Split Thread A second impeachment

Meadmaker said:
It's impossible to replay time with just one variable changed, so we will never know the other "what if" scenarios. However, to say that impeaching Trump was what caused the election victory is to commit the "post hoc ergo proctor hoc" fallacy.


...snip...
Click to expand...


You need to re-read the post you quoted, it never said what you claim it does.
 
Meadmaker said:
It's impossible to replay time with just one variable changed, so we will never know the other "what if" scenarios. However, to say that impeaching Trump was what caused the election victory is to commit the "post hoc ergo proctor hoc" fallacy.

In my opinion, had the pandemic not come along, Trump would have sailed to an easy win.
Click to expand...

Your opinion about the pandemic is of no use right now.

We know that the Democrats impeached Trump in a partisan vote and still won the Presidency and control of the Senate so the claim than a second impeachment would hurt the Democrats cannot be shown to be true.
 
dejudge said:
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
...Impeaching Trump will do the exact opposite and harden those voters' opposition to what they perceive as a bunch of over-entitled elites.
Click to expand...
Your claim has actually been proven to be false. Trump was already impeached by the Democrats even by partisan vote yet they have not only won the Presidency but also gained control of the Senate.

A second impeachment of Trump will completely destroy him.
Click to expand...

Meadmaker said:
It's impossible to replay time with just one variable changed, so we will never know the other "what if" scenarios. However, to say that impeaching Trump was what caused the election victory is to commit the "post hoc ergo proctor hoc" fallacy.
...
Click to expand...
In context of the claim dejudge was replying to, I don't think he was saying that the first impeachment helped the Dems to victory in 2020 so much as that it didn't hurt them nearly as badly as people were afraid it might.
 
dudalb said:
Maybe even consider the possbility that he or she might come from the left as well as the right.
Click to expand...

The Great Zaganza said:
Quite possible.
Click to expand...

Mathematically possible? Sure. Probable? Hardly.

There is nothing happening on the Left to indicate the table is set for something like that. Democrats tend to elect decent people and hold those who prove to not be so decent accountable. Republicans, not so much.
 
dudalb said:
Maybe even consider the possbility that he or she might come from the left as well as the right.
Click to expand...

The Great Zaganza said:
Quite possible.
Click to expand...

johnny karate said:
Mathematically possible? Sure. Probable? Hardly.

There is nothing happening on the Left to indicate the table is set for something like that. Democrats tend to elect decent people and hold those who prove to not be so decent accountable. Republicans, not so much.
Click to expand...

At the moment it doesn't look like it.

I've mentioned many times that my thesis in college was about "how it could happen here". How the US wasn't immune from slipping into authoritarianism. There are right wing dictators and left wing dictators. There is Franco, Hitler, Mussolini and others on the right, and there is Stalin, Mao, Castro etc on the left.

I see no real immediate danger on the left, but that doesn't mean we really won't see that down the road.

I see a real need for structural change. The lame duck period for example has to be changed.
 
turingtest said:
In context of the claim dejudge was replying to, I don't think he was saying that the first impeachment helped the Dems to victory in 2020 so much as that it didn't hurt them nearly as badly as people were afraid it might.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The Atheist said that impeachment would "harden voters' opposition", and dejudge said that the claim had been refuted.

I don't think the Atheist's claim that a second impeachment would harden voters' opposition was refuted by the fact that Donald Trump lost re-election after the first impeachment.

That much should be blindingly obvious to everyone. Obviously, what happened last time cannot prove anything about what would happen if we do something similar again. Furthermore, the fact that something occurred after the last impeachment can't even be tied in a causal manner to the subsequent election results. We cannot tell whether Donald Trump got more votes or fewer votes as a result of impeachment.

What can be said with certainty is that impeaching Donald Trump did not cause him to be re-elected. We know that because Donald Trump was not re-elected. The above are all things that cannot be disputed by anyone who can read.

It is my opinion, which I cannot prove, for exactly the reasons mentioned before, that the first impeachment of Donald Trump caused him to get more votes than he otherwise would have.

Did I mention that can't be proved? So, if anyone feels like posting, "You can't prove that." feel free, but know that I'm already saying that. Right? Can't prove it. Right there on the page. My opinion.

It is also my opinion that the Atheist was correct. My belief is that a second impeachment would harden opposition to the Democrats. I will amend that somewhat, though, by saying it would only do so if they failed to convict. However, as I stated earlier, I'm not sure I care. Impeachment and removal from office is the right thing to do, so right at this moment I'm leaning toward saying they should do the right thing, regardless of political calculations.
 
acbytesla said:
At the moment it doesn't look like it.

I've mentioned many times that my thesis in college was about "how it could happen here". How the US wasn't immune from slipping into authoritarianism. There are right wing dictators and left wing dictators. There is Franco, Hitler, Mussolini and others on the right, and there is Stalin, Mao, Castro etc on the left.

I see no real immediate danger on the left, but that doesn't mean we really won't see that down the road.

I see a real need for structural change. The lame duck period for example has to be changed.
Click to expand...

Yes, there have been left wing dictators in the history of the world, but that has no bearing on the likelihood of it happening here anytime soon.

What we are seeing happening in America right now didn’t occur in a vacuum. It’s been carefully crafted and constructed by Republicans for decades. It’s been leading to this for a long time.

There are simply no warning signs at all that something like this could happen on the Left.

Shortening the lame duck period is an idea I agree with, by the way.
 
I originally considered this a mildly good idea in some ways but also pointless, with the net result of not caring one way or the other, but then I heard someone pointing out that an impeachment & conviction would make Trump ineligible to run again. I don't think he's likely to anyway because by that time it's likely that either he'll be dead or his continuing nervous degeneration will be so severe as to make him look too pitiful for his own current following. But just in case that doesn't work out, given the fact that the Democrats who are currently in control of their party will only spend the next few years rolling out a red carpet for him anyway just like before, another precaution against Trump 2024 would be good.
 
Delvo said:
I originally considered this a mildly good idea in some ways but also pointless, with the net result of not caring one way or the other, but then I heard someone pointing out that an impeachment & conviction would make Trump ineligible to run again. I don't think he's likely to anyway because by that time it's likely that either he'll be dead or his continuing nervous degeneration will be so severe as to make him look too pitiful for his own current following. But just in case that doesn't work out, given the fact that the Democrats who are currently in control of their party will only spend the next few years rolling out a red carpet for him anyway just like before, another precaution against Trump 2024 would be good.
Click to expand...

He needs to be impeached *if only* to prevent him from running again, no matter how unlikely we guess that is at this time.
 
Paul2 said:
He needs to be impeached *if only* to prevent him from running again, no matter how unlikely we guess that is at this time.
Click to expand...

He needs to be impeached because we desperately need to reset standards back to the pre-Trumpian era, where reality was real and criminality pushed by the President was not a daily news report.
 
johnny karate said:
Yes, there have been left wing dictators in the history of the world, but that has no bearing on the likelihood of it happening here anytime soon.

What we are seeing happening in America right now didn’t occur in a vacuum. It’s been carefully crafted and constructed by Republicans for decades. It’s been leading to this for a long time.

There are simply no warning signs at all that something like this could happen on the Left.

Shortening the lame duck period is an idea I agree with, by the way.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. There are people on the left right now who would do the same things as those on the far right. They just don't have much of a voice at the moment.

It just isn't a danger in the foreseeable future. When I wrote my thesis, I compared the tactics and strategies employed by left wing and right wing authoritarian governments. And the fact is they were not very different from each other.
 
Meadmaker said:
I don't think the Atheist's claim that a second impeachment would harden voters' opposition was refuted by the fact that Donald Trump lost re-election after the first impeachment.
Click to expand...

From my reading of dejudge's refutation, the 'hardening of resolve' was supposed to have been aimed at non-Republican Senate and House, nothing to do with Presidency at all. TheAtheist was claiming that if the Democrats caused any consequences to come to Trump in the last two weeks of his presidency for the deadly attack on the Legislative branch, voters would respond by voting for Republican Senators and Representatives. Which they didn't, after the previous impeachment. It wasn't as strong a response in Congress as it was to Presidency, but voters sure weren't hardened against Democrats for Congress for the impeachment.
 
dudalb said:
Maybe even consider the possbility that he or she might come from the left as well as the right.
Click to expand...

The Great Zaganza said:
Quite possible.
Click to expand...

Be Warned: Your Own Version of Trump is Coming

One day, very soon, your personal Donald Trump will come along. It'll be all of the same tricks, only perfectly tailored to your beliefs and pent-up rage. He or she will be just as dishonest and as abrasive as the proverbial cat's tongue on your genitals ... but everything they say will go down smooth as butter. You know how sometimes you drink butter? Like the little tub of it they give you at Red Lobster? Like that.

They may not even be running for office. They may only want you to buy their book, or listen to their podcast. What matters is that you spot them before it's too late.
Click to expand...

Article: https://www.cracked.com/blog/be-warned-your-own-trump-coming/
 
BobTheCoward said:
Do you think the benefits of doing it are high or low?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant, Bob. Remember, the government isn’t in the business of utilitarianism. I am shocked to see you suggest it is. It is in the business of fidelity to the constitution, though, right? Impeachment.
 
Meadmaker said:
It is also my opinion that the Atheist was correct. My belief is that a second impeachment would harden opposition to the Democrats. I will amend that somewhat, though, by saying it would only do so if they failed to convict. However, as I stated earlier, I'm not sure I care. Impeachment and removal from office is the right thing to do, so right at this moment I'm leaning toward saying they should do the right thing, regardless of political calculations.
Click to expand...

i agree to a certain extent, failing to convict would be a disaster. but not in the sense that it could be avoided, it will just reveal how far gone these people are. it will harden the opposition of a small portion of the R electorate and a good number of house reps and a handful of senators. but these people's opposition is already so hardened they thought they had a right to go and kill legislators for counting votes they didn't like. they wanted to kill the VP, and many legislatures were ok with that. the dems aren't going to make them happy.

but i think many voters realize that he's lost his mind. for some of the house as well, and much of the senate, whatever political benefits he was giving them are gone.

hopefully not everyone is afraid of trump
 
If you can confirm a Supreme Court Justice in 8 days, then you can impeach a President in 10.
 
dirtywick said:
i agree to a certain extent, failing to convict would be a disaster. but not in the sense that it could be avoided, it will just reveal how far gone these people are. it will harden the opposition of a small portion of the R electorate and a good number of house reps and a handful of senators. but these people's opposition is already so hardened they thought they had a right to go and kill legislators for counting votes they didn't like. they wanted to kill the VP, and many legislatures were ok with that. the dems aren't going to make them happy.

but i think many voters realize that he's lost his mind. for some of the house as well, and much of the senate, whatever political benefits he was giving them are gone.

hopefully not everyone is afraid of trump
Click to expand...

Indeed. At the least we need to see exactly who are going to stand behind Trump. If this impeachment ends up rankling Republicans then those Republicans are defenders of an attempted coup.

On the other hand, “But what if we fail to convict?” Is a terrible non-argument.

This can be said about almost any crime. “Sorry, we can’t prosecute this guy for racially-aggravated murder because what happens if there is a racist jury? They might be sympathetic. Best let bygones be bygones. Turn the other cheek. Forgive and forget. Sing kumbaya. Take the plane from Munich with your piece of paper. Submit to the Saviours. Etc etc...”
 
Lurch said:
Quite the hang-up on Pelosi ya got going there. Supposedly Trump's a billionaire, but spends more time and energy on TV, tweeting, and golf than on doing his goddamned job. Why aren't you whining about him being some rich, coastal elite who belongs back in his gold leaf-bedecked den of iniquity?
Click to expand...

Do you not even understand the difference between Republicans and Democrats?
____________________________

Meanwhile, this:

Brendan Buck, a former adviser to former Republican House speakers Paul Ryan and John Boehner who has criticised Trump before, cautioned against declaring the outgoing president politically dead.

Buck argued that any kind of punishment for Trump - be it impeachment or prosecution or merely a censure by Congress - could accrue to his political benefit, a point Miller made as well.
Click to expand...
bolding mine

I'm going to take a wild guess their insight is a little better than some unknown people on an internet forum.
 
The Atheist said:
Do you not even understand the difference between Republicans and Democrats?
____________________________

Meanwhile, this:

bolding mine

I'm going to take a wild guess their insight is a little better than some unknown people on an internet forum.
Click to expand...
that was not so much a prediction that punishing trump would accrue to his benefit as much as merely saying you could not rule it out, which should be obvious. That does not add up to an argument for not punishing trump because some pol knows more than we do.
 
The Atheist said:
Do you not even understand the difference between Republicans and Democrats?
____________________________

Meanwhile, this:

bolding mine

I'm going to take a wild guess their insight is a little better than some unknown people on an internet forum.
Click to expand...

You think? I'm not so sure.

I can see their point, but people are also emboldened when they are able to get away with things. More important in my mind than punishment is exposing him as the incompetent awful man he is.

Trump is not a young man. He's 74 and a half. This isn't Hitler who was sentenced to 5 years in Prison but only served 9 months. Hitler was arrested for Treason when he was 34 and out before he was 36 and right back at it.

Trump and Trumpism must be destroyed.
 
acbytesla said:
I can see their point, but people are also emboldened when they are able to get away with things.
Click to expand...

Trump is irrelevant - it's the people who voted for him that matter, and despite me being happy to say out loud that all Trump/Republican voters are ignorant scum, it's not actually true. Some of them are decent people - I don't believe the split in USA is 50-50; I'd tend to think 2/3 of Americans are fine people, the other side are *****.

acbytesla said:
More important in my mind than punishment is exposing him as the incompetent awful man he is.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that's not news.

acbytesla said:
Trump and Trumpism must be destroyed.
Click to expand...

I'm also pretty sure he's done that all on his own.

How about Newt Gingrich as a source?

While the piece is less than something you scrape off your shoes, even Newt manages to stick a telling piece in:

At any given moment, somewhere between 20% and 50% of the Republican Party is eager to sell out. They’ll be happy with a pat on the head and an invitation to a cocktail party from left-wing elites. That way, they can be accepted as "mature statesmen."

In fact, some Republicans are joining the insane calls by Democrats and the media to invoke the 25th Amendment to oust a man who received 74 million votes and has already said he’s leaving the White House in just a few days.
Click to expand...

Those people Gingrich talks about "selling out" are the voters I mean. If you can give them reasons to vote Democrat, many will.

Impeaching Trump, creating sympathy for the fat ****, is not the way to go about it.
 
dejudge said:
Your opinion about the pandemic is of no use right now.

We know that the Democrats impeached Trump in a partisan vote and still won the Presidency and control of the Senate so the claim than a second impeachment would hurt the Democrats cannot be shown to be true.
Click to expand...

Whereas not acting will almost certainly hurt the Democrats given the current atmosphere. You cannot ignore sending a mob to break into the Capitol to try to stop a legislative action.
 
Last edited:
angrysoba said:
Irrelevant, Bob. Remember, the government isn’t in the business of utilitarianism. I am shocked to see you suggest it is. It is in the business of fidelity to the constitution, though, right? Impeachment.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of talk in this thread of, "if not x then y." Just trying to figure out who thinks that is relevant and who does not.
 
Paul2 said:
This "heal the division" is absolute bullcrap, and we just crossed the line where we're gonna pretend differently. **** that. The ones who want to heal the division are the ones who fomented it. Give. Me. A. Break.
Click to expand...

Understatement of the year. Trumpanzees and their enablers have no shame. They don't even know what that means.
 
The Atheist said:
....
Buck argued that any kind of punishment for Trump - be it impeachment or prosecution or merely a censure by Congress - could accrue to his political benefit, a point Miller made as well.
Click to expand...

I'm going to take a wild guess their insight is a little better than some unknown people on an internet forum.
Click to expand...
Their "insight" is nothing more than the same line they always give when the boot is the one coming down on them, "you don't want to do that, it will make you look mean" or whatever. :rolleyes:

It's a predictable GOP propaganda ploy and unfortunately it has been successful time and time again. Time to recognize it for what it is.
 
Last edited:
The Atheist said:
...

How about Newt Gingrich as a source?

While the piece is less than something you scrape off your shoes, even Newt manages to stick a telling piece in:

Those people Gingrich talks about "selling out" are the voters I mean. If you can give them reasons to vote Democrat, many will.

Impeaching Trump, creating sympathy for the fat ****, is not the way to go about it.
Click to expand...
What happened over the last couple months and especially the last week negate some of those 74 million votes. Obviously many of those votes came from diehard Trump fans. Nothing the Democrats do, impeach or any version of ridding ourselves of Trump, is going to affect their beliefs one bit. It's just as likely doing nothing will embolden them.

Gingrich is a washed-up politician still trying to insert himself into current events so he can drive up book sales.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Their "insight" is nothing more than the same line they always give when the boot is the one coming down on them, "you don't want to do that, it will make you look mean" or whatever. :rolleyes:

It's a predictable GOP propaganda ploy and unfortunately it has been successful time and time again. Time to recognize it for what it is.
Click to expand...

Then they say the Dems are weak
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It's just as likely doing nothing will embolden them.
Click to expand...

It is not "just a likely". It is absolute certainty.

Behavioral scientists says lack of expected (or any for that matter) punishment is treated as reward.

Opinions like "let them get away with it or else!" are extremely foolish at best.
 
Bernie Sanders
@BernieSanders
·
Jan 8
Some people ask: Why would you impeach and convict a president who has only a few days left in office? The answer: Precedent. It must be made clear that no president, now or in the future, can lead an insurrection against the U.S. government.
Click to expand...
 
A bloody attempted coup was just experienced by the entire Legislative branch. That cannot be encouraged by offering zero consequences.
 
Last edited:
The Atheist said:
Those people Gingrich talks about "selling out" are the voters I mean. If you can give them reasons to vote Democrat, many will.

Impeaching Trump, creating sympathy for the fat ****, is not the way to go about it.
Click to expand...

No, Gingrich is not referring to the voters. The clue is "mature statesmen." Voters aren't statesmen. Politicians are.
 
Latest report is that the House of Representatives will impeach Donald J Trump this week. but likely delay sending articles of Impeachment to the United States Senate.

This according to a letter Speaker Pelosi sent out in the last hour.
 
I know the internet has created this mythology where "I'll argue any stupid contrarian position because I'd rather defend an immoral absurdity then live in a world where everyone agrees on anything" is a noble position, but it's also the biggest cylinder in the engine that drove us to the post-fact world.

"When the President orders an angry mob to storm the Capitol and 5 people die CONSEQUENCES SHOULD OCCUR" was firmly established in the "No **** Sherlock Act of Nineteen Hundred And Always."
 
acbytesla said:
Latest report is that the House of Representatives will impeach Donald J Trump this week. but likely delay sending articles of Impeachment to the United States Senate.

This according to a letter Speaker Pelosi sent out in the last hour.
Click to expand...

Then it's a farce. Another political dog and pony show.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom