The Impeachment Thread Part Deux

[Simmsy]

As a progessive socialist, I've never understood why the Dems have never really embraced that part of the party. I'm starting to see why with the republican party. When you open up the spectrum of what you stand for (widen the tent/umbrella/roof, etc) you have to let in some crazies. Those crazies become apart of your party and eventually you have to give them a platform or they will get to that platform on their own. However, I've never seen a party like the GOP embrace it like this before.

[LD0506]

9 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I’ll say I have voted FOR dems, only against the GOP so chose the ones most likely to beat them (the Dems).  I know its early but I haven’t seen a whole lot yet that I like but I’ll give them a chance.  It is also very possible that I may just determine the country is ****ed and not waste my time voting.  We’ve got a few years so it is too early to commit to a certain course of action.

 

Yanno........I probably ought to just stfu and not respond here, but when does that ever happen? 😄

 

You're an interesting case study here. You've been pretty vocally rightwing R on here, open and honest about it while still staying engaged in the conversation, even to the point of questioning the direction of that political cohort these days.

 

Kudos, that actually puts you in a relatively small group. You are well spoken about your views, no one could claim you show any of the small minded bitterness that others are accused of, and you seem to have some incredibly strong ankles with the way you dig your heels in when you think you're right.

 

Now, you not only wonder about voting affiliation but share these thoughts online? 

 

Are you a ****ing unicorn or what? Something heard of yet rarely if ever seen?

 

But I digress...........

 

You and others of your ilk are wrestling with these very questions and it could and should be enlightening to all. What DO you do? 

 

Just as an observation, not even rising to suggestion level, "joining the Democrats" has an undertone all out of proportion to the reality. There's no initiation, no surgery or tattooing, essentially it boils down to listening to a wider range of voices. Don't even have to let go of the ones you do now, just add some to the playlist, make up your own mind. That's kinda what is expected from all of us.

 

And you may find over time that that willingness broadens the Dems position, that they notice and start representing more of those awfully centrist, normal POVs that are shared across the partisan divide, or even that you discover that they were actually promoting a lot of them all along.

 

There's a helluva lot of work that needs doing in this country, work that doesn't get tagged with a D or R but is basically **** that has been left undone for so long that it has become a huge mess. We could use your help with it.

 

 

 

 

[gbear]

LD, your post reminds me of something I heard a long time ago, "If enough people really want to change gun laws in this country, they should join the NRA.  If enough people in the NRA wanted a change, the NRA could get it done."

 

I almost think of this as the Archie Bunker approach.  Become the vocal part of the enemy and then change it from within.

 

 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

10 hours ago, DCranon21 said:

 

If that is the case, after the Coronavirus bill, my next job will to make DC, PR, VI, and maybe Guam states. It's time to stop this bs and make sure they will not have any more power for at least a generation or 2. Don't stop there, reshape the SC bench once you give them statehood. It's time for them to pay for this idiot and what he's really done to this country in the last 4 years. 

they don’t have the votes to do this, so it will never happen 

[Simmsy]

12 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

they don’t have the votes to do this, so it will never happen 

Not anytime soon, at least.

 

I've always tried to float another idea: instead of building all of these Amazon/Google/Microsoft headquarters in the cities of blue states, build one out in the middle of Wyoming. These companies bring in a diverse group of people, the more people they bring in the bigger the cities grow and become more diverse. Those cities will eventually turn the state purple and then blue. It won't happen overnight, but it will only take one generation to see significant change. Then we add statehood, the right SC judges and the GOP as we know it dies.

[LD0506]

1 minute ago, Simmsy said:

Not anytime soon, at least.

 

I've always tried to float another idea: instead of building all of these Amazon/Google/Microsoft headquarters in the cities of blue states, build one out in the middle of Wyoming. These companies bring in a diverse group of people, the more people they bring in the bigger the cities grow and become more diverse. Those cities will eventually turn the state purple and then blue. It won't happen overnight, but it will only take one generation to see significant change. Then we add statehood, the right SC judges and the GOP as we know it dies.

 

 

150K tech workers and their support staff could flip N Dakota

 

Maybe Wyoming too although there are some crazy ****ers there

[tshile]

13 hours ago, LD0506 said:

And you may find over time that that willingness broadens the Dems position, that they notice and start representing more of those awfully centrist, normal POVs that are shared across the partisan divide, or even that you discover that they were actually promoting a lot of them all along.

As I’ve found myself in more dem-oriented circles, this is my experience. 
 

hard core progressivism and strong liberalism are what gets tagged for the Dems - in part because the extremes are always loudest, but also because as a whole the republicans spend an incredible amount of effort pushing the narrative that all Dems are extreme (the 50-year-long-moderate-record-Biden was the final move of the socialist takeover movement. 🥱)

 

But the reality is, as long as they don’t think of you as a hard right trumpet of sorts, they’ll entertain your ideas and conversations are pleasant and constructive. 
 

I fully expect any significant movement of sane/moderate republicans to the Dems to cause an uproar as that party tries to balance recruiting those votes vs keeping their far-left end “motivated” (worst ‘thing’ that exists within our country is this idea that the parties have to motivate people to actually vote...) 

 

but otherwise it’s a night and day difference. And even when I find myself on the receiving end of a rant I can usually fall back on the idea of “at least they’re trying to solve a real problem and the motives are admirable.” Which is not something I’ve been able to say about the far-right counterparts for some time now.

 

When I find myself outnumbered 4-1 or 5-1 with a group of very liberal friends, I find the conversation to be of substance. 
 

when it’s with hard-right people I find myself defending against accusations of hating my country. 
 

they’re just two very different worlds. 

[visionary]

 

[Dan T.]

14 hours ago, tshile said:

Did he say they’d withdrawal it? I thought he said the objection was over and withdrawn as they ended their session already and if he wanted to reinstate it tomorrow, fine, but it’s much to do about nothing

 

 

?

 

im not opposed to the idea I heard that wildly wrong

 

 

It was a confusing couple of minutes there.  I think Raskin, while saying he would withdraw that part, did say something about reserving the right to reinstate it, but he did end by saying "This is much ado about nothing because it's not critical in any way to our case."

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/10/966638864/much-ado-about-nothing-house-managers-strike-claim-about-gop-senator-from-record

 

Here's an account with the full video.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9247781/Lee-makes-Democrats-withdraw-evidence-Trump-called-pressure-senator-overturn-election.html

 

Leahy looked bumbling and confused. Schumer jumping in and shutting things down for a few minutes kinda saved Leahy and was a smart move. 

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Leahy looked bumbling and confused

 Felt like that’s because he was being yelled at and not understood. 
 

If I understand correctly:

mike Lee requested something be struck referencing a senate resolution that allows that

 

leahy ruled that the resolution cited doesn’t apply to opening arguments (which I took to relate to how criminal trials work where opening and closing statements are not subjected to the exact same rules as everything in between, and there is more leeway)

 

lee got upset and declared that it doesn’t matter, he was the direct witness to the statements as he supposedly made them, and declared them not factual and therefore demanded they be struck from the record

 

At this point leahy appears confused and I don’t blame him - the ruling seemed clear, the resolution Lee referenced doesn’t give him the power to strike what he wanted struck. 
 

Lee then goes on a tirade that’s basically: rules don’t actually matter, this is what I think should happen. Which I shrugged off as typical GOP thinking - rules don’t actually matter

 

 

[Dan T.]

3 minutes ago, tshile said:

 Felt like that’s because he was being yelled at and not understood. 
 

 

For the most part I agree with you.  He's got Mike Lee ranting at him, the parliamentarian trying to guide him, and other general chaos going on.  But the optics were bad for him.  He asked for a call of the roll, and most Senators didn't know what the question was.  That's when Schumer stepped in.

 

And I almost want them to swear Mike Lee in to testify, because the event in question happened.  He's acting butt hurt but the facts are essentially there.  Trump and Giuliani both called his phone.  He handed over to Tommy T. and stood by in the case of Trump.  and Rudy left a message. That's not in dispute.

[Riggo-toni]

Mike Lee is a lying lowlife scumbag.  That is all.  Carry on...

[TheGreatBuzz]

I took a few minutes to let this all sink in and here are my thoughts.  Note that I am sometimes prone to rambling and my positions can change by the minute depending on my mood.

 

2 hours ago, LD0506 said:

You've been pretty vocally rightwing R on here, open and honest about it while still staying engaged in the conversation, even to the point of questioning the direction of that political cohort these days.

 

Just pointing out that I no longer identify as an R or rightwing because both of those things don't mean what they used to.  I call myself a conservative but even that term has become a negative lately.  I don't know what to call myself anymore.  But I appreciate what you said.

 

2 hours ago, LD0506 said:

Are you a ****ing unicorn or what?

 

No.  Just hung like one.

 

2 hours ago, LD0506 said:

There's a helluva lot of work that needs doing in this country, work that doesn't get tagged with a D or R but is basically **** that has been left undone for so long that it has become a huge mess. We could use your help with it.

 

Maybe I'm just tired and frustrated.  I don't know.  I do find myself actually against many of the things that the Dems push for.  They got my vote this time because of the existential threat that was Trump and his ilk.  I don't know that it will become a regular thing though.  I agree there are many things that have been left undone for so long that it has become a huge mess.  But many of these things I don't agree with the Dems path or see them not doing anything about it either.  This is not intended to be a "both sides" point because I know the GOP is far worse but the Dems seem full of the career politicians also and all the negative connotations that comes with that.  But this isn't a "why I don't like the Left" thread so we should probably wind down this derail.

 

45 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

But the reality is, as long as they don’t think of you as a hard right trumpet of sorts, they’ll entertain your ideas and conversations are pleasant and constructive. 

 

While I also encounter this a fair amount of the time, I also find (usually when taking a more conservative position that may or may not be similar to the GOP position) that there is a not-too-uncommon occurrence of "well, the GOP said X but did Y."  It drives me nuts.  Yes, I get that the GOP sucks.  But that is not what we are discussing.  We are talking about the benefits of X.  No need to point out that the GOP are hypocrites, we all already know that.  Just because I support X does not mean I support them doing Y.  And I find myself there a lot.  I support a lot of what the GOP says they are for, I'm just not for what they usually end up doing.

 

 

23 minutes ago, tshile said:

 Felt like that’s because he was being yelled at and not understood. 
 

If I understand correctly:

mike Lee requested something be struck referencing a senate resolution that allows that

 

leahy ruled that the resolution cited doesn’t apply to opening arguments (which I took to relate to how criminal trials work where opening and closing statements are not subjected to the exact same rules as everything in between, and there is more leeway)

 

lee got upset and declared that it doesn’t matter, he was the direct witness to the statements as he supposedly made them, and declared them not factual and therefore demanded they be struck from the record

 

At this point leahy appears confused and I don’t blame him - the ruling seemed clear, the resolution Lee referenced doesn’t give him the power to strike what he wanted struck. 
 

Lee then goes on a tirade that’s basically: rules don’t actually matter, this is what I think should happen. Which I shrugged off as typical GOP thinking - rules don’t actually matter

 

 

 

Watching Leahy there stoked my desire for term limits.  I get all of the process confusion.  But he seemed totally lost and struggled to even form a coherent sentence.

 

14 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

And I almost want them to swear Mike Lee in to testify, because the event in question happened. 

 

I had the same thought and really wanted this to happen.  But I also feel like there should have been quite a few people that should be testifying under oath.

 

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[HOF44]

If the world only had more Tshile’s and Buzz’s.  This country needs a strong but sane conservative voice.  As it also needs a strong liberal voice.  I believe in between those two with a real give and take is where we should be.  Pipe dream I know. 

[Llevron]

10 minutes ago, HOF44 said:

If the world only had more Tshile’s and Buzz’s.  This country needs a strong but sane conservative voice.  As it also needs a strong liberal voice.  I believe in between those two with a real give and take is where we should be.  Pipe dream I know. 

 

I think it comes with education and in that, not so much as a pipe dream but something we are going to have to actively work at and counter for a few decades. You think about these two fellas and its clear they are educated and thoughtful in their beliefs. They listen to others not just for information but to sniff out bias. That's a learned skill. And they probably learned it on their own, as in not taught, and in likely very different places. My hope is that we add some kind of media literacy and financial literacy as basics of education from middle school up. We can make more Buzzes and Tshiles and we dont even have to tell them what to think. Just how to identify people that do. Unfortunately that is needed in this country now. 

 

Also I dont understand why Dems are rushing this. If the contention is that they can do multiple things at once, then why not take the time to call witnesses and get people who can really damn Trump in here?

[Skintime]

18 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

I think it comes with education and in that, not so much as a pipe dream but something we are going to have to actively work at and counter for a few decades. You think about these two fellas and its clear they are educated and thoughtful in their beliefs. They listen to others not just for information but to sniff out bias. That's a learned skill. And they probably learned it on their own, as in not taught, and in likely very different places. My hope is that we add some kind of media literacy and financial literacy as basics of education from middle school up. We can make more Buzzes and Tshiles and we dont even have to tell them what to think. Just how to identify people that do. Unfortunately that is needed in this country now. 

 

Also I dont understand why Dems are rushing this. If the contention is that they can do multiple things at once, then why not take the time to call witnesses and get people who can really damn Trump in here?

They frustrated me last time with how quickly they did it and again this time. I don't understand why they are always in such a rush. If we as a nation could find a way to hold new more accountable for what they say then we might have a chance at avoiding a internal war, otherwise we are in trouble with what the media is doing to this country to make more $$.

[goskins10]

15 hours ago, Simmsy said:

So what will you do? Vote Dem, Indy or not at all? I've always wondered what I would do if put in this situation.

 

I hate this feeling like i think you and many others do. Until recently (last 8 yrs) I have never been a "party first" person. I have voted for who Liked and didn't care the party. I am now in a position that I can only vote straight Dem until the Rep get their heads out of their asses unless three is some major flaw - like they did something illegal - say like a Roy Moore but Dem. Otherwise I want to do all I can to get the Reps out of office.  

[PCS]

I've had to work during the Impeachment trial except today. Same reaction today as when I was playing catch up the previous couple. Start off listening and watching then suddenly 

 

 

 

 

[Simmsy]

Doesn't Jamie Raskin have any friends or family watching this? Someone needs to tell him to switch to a different color yarmulke? He looks like he has a massive bald spot on the back of his head.

 

22 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I hate this feeling like i think you and many others do. Until recently (last 8 yrs) I have never been a "party first" person. I have voted for who Liked and didn't care the party. I am now in a position that I can only vote straight Dem until the Rep get their heads out of their asses unless three is some major flaw - like they did something illegal - say like a Roy Moore but Dem. Otherwise I want to do all I can to get the Reps out of office.  

I've honestly have never been put in that situation, I don't know how to expect people to react. Its easy for me to say that lifelong republicans should vote Dem, but I couldn't see  making the switch so easy myself. Voting for the opposition, throwing your vote away with a third party vote or straight up staying home. Not very good options, maybe its time for the Dems to widen the tent a little more to the right?

 

Edit: Holy ****, that is not a yarmulke, dude is seriously balding like that. His hair is naturally balding into a reverse mullet.

[The 12th Commandment]

3 hours ago, gbear said:

LD, your post reminds me of something I heard a long time ago, "If enough people really want to change gun laws in this country, they should join the NRA.  If enough people in the NRA wanted a change, the NRA could get it done."

 

I almost think of this as the Archie Bunker approach.  Become the vocal part of the enemy and then change it from within.

 

 

Nice.  My argument to my many right wing friends is that I'm working to keep the far left from having too much influence on my party, why can't they do the same thing with theirs and keep out the Nazis?  I think it has a subtle influence.  

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Simmsy said:

Doesn't Jamie Raskin have any friends or family watching this? Someone needs to tell him to switch to a different color yarmulke? He looks like he has a massive bald spot on the back of his head.

 

I've honestly have never been put in that situation, I don't know how to expect people to react. Its easy for me to say that lifelong republicans should vote Dem, but I couldn't see  making the switch so easy myself. Voting for the opposition, throwing your vote away with a third party vote or straight up staying home. Not very good options, maybe its time for the Dems to widen the tent a little more to the right?

 

 

If they widen it any more it will be the grand canyon. I feel like that's all the dems have been doing since the tea party is trying to appease the so called middle that seems to be moving further right. But they are not really moving that far right they have been made afraid of the Dems. 

 

The majority of the agree with most the democratic agenda yet they vote the other way out of fear. The rep have done a great job of making people afraid of change. 

[Simmsy]

7 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

If they widen it any more it will be the grand canyon. I feel like that's all the dems have been doing since the tea party is trying to appease the so called middle that seems to be moving further right. But they are not really moving that far right they have been made afraid of the Dems. 

 

The majority of the agree with most the democratic agenda yet they vote the other way out of fear. The rep have done a great job of making people afraid of change. 

If you had asked me a couple of months ago, I wouldn't have said that the Dems should move right at all. However, there has been a slight exodus of GOP moderates that have no home. I'm not saying we should change our ideals, but it wouldn't hurt to blow in their ear a little bit.

[Burgold]

Dems have done an exceptional job making their case. I kind of wish they had invited Liz Cheney or Kinzinger to be one of the managers just so it wouldn’t be a Dem Case, but a House Case. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

43 minutes ago, Simmsy said:

Not very good options, maybe its time for the Dems to widen the tent a little more to the right?

The only way they can realistically do that is to move the tent further to the right.  No chance the dems can fit more folks from the right with their trans/immigration/gun control stances.