nitram Jul 2019 #16

Presumably Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #24

Raised Clinton's popularity but what did it do for the elections? Caliman73 Jul 2019 #33

The Senate trial was after the election FBaggins Jul 2019 #84

This should be its own OP !! uponit7771 Jul 2019 #96

(asterisks) statistical improbability of a party holding the WH for more than 2 terms, Nader ehrnst Jul 2019 #167

Impeachment has never been a positive for the impeached for the control of government ***NEVER*** uponit7771 Jul 2019 #17

Nor was the fact that all of those impeached were in their parties' second term in the WH. ehrnst Jul 2019 #29

Irrelevant, there are no party term limits in any branch of the US government uponit7771 Jul 2019 #31

Um... you base your assumptions on history, yes? ehrnst Jul 2019 #47

No, facts ... there are no party limits for any branch of the government and there have been parties uponit7771 Jul 2019 #53

Fact: there is no restriction on a party from winning the WH again after impeachment ehrnst Jul 2019 #115

We agree, impeachment has historically made gaining control of branches of government harde uponit7771 Jul 2019 #126

Actually, I don't know how much of a factor it was in subsequent elections, ehrnst Jul 2019 #129

No, not at the beginning for Nixon or Clinton ... the public did not want them out. It was after uponit7771 Jul 2019 #130

Straw man. Never said there were. ehrnst Jul 2019 #98

Irrelevant. Impeachment has never disqualifed a party for a 3rd term in the WH **NEVER*** ehrnst Jul 2019 #49

Strawman, never said it did uponit7771 Jul 2019 #90

Because Bill Clinton DeminPennswoods Jul 2019 #22

It may help the GOP in a few ways if it's timed badly. ehrnst Jul 2019 #27

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2019 #35

So, are there any other ways to meaningfully hold him accountable? Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #36

Calling him out like Democrats are doing, continuing the investigations. ehrnst Jul 2019 #43

If he is as unstable as your comments portray him as (and I agree with you) Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #54

One can leave an abuser. We can't leave this one until 2021. ehrnst Jul 2019 #58

I've never been in an actual abusive situation (personally) Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #66

What "Something" exactly? ehrnst Jul 2019 #105

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2019 #99

Meaningfully being Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #60

So how does impeachment as a political process hold him "more accountable" ehrnst Jul 2019 #106

Impeachment historically reduces the impeached polling numbers when done correctly uponit7771 Jul 2019 #69

what do you mean by "done correctly?" And how would it be "done incorrectly?" ehrnst Jul 2019 #107

Right timing during an election year uponit7771 Jul 2019 #122

Nixon's numbers were OK before Saturday night massacre uponit7771 Jul 2019 #123

Again, we are fortunate that it is Speaker Pelosi who is making this call Gothmog Jul 2019 #121

More republican polling numbers ?! Really ?! uponit7771 Jul 2019 #124

We are fortunate that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are calling the shots here Gothmog Jul 2019 #136

If I had to choose anyone to be Speaker right now, based on resume and recommendations, it would be ehrnst Aug 2019 #189

Pelosi is amazing Gothmog Aug 2019 #190

It is evidence free, fear based defeatism nt Fiendish Thingy Jul 2019 #30

+1 Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #37

On whose part? Speaker Pelosi's? The majority of Dems in congress? ehrnst Jul 2019 #41

I was replying to the OP nt Fiendish Thingy Jul 2019 #116

+1, there are few if any factual political reasons against impeachment uponit7771 Jul 2019 #80

Because you say they're not factual? ehrnst Jul 2019 #108

No, reality says they're factual ... and :rolleyes: uponit7771 Jul 2019 #128

They are afraid of the "poor baby" effect. Kablooie Jul 2019 #40

I think it would be more like "The Dems are attacking US!" (nt) ehrnst Jul 2019 #45

"Leave Trump alone!!! Wah!!!" Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #55

Politics is complicated. Caliman73 Jul 2019 #50

to me the difference is while Bill's single downfall was "getting caught with his pants down", he onetexan Jul 2019 #113

It will help him by getting this all out of the way well before the election StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #61

I'm ok if there is a plan and timing must be factored in Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #74

Sharon their plan with you for me who - for even they have a plan - StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #87

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2019 #92

Polling shows that this stunt will hurt Democrats in swing districts Gothmog Jul 2019 #72

-1, this "polling" is based of Republican internal polling and should NOT be trusted. uponit7771 Jul 2019 #100

We are fortunate that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are calling the shots here Gothmog Jul 2019 #119

That doesn't address the fact you're taking a position based off of republican polling numbers uponit7771 Jul 2019 #125

Yes it does-Speaker Pelosi is the one making the decision Gothmog Jul 2019 #134

what i'm seeing play out is leadership support for *investigation* over impeachment 0rganism Jul 2019 #86

I dont really get it either. honest.abe Jul 2019 #89

+1,if we're damned if we do and damned if we don't we might as well do the right thing uponit7771 Jul 2019 #101

So, now you're just giving up defending it at all as the only reasonable, sensible choice but ehrnst Jul 2019 #109

His presidency has much, much more for history to damn him with as the worst POTUS ever ehrnst Jul 2019 #110

I think everyone is considering the cons of impeachment. honest.abe Jul 2019 #120

I don't think... Snackshack Jul 2019 #91

Nixon was not impeached. He resigned before he could be impeached. wasupaloopa Jul 2019 #97

Do you really think Trump might resign if impeached? Knowing he'll be indicted when out of office? ehrnst Jul 2019 #118

No I never implied he would wasupaloopa Jul 2019 #135

These are your words, yes? ehrnst Jul 2019 #140

I was correcting the idea that 4 presidents were impeached. wasupaloopa Jul 2019 #145

Apology accepted. And it was only 2 presidents, actually. ehrnst Jul 2019 #147

Wasn't he impeached but resigned before conviction? Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #164

Because of how the media reports things as they did with Mueller JI7 Jul 2019 #111

Comparing Trump to Clinton is not a good comparison Poiuyt Jul 2019 #112

But what about a Dem Senator incumbent candidate in a Red state having to vote yes for impeachment? ehrnst Jul 2019 #117

The impeachment inquiry we're doing now is perfect. gulliver Jul 2019 #143

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2019 #146

It's not really an Impeachment Inquiry per se Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2019 #163

Republicans "won" all three branches in 2000. BlueTsunami2018 Jul 2019 #152