I'd like to think that getting a declining, sociopathic mad man out of office before he does something truly catastrophic would be something that most people would be into, regardless of party and/or getting a win

7/14/2017 11:03:22 AM

Please point us too all of these war-mongering democrats and their statements.

Please indicate the path democrats can take where any reforms/bills/suggestions could even make it out of a congressional committee.

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 11:05 AM. Reason : Y'all are still fighting a Democratic Party that barely even exists anymore.]

7/14/2017 11:04:47 AM

Smartphones actually may make people MORE engaged in the process but unfortunately at the cost of becoming quite tribalistic. If anything, the feeling that no one has any skin in the game because of corporatism, big-money lobbying and a failing two-party system probably fuels more apathy.

Short of going to a more European style of governing where coalitons are built and smaller parties can at least wield some influence not sure how to fix it.

(Though from an entertainment standpoint this Trump stuff is A+)

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 11:07 AM. Reason : and yes, I do feel conservative have more fault than progressives here, so not wholly both sidesy ]

7/14/2017 11:06:25 AM

Quote :

"Democracy dies from apathy. Apathy comes from everybody having something better to do than care. What better thing to do than immerse yourself in a 6 inch screen for hours a day rather than interact with the world around you, your family, your government."

depends on what people are immersing themselves in on that 6 inch screen

the argument can easily be made that you can use that 6 inch screen to get others to engage politically/civically, especially as a tool to inform/assemble groups/have discussions

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM. Reason : ^ beat me to it]

7/14/2017 11:11:07 AM

Quote :

"Please indicate the path democrats can take where any reforms/bills/suggestions could even make it out of a congressional committee."

un-paid speeches and community outreach. no, they won't pass shit, but focusing on the people instead of trump gives them the high ground for the future.

but you know as well as i do this is a pointless hypothetical. most democrats are in it for re-election, just like the republicans.

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 11:14 AM. Reason : .]

7/14/2017 11:14:00 AM

Quote :

"I just don't see how we do American politics, and American government, without parties."

Humans have to evolve.

In other words, education and the value of ideas has to overcome tribalism (which is natural for us currently).

And when I say education/ideas, I really mean ideas that aren't predicated on dividing us. Conservative ideas are based on the thought that anyone who isn't you is your enemy. Liberal ideas are based on the thought that everyone is the same.

Neither side is correct. Both sides are divisive. Ideas that solve problems as opposed to create the idea that more problems exist than do are the ones that need to prevail. Example:

We need a means of generating a large abundance of energy for earth's life to use to maintain and increase standards of living.

Conservative solution: Take the easiest, most readily available form of energy and only give it to people who look and think like them, destroying our planet in the process, while ignoring the civil unrest this causes and how it leads to war.

Liberal solution: Take the nicest sounding, most readily available form of energy and give it to everyone while ignoring the negative, intermediate, economic impacts that lead to civil unrest and war, destroying our society in the process.

An actual solution: Fund scientists to determine a method that can generate surplus energy that can be given to everyone so that no one is fighting over it or fighting to control it, thus eliminating the risk of civil unrest and war while simultaneously maintaining and improving standards of living for everyone.

That last one can't happen until conservatives wise up on tax reform and liberals wise up on practicality.

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 11:48 AM. Reason : a]

7/14/2017 11:46:21 AM

Quote :

"but you know as well as i do this is a pointless hypothetical. most democrats are in it for re-election, just like the republicans."

Am I missing something? Politicians seeking to get re-elected is one of the aspects of our democracy that still somewhat functions.

7/14/2017 12:06:33 PM

It's arguably the only part that functions, haha.

7/14/2017 12:07:03 PM

You forget the huge amount of lobbying that goes on in Washington. Oil lobbyists have both sides of the carpet by the balls and ovaries.

I think we should start with campaign reform. Donations to campaigns by corporations and lobbyists = really bad.

7/14/2017 12:11:20 PM

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/background.php?id=E01&year=2016

7/14/2017 12:27:42 PM

You act like I don't realize that big oil panders to their audience, which are Republicans. That's a true statement.

But the takeaway here is that there is a big corporation pandering to their audience. Insert any corporation/industry to any audience. That's still a problem. There are pro-pharma senators and house reps on both sides of the aisle. They're bought and paid for just like Republicans with big oil.

7/14/2017 12:54:00 PM

I wonder if Caligula's contemporary citizens talked about him the same way we do regarding Trump.

Granted, Trump hasn't made Cadillac One a general, but you never know...

7/14/2017 12:57:39 PM

you implied that the oil lobby was in the pockets of both parties equally

7/14/2017 1:01:08 PM

I did, my apologies. My brain was thinking just lobbies in general, and that is what I should have typed.

I mean, for the American public, kicking lobbyists out of Washington is a no-brainer.

I would LOVE to drive an electric car. I can't afford one, and they're still a niche. I wish we could invest enough R&D to ensure that they become affordable. I'm sure it will happen eventually, but right now the demand just isn't worth a breakthrough in price right now. If we could get away from lobbyists, perhaps that could change.

But I digress, and so has this thread. We're talking about impeachment here. Carry on.

7/14/2017 1:06:12 PM

Quote :

"Am I missing something? Politicians seeking to get re-elected is one of the aspects of our democracy that still somewhat functions."

if you're operating under the assumption that re-election means appealing to your electorate, which it isn't.

it's about maintaining support from your party leadership, donors, and the media. that's what drives policy, not the needs of the average person.

[Edited on July 14, 2017 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

7/14/2017 1:17:40 PM

there's obviously room for reforming lobbying, but kicking them out of D.C. is kind of absurd

think of any issue that's close to you. you'd more than likely lobby for that cause.

7/14/2017 1:17:42 PM

Sure, I would. But I don't have millions of dollars to donate to a candidate that I know will vouch for lung cancer research. Big corporations do, that is why they have an unfair advantage when it comes to Joe and Jane America.

There should be a difference between lobbying, and donating millions of dollars to get your guy or gal re-elected.

I believe candidates should have a fixed budget, where that budgets grows based on the number of constituents you have to reach. No more, no less. No donations.

7/14/2017 1:25:32 PM

Quote :

"Do you not get that America still has further she can fall? No matter what you call America's current system, Oligarchy, inverted totalitarianism, etc. it can absolutely get worse. It is a short, slippery slope to a system that looks more like ...... Russia. Where the strongman magically gets 90% of the vote EVERY SINGLE ELECTION, where opposition protests are crushed with police batons, and opposition leaders are assasinated, etc etc etc."

I agree with you that we are currently living in a system of inverted totalitarianism, and that we are creeping toward a more formal version of corporate totalitarianism. And, as Sheldon Wolin (who coined the term) described:

Quote :

"Inverted totalitarianism reverses things. It is all politics all of the time but a politics largely untempered by the political..And there is, of course, the culminating moment of national elections when the attention of the nation is required to make a choice of personalities rather than a choice between alternatives. What is absent is the political, the commitment to finding where the common good lies amidst the welter of well-financed, highly organized, single-minded interests rabidly seeking governmental favors and overwhelming the practices of representative government and public administration by a sea of cash."

So if you agree that we are in this system. Then it does not make sense to focus on the personalities involved. But rather to focus on the POLICY and the new system we want to see.

Quote :

"This can absolutely be construed as an existential threat to what's left of American democracy."

The existential threat ALREADY HAPPENED. If you genuinely believe that the levers of power are so corroded (you just said yourself that we don't have "proper congressional oversight") because the right wing is rabidly becoming more radical and have corrupted the other branches of government (with the passive help/weakness of the Democrats), then it makes no difference if one figurehead (Trump) is replaced with a more politically capable figurehead (Pence). If you do not have faith in the institutions of power (which you do not appear to have), then it makes no sense to expect those same institutions to correct themselves.

You do not fight fire with fire. You fight it with water. And you do not fight fascism with corporatism. You fight it with Socialism.

Quote :

"Please point us too all of these war-mongering democrats and their statements."

Tim Kaine is calling this "treasonous." Treason only applies to aiding and abetting a foreign adversary during a time of war. So either he's stupid (that's a given), or he's trying to look tough and is raising cold war hysteria just so his side can get points/back into power. He doesn't actually give a shit.

Quote :

"Please indicate the path democrats can take where any reforms/bills/suggestions could even make it out of a congressional committee."

Go LEFT. There is nothing the Democrats can or will do to substantively change anything. They are only interested in restoring their own personal power and have no desire to reform anything. They've been so focused on winning the culture wars for the past 30 years that they've completely forgotten how to speak the language of class struggle. They are not willing to move left on economic policy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR65ZhO6LGA).

Moving left on policy (see Corbyn) is the only winning strategy they still have, and they WON'T TAKE IT. Stop trying to reform a broken system from within. It doesn't work. If you genuinely believe that healthcare is a human right, if you genuinely believe that education should not be a financial burden to the working class, if you genuinely believe that military adventurism is both morally wrong and bankrupting our society, if you genuinely believe that mass incarceration is exacerbated by privatization, and if you genuinely believe that the working class is entitled to their social security and other basic safety nets, then YOU HAVE TO GO LEFT on economic policy.

7/14/2017 1:31:12 PM

There's no money in moving further left.

7/14/2017 1:41:35 PM

This thread is the perfect microcosm of why Republicans keep winning. Over the past several decades they've systematically ruined our education system, social safety nets, public infrastructure, voting rights and health care. But man, those evil fucking Democrats, taking money from a corporation, how dare they! You know, those evil corporatists Democrats passed a version of the ACA out of the House that included a public option. Blue dog pro-life Democrats from southern states voted yes on what was essentially single payer healthcare! They also voted for the most draconian financial regulations since 1930s and the largest investment in renewable energy of any nation ever. That's the only thing that matters, voting records. I don't give a give fuck who you're taking your campaign money from, as long as once you're in office you vote for progressive policies, and by and large most of them do.

7/14/2017 1:57:53 PM

Patting yourself in the back for a bill passed by THE HOUSE. Not the Senate. The HOUSE. How low can the bar go?

And how about those "progressive policies" like financial deregulation by repealing Glass Steagal (Clinton). Ending "Welfare as we know it" (Clinton). Increased mass incarceration by the 1994 Crime Bill (Clinton). Free Trade and union decimation (Clinton). Continued Bush Era tax cuts (Obama). Increased Drone Program (Obama).


Yeah....reeeeeeaaaaallll progressive.

7/14/2017 2:08:38 PM

Yeah well, public option was never passing the Senate after Ted Kennedy died and no one bothered to vote for his corporatist Democratic replacement. Maybe the real problem is there are two Dakotas and they get the same number of Senators as California and New York.

7/14/2017 2:15:19 PM

Isn't it SOP to have big Rose Garden celebrations for bills that pass the House?

7/14/2017 2:35:36 PM

people like shrike are why the democrats are losing

7/14/2017 2:36:09 PM

Screw Democrat, screw Republican.

Give me good ideas. Good legislation. Practical Laws that are passable and functional.

We have every word in the English language with all the math you can handle. And yet we refuse to make things work.

7/14/2017 2:39:58 PM

totally bro!

7/14/2017 3:05:11 PM

Quote :

"o if you agree that we are in this system. Then it does not make sense to focus on the personalities involved. But rather to focus on the POLICY and the new system we want to see. "

Nice quote from Wolin, and generally I'd say y'all are correct. In the case of Trump, I'm going to go ahead and disagree. Trump is, in fact, bigger than himself.

First, the way the Alt-Right has grafted itself onto him. I personally feel the Alt-Right is dangerous (for a number of reasons) and needs to be stamped out ASAP, they view Trump as savior like (in some cases). Impeaching Trump takes the wind WAY out of their sails.

Second, Trump, as his role as president, is the essence of the private sector feeding as hard as it can from the public trough (see his DC hotels, emoluments, etc, its a long list). Send his ass to jail so the next guy thinks twice about trying to enrich himself.

Third, Trump is spearheading our politics movement toward "Alt-facts" and just outright lies. Have people been lying since forever in politics? Yes. But I don't see how anyone can't say his administration isn't in a different league. I think we need to show that lying to the American public is gonna backfire, again so the next guy thinks twice.

Quote :

"The existential threat ALREADY HAPPENED. If you genuinely believe that the levers of power are so corroded (you just said yourself that we don't have "proper congressional oversight") because the right wing is rabidly becoming more radical and have corrupted the other branches of government (with the passive help/weakness of the Democrats), then it makes no difference if one figurehead (Trump) is replaced with a more politically capable figurehead (Pence). If you do not have faith in the institutions of power (which you do not appear to have), then it makes no sense to expect those same institutions to correct themselves."

I would view impeachment as a lever of power that is still capable of functioning. I'd view it as a sign that maybe we don't need to totally burn down the system and start over. Not to mention that impeachment will most likely mean either the GOP has acquiesced to its constituents or the Dems just crushed the GOP in a wave election. Either would indicate that democracy is still functioning to some degree and I'd find some hope in that.

Quote :

"Tim Kaine is calling this "treasonous." Treason only applies to aiding and abetting a foreign adversary during a time of war. So either he's stupid (that's a given), or he's trying to look tough and is raising cold war hysteria just so his side can get points/back into power. He doesn't actually give a shit."

Its arguable that cyber attacks are an act of war, just because our complicit congress hasn't legally declared those attacks as an act of war doesn't mean it wasn't an act of war. You should also take a close look at that guy from california who joined al quaeda and was making videos for them back in the mid-2000s. Technically, we never declared war on AQ, congress just authorized military force. Yet he was still indicted on Treason charges:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/11/AR2006101101121.html
So I think one can make the case that its a grey area.

Quote :

"If you genuinely believe that healthcare is a human right, if you genuinely believe that education should not be a financial burden to the working class, if you genuinely believe that military adventurism is both morally wrong and bankrupting our society, if you genuinely believe that mass incarceration is exacerbated by privatization, and if you genuinely believe that the working class is entitled to their social security and other basic safety nets, then YOU HAVE TO GO LEFT on economic policy."

I don't disagree, but now you should go look at a rundown of bills that Dems have introduced in the 115th congress. Bills that:
- take the teeth out of mandatory sentencing laws
- Amending Social Sec./CHIP to provide mental health benefits to poor kids
- Reducing loan rates on federally backed student loans and eliminating all origination fees on them
- repealing the AUMF to fight terrorists
- a $15 min wage bill with 28 Dem co-sponsors
- a bill letting married gay people file their taxes together
- a bill to provide extra funding to retain teachers in poor areas
- a bunch of others that I'm sure we could find some good in.

Do these go far enough? Eh, certainly not in every case, and in some cases I can even see the arguments against the incrementalism in these bills. Are they a hell of a lot closer to what we need than anything the GOP has proposed in the 115th congress? I say that's an EASY YES.

I know we've had these arguments over incrementalism, policy first vs. winning elections first, etc etc and I'd say that's where this is headed again. Its just a small, nuanced difference that seems to keep rearing its ugly head, lol.

7/14/2017 5:02:03 PM

Is someone compiling the list of things of which President Trump is guilty to require impeachment?

I would like to see that.

7/14/2017 11:27:37 PM

OH GAWD FAKE NEWS HAS GOT THA URN

7/15/2017 1:20:15 PM

^^Technically, the only people that could do that work for the FBI.

^hahaha


[Edited on July 15, 2017 at 1:59 PM. Reason : a]

7/15/2017 1:59:13 PM

Quote :

"the thought of Paul Ryan as President makes my skin crawl"

Since the impeachment of President Trump and Vice President Pence would likely require the Democrats retaking the House, wouldn't the next person in line to the presidency be Nancy Pelosi (barring some form of political jujitsu that would otherwise make another individual the Speaker of the House)?

7/17/2017 1:48:35 PM

a lot can happen between now and next fall

7/17/2017 1:50:08 PM

^^ There's zero fucking chance that Republicans would just cede power to the Dems like that. And an even slimmer chance that Democrats could accomplish that (especially with Pelosi).

It's 50/50 that Trump doesn't finish this term (whether it be impeachment due to violation of the emoluments clause, Russia hysteria, dying on the shitter while eating chocolate cake, or randomly walking out for a stroll and forgetting where he lives). But the right wing is absolutely NOT letting go of executive power that easily. They'll happily sacrifice him to retain control.

7/17/2017 2:03:37 PM

You folks are seriously delusional if you think impeachment hearings would trickle all the way down to the speaker.

Just step back and listen to yourselves.

I'm not saying that Trump leaving would be a bad thing, but then to turn right around and impeach the VP, THEN impeach the speaker?

It's like you're all living some hypothetical thought exercise from a HS Civics class.

7/17/2017 2:19:20 PM

I think the logic they're going through is not to impeach the speaker, but that if they're able to impeach anyone, that means the dems have a majority, which means the new speaker wouldn't be Paul Ryan. So you get a dem president by impeaching the pres and vp

7/17/2017 2:26:47 PM

impeachment isn't the only way for Ryan to become POTUS

[Edited on July 17, 2017 at 2:27 PM. Reason : also, ^]

7/17/2017 2:27:03 PM

^^ which is still pretty dumb, because there's no precedent for a Pres and VP duel impeachment.

Cc Gerald Ford.

7/17/2017 2:35:48 PM

http://time.com/4861520/president-trump-impeach-poll-nixon/
41% want to see him impeached.

7/17/2017 3:08:52 PM

does that include people who don't think impeachment goes far enough

[Edited on July 17, 2017 at 3:31 PM. Reason : well]

7/17/2017 3:31:28 PM

Haven’t seen anything pence has done yet that would be impeachable. He lied about knowing Flynn was compromised but that’s small potatoes compared to what trump’s team was involved with.

If it turns out pence was in the meeting with Russia that’s a different story.

Pence, if you recall, was one of the early ppl criticizing trump for his rhetoric on Muslims, before trump made him his VP.

7/17/2017 3:35:42 PM

so what

he's still a fucking venal, opportunistic hypocrite

i'm allergic to fucking potatoes, size doesn't matter

7/17/2017 3:53:58 PM

^^Did something come out indicating he lied about the Flynn thing?

I only ask because someone else said something along the same lines and I haven't been able to find anything on it. Hard to believe he didn't know, but I'm not ready to call him a liar without something more substantive.

7/17/2017 5:13:57 PM

^ http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/19/mike-pence-flynn-elijah-cummings-responds-238598

Pence knew Flynn was a foreign agent, as head of the transition this is the shit that shoulda been teased out considering security clearances are apart of that entire process. Pence didn't give a shit. He also some how missed all the revisions that Kushner and Sessions have had to make to their security clearance forms. It remains to be seen if damning evidence exists that can roll him into accessory to conspiracy charges (this includes ongoing RICO cases), but the fact is his credibility is zero. If he gains the presidency, his role will basically be ceremonial. The stench of Russia won't wash off that easily. Hell it could be argued that it WOULD BE BETTER for the GOP if they impeach Pence to remove the Russian anchor around their necks. The media's "Eye of Sauron" will move pretty quickly to the next target after Trump is old news (ya can't tweet from jail!!!). Do you really think Pence's "I'm outta tha loop guyzzz" act is gonna stand up to scrutiny?

RE: Paul Ryan.
Dude is already on tape swearing everyone to secrecy in regards to Russian campaign funding. We know for a fact that Obama et. al. laid out the intelligence for Ryan and McConnell and they both said they would make any releases of intelligence into a political football. They ran interference. Period. Again, it remains to be seen if damning evidence exists that can roll him into conspiracy/accessory charges, but his credibility on this issue is zero. Again, once the media moves beyond the Trump family crime syndicate story, do you really think Ryan's "I didn't think there was evidence" is gonna stand up to scrutiny? The guy gets intelligence briefings on a weekly basis, he probably knows about 10x more shit than we do right now, and can only shrug his shoulders.

7/17/2017 6:33:05 PM

I still think everyone fantasizing about 3 level, balls deep impeachment is putting too much faith in our institutions to correct themselves from the decades long assault that's been carried out on American democracy.

Executive Branch: The right wing just won the presidency even though they overwhelmingly lost the popular vote by running a cokehead sexual predator who has multiple business conflicts of interests and zero understanding of government.

Judicial branch: The right wing successfully stopped our last president from appointing a S.C. nominee, and appointed one of their own instead, and will probably mount an effort to remove RGB soon.

Legislative Branch: The right wing currently controls both the House and Senate and 33 State Legislators (only 1 more needed to call a convention).

The media/watchdog: The right wing has successfully convinced millions of people that nothing is real anymore and all news is fake.

Do you guys seriously think that these institutions will just cede power to the Dems, the party that can't stop tripping over it's own dick? Un-fucking-likely

Ask yourself this: What seems more likely given current and long lasting trends....

Multiple consecutive impeachments and power somehow returning back to Democrats?

Or a further consolidation of power into the hands of the corporately backed right wing (I.e. election commissions resulting in voter suppression. Crushing of political dissent, and censoring of "fake news")

[Edited on July 17, 2017 at 7:22 PM. Reason : ]

7/17/2017 7:03:00 PM

It's a pipe dream to think that Trump and Pence will both be impeached.

IMHO, it is also a pipe dream to think that the conservatives will hold majorities after 2018 and/or 2020. My party had their chance, and they blew it. Blew it over a reality TV star.

[Edited on July 17, 2017 at 9:14 PM. Reason : sdfs]

7/17/2017 9:13:56 PM

Quote :

"The media/watchdog: The right wing has successfully convinced millions of people that nothing is real anymore and all news is fake."

credit where credit is due, the media did that to themselves. the right wing only ballooned it to their advantage.

7/18/2017 11:27:26 AM

how do you figure?

7/18/2017 11:29:03 AM

by becoming histrionic opinions and entertainment instead of just facts news and reporting

7/18/2017 11:34:39 AM

exaggeration, sponsored articles, selective reporting, deliberate misrepresentation, biased agendas of the network owners, etc

it's been getting worse as news organizations try to keep up with the digital age

[Edited on July 18, 2017 at 11:42 AM. Reason : ^histrionic is a great word for it]

7/18/2017 11:36:25 AM

What JesusHChrist is missing in his list is the intelligence community. It's pretty obvious (to me) that a majority of them are invested in getting to the bottom of this Russia shit.

Again, just look at how the NYTimes kept feeding Trump Jr. rope over a week. Jr. had to change his story like 5x and we still haven't gotten to the bottom of it. Whomever was leaking the NYTimes info (my guess is foreign or domestic intelligence) did it in such a way as to destroy Jr's credibility. They are literally going to do this to every single person close to Trump that they have shit on. The media will create a spectacle and unflinchingly repost whatever the intelligence community feeds them. I believe that even a portion of True believer Trumpkins are gonna start to waver in their support after another two months of this shit.

Caveats:

Yes I'm operating under the assumption that a lot more damaging info is out there and the intelligence community has all of it and is willing to leak it as part of a counter-Intel operation.

No, I'm not a big fan of the intelligence community controlling the narrative. It's fucking dangerous. It may even be a bigger danger to this country than Trump being butt buddies with Putin. In the next few months we could even be living in the midst of a "propaganda" campaign operated by the IC. Which is why I've repeatedly said the moment the FBI thinks it can prosecute, the IC should spill the beans and release all the evidence they have and let the chips fall were they may. Anything else dangerously approaches a military state.

7/18/2017 12:19:52 PM