Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[JimL]

I stand by my statement --- it was such a lopsided partisan procedure, and you can put all the lipstick you want on this porker, but it most certainly was not a unified House by any stretch of the imagination.

It was the Democrats pushing this --- the only correction I would make is that a FEW of them didn't get sucked into this partisan sham.

The republicans aren't pushing it simply because the president is a republican. You can be sure if this were Obama, the republicans would be pushing it big time, and so would you be. The only partisan sham going on is that of the republican party. The republicans for the most part didn't even participate in the "House Impeachment," not because they were stopped, but because, like you, they're complicit partisan hacks who want only one thing, and that one thing is not to comply with their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from foreign and domestic enemies. They're either ignorant boobs, or in my opinion, they're treasonous for not upholding their oath to defend the country which is what defending the Constitution is all about.

[Cow Poke]

There are always outlier polls. The fact is that the combined average of the major polls (like what RCP does) has shown support for impeachment drop and more folks now opposing it than supporting it.

I seriously doubt that was the result that the Democrats expected.

They suckered themselves into thinking that the vast majority of Americans were in their bubble.

[Tassman]

I am not at all sure folks on the left are listening to themselves anymore and fairly sure that their lack of sanity requires that they not be listening to themselves.

Actually, polling has remained fairly consistent. But this is irrelevant to the Senate leaders publicly abrogating their duty to run a fair, impartial trial of the impeached president as the Constitution demands.

[Cow Poke]

Actually, polling has remained fairly consistent.

Yeah, that's what I said --- in spite of the Democrats supposedly putting on a smoking-gun case, and the media hammering this 24-7, it hasn't moved the needle much at all. Great job, partisan Democrats.

But this is irrelevant to the Senate leaders publicly abrogating their duty to run a fair, impartial trial of the impeached president as the Constitution demands.

Tassy ---- the incredibly partisan Democrats ran their portion of this in the House without the Senate interfering. You didn't complain about them not consulting the Senate, did you?

Neither did I. The House has absolute authority over the first part of the impeachment process, and the Senate has absolute authority over their part.

The Democrats weaponized impeachment, and the Senate is saying "oh, no you don't!"

[JimL]

Yeah, that's what I said --- in spite of the Democrats supposedly putting on a smoking-gun case, and the media hammering this 24-7, it hasn't moved the needle much at all. Great job, partisan Democrats.



Tassy ---- the incredibly partisan Democrats ran their portion of this in the House without the Senate interfering. You didn't complain about them not consulting the Senate, did you?

And just how could the Senate interfere, they complained a whole hell of a lot about process though, and I heard you complaining right along with them, didn't I?

Neither did I. The House has absolute authority over the first part of the impeachment process , and the Senate has absolute authority over their part.

They have absolute authority within the rules and one of the rules is that they can't begin the trial until the Articles are delivered. The House has every right to withhold the Articles after hearing from the Senate Majority reader that he is coordinating with the defense in putting on a sham trial. Moscow Mitch, and Lindsey Graham, are obviously corrupt idiots, and unfortunately for them, and for you, Nancy Pelosi is a political genius.

The Democrats weaponized impeachment, and the Senate is saying "oh, no you don't!"

That's just the constant cry coming from the blind cult of Trump.

[Sam]

Yeah, that's what I said --- in spite of the Democrats supposedly putting on a smoking-gun case, and the media hammering this 24-7, it hasn't moved the needle much at all. Great job, partisan Democrats.

Moved the needle more than 10 points, from available polling.

[DivineOb]

Yeah, that's what I said --- in spite of the Democrats supposedly putting on a smoking-gun case, and the media hammering this 24-7, it hasn't moved the needle much at all. Great job, partisan Democrats.

Far more people supported impeachment than opposed according to Real Clear Politics supported impeachment (I assume that's your preferred site). And a lot of those polls are quite old and surely only went up over the course of the impeachment inquiry. In fact, according to the second graph on 538 support for removal is currently just a hair below 50% and support for impeachment exceeds 50%. (In that second graph there are some buttons at the bottom to choose whether to include all polls, only those asking about support for impeachment, or only those asking for impeach and remove).

[Cow Poke]

Far more people supported impeachment than opposed according to Real Clear Politics supported impeachment

Yeah, that's impeachment. NEWS FLASH: That's already been done.

(I assume that's your preferred site).

Not necessarily "preferred", just the most handy, and doing an updating aggregate.

And a lot of those polls are quite old and surely only went up over the course of the impeachment inquiry. In fact, according to the second graph on 538 support for removal is currently just a hair below 50% and support for impeachment exceeds 50%. (In that second graph there are some buttons at the bottom to choose whether to include all polls, only those asking about support for impeachment, or only those asking for impeach and remove).

So, we should take DRASTIC action because less than half the people in the country think so? Even Pelosi set the bar at "overwhelming" support.

[Cow Poke]

Moved the needle more than 10 points, from available polling.

In your cherry picked poll?

[Mountain Man]

Yeah, that's impeachment. NEWS FLASH: That's already been done.



So, we should take DRASTIC action because less than half the people in the country think so? Even Pelosi set the bar at "overwhelming" support.

Public support is a red herring. It doesn't matter if 100% of voters want Trump impeached, if there is no legal case against him then it would be proper to acquit.

And having said that, if public sentiments really are against the President then why not let the voters decide in November?

[Cow Poke]

Public support is a red herring. It doesn't matter if 100% of voters want Trump impeached, if there is no legal case against him then it would be proper to acquit.

Absolutely true, but some of the lefties here keep using the "public support" numbers to justify support.
A) That's now how our government works
2) They are shooting themselves in the feet

And having said that, if public sentiments really are against the President then why not let the voters decide in November?

Naturally that's the better argument, but this is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER situation which demands URGENCY, which is why the Democrats RUSHED this through to Articles of Impeachment, then.... um..... balked.

[Sam]

In your cherry picked poll?

As I keep saying, find any contravening poll in the pre-September timeframe and we can talk about cherry-picking.

As of now, you're just falsely restating something despite being shown the evidence that it's false.

Ain't no honor or dignity in that.

--Sam

[DivineOb]

So, we should take DRASTIC action because less than half the people in the country think so? Even Pelosi set the bar at "overwhelming" support.

No. If support for removal doesn't significantly increase by the end of the trial then I'm not sure that removal would be the right course of action (and would certainly never happen besides). The case has to be overwhelming and ironclad. Pelosi knows that too.

BTW, in case you missed it, yesterday in court Democrat lawyers argued that additional articles of impeachment might be added based on the outcome of those legal cases which are currently in flight. Right on schedule ;).

[Cow Poke]

No. If support for removal doesn't significantly increase by the end of the trial then I'm not sure that removal would be the right course of action (and would certainly never happen besides). The case has to be overwhelming and ironclad. Pelosi knows that too.

Yeah.

BTW, in case you missed it, yesterday in court Democrat lawyers argued that additional articles of impeachment might be added based on the outcome of those legal cases which are currently in flight. Right on schedule ;).

They've been saying that for a couple weeks --- ever since they first announced the 2 Articles, and America yawned.

[Cow Poke]

As I keep saying, find any contravening poll in the pre-September timeframe and we can talk about cherry-picking.

As of now, you're just falsely restating something despite being shown the evidence that it's false.

Ain't no honor or dignity in that.

--Sam

Sam, are you this snooty arrogant in real life?

FACTS ARE ----

A) Trump has been impeached, and America pretty much yawned...
2) There's about a ZERO % chance the Senate will remove
C) Trump's fundraising is through the roof.

Anything else over which you'd like to squabble?