iNow Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 7 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Beat down after voting yea? This one. Article 2 also passed. 3 no vote plus 1 vote as present. 195 repubs and 3 dems against. 228 dems and 1 independent for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YJ02 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 13 hours ago, Phi for All said: After all, if what you said was true, and I was on the extreme left, I could claim Bernie Sanders was on the right. Just because he'd be to the right of me doesn't make him "on the right". I typed On 12/17/2019 at 10:05 PM, YJ02 said: how far to the right someone is depends on how far to the left you and your perceptions are. all relative to the location of the observer I did not say that the location of the observer made someone BE on the right or left, just 'how far' right or left I would guess that Bernie Sanders would place Al Gore on the left, but much closer to the center then he is. Sander's location puts Gore to his right; Gore's location puts Sanders' to his left, yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 8 hours ago, YJ02 said: I did not say that the location of the observer made someone BE on the right or left, just 'how far' right or left I would guess that Bernie Sanders would place Al Gore on the left, but much closer to the center then he is. Sander's location puts Gore to his right; Gore's location puts Sanders' to his left, yes? It's clear you don't understand what a spectrum is, and how your political perspective fits upon it in relation to a group. Whether you're considered left or right isn't relative to any other individual (or an observer, as you put it) , it's where your perspective sits among the group. It would be meaningless to classify Sanders as "on the right" just because he's to the right of me. Doesn't that make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted December 19, 2019 Author Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) There is no absolute yardstick for determining where you are on the political spectrum, Phi. Using YJ's analogy, A Gore might be on the left of B Sanders if we use the Climate change yardstick. If we use the Education yardstick B Sanders might be on the left of A Gore. I myself, used the gun owner yardstick to place Zapatos to the right of JCMacSwell. So I would argue it is subjective, as it depends on which metric you decide to use for making the left/right determination. ( if it wasn't there would be no need for the thread Zap opened ,'Attributes along the Political Spectrum' ) Edited December 19, 2019 by MigL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 This, too, is off-topic, but it takes more than 2 people to form a "spectrum." That's the deeper point Phi is making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 minute ago, MigL said: There is no absolute yardstick for determining where you are on the political spectrum, Phi. Using YJ's analogy, A Gore might be on the left of B Sanders if we use the Climate change yardstick. If we use the Education yardstick B Sanders might be on the left of A Gore. I myself, used the gun owner yardstick to place Zapatos to the right of JCMacSwell. So I would argue it is subjective, as it depends on which metric you decide to use for making the left/right determination. ( if it wasn't there would be no need for the thread Zap opened ) That's Phi's point or are you to the right of... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted December 19, 2019 Author Share Posted December 19, 2019 Oooops. Maybe I misunderstood Phi ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) Nancy Pelosi just had her say, following Mitch and Chuck, 30 minutes each. She won't talk about impeachment anymore. The senate is not getting the Articles until Mitch is a good boy, and agrees to have a REAL senate trial with relevant witnesses, like Bolton and Mulvaney. How long can Nancy delay sending the Articles to the senate? Now is a good time for a few weeks of sweating the GOP. Maybe the poles will start moving, and GOP senators start taking notice of their own popular support. Edited December 19, 2019 by Airbrush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 6 minutes ago, Airbrush said: Nancy Pelosi just had her say, following Mitch and Chuck, 30 minutes each. She won't talk about impeachment any more. The senate is not getting the Articles until Mitch is a good boy, and agrees to have a REAL senate trial with relevant witnesses, like Bolton and Mulvaney. All fun and gamesmanship until some become open to voting aye... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapatos Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 36 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: All fun and gamesmanship until some become open to voting aye... I think withholding the Articles of Impeachment would be a smart strategy by Pelosi (I didn't even realize that was an option). It eliminates McConnell's strategy of using the Senate rules to dump dirt over the A of I and instead leaves McConnell's and Graham's disregard for their oath hanging in the wind for all to see. Here is the oath the Senators give: Quote “I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of [Donald Trump], now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.” Here is what McConnell said: Quote I'm not impartial about this at all And Lindsey Graham: Quote This thing will come to the Senate, and it will die quickly, and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 2 hours ago, MigL said: Oooops. Maybe I misunderstood Phi ? Historically speaking, this is a wise default. But it is off-topic, as iNow points out, and I've said enough about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted December 20, 2019 Author Share Posted December 20, 2019 Very well, back on topic. It seems the wheels are starting to come off the cart for D Trump. Some of his most ardent supporters, that fringe sect of Christianity, the Evangelicals, are now calling for his removal from office. https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html I haven't the stomach to read the whole thing, mostly going by the title, so I may be jumping to wrong conclusions. But if Republican supporters are starting to distance themselves from D Trump, how soon before Republican Senators ( worried about re-election ) do the same ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 8 minutes ago, MigL said: if Republican supporters are starting to distance themselves from D Trump, how soon before Republican Senators ( worried about re-election ) do the same ? It will take one brave one to show courage and step out against the President. That senator will be like a seed crystal on to which others can grasp and grow. It still won’t rise to the 2/3rds needed to remove from office, but Romney seems likely to lead here on principle. We’ll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, MigL said: Very well, back on topic. It seems the wheels are starting to come off the cart for D Trump. Some of his most ardent supporters, that fringe sect of Christianity, the Evangelicals, are now calling for his removal from office. https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html I haven't the stomach to read the whole thing, mostly going by the title, so I may be jumping to wrong conclusions. But if Republican supporters are starting to distance themselves from D Trump, how soon before Republican Senators ( worried about re-election ) do the same ? You should do. The ethics it supports are universal in a civilised society. It's just their inspiration for those ethics that isn't. Edited December 20, 2019 by StringJunky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) Its interesting that all the Republican arguments attack the Dems, rather than defend D Trump. Edited December 20, 2019 by dimreepr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, dimreepr said: Its interesting that all the Republican arguments attack the Dems, rather than defend D Trump. When the facts aren’t on your side, pound on the process. When the process isn’t on your side, pound on the facts. When neither the facts nor the process are on your side, pound on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Did I say interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 (edited) Interesting leverage Nancy Pelosi has holding the Articles out of their reach. She should sweat the GOP for as long as possible, without interfering with primaries. This is now a war of attrition. Every time the GOP asks for the Articles, so they can quickly throw it into the fire, Nancy will say "Only if you promise to a real, fair trial with relevant witnesses." This Charlie Brown and Lucy repetition will work the effect of (Trump's own tactic of constant repetition) it will make more non voters (there are 100 million Americans that DON'T VOTE) step up and actually vote. Doesn't the House get more authority now to issue subpoenas after impeachment has been approved in the House? Don't subpoenas have more force now? They should AGAIN subpoena everyone relevant to this case. Edited December 21, 2019 by Airbrush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, Airbrush said: Doesn't the House get more authority now to issue subpoenas after impeachment has been approved in the House? No. The power here is in keeping it in the news and highlighting the lack of impartiality in the senate to voters who want fairness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 (edited) After listening to Michael Moore's interview yesterday I realize that the next election has 3 possibilities: 1 Trump just barely wins; 2 Trump just barely loses; 3 Trump loses in a LANDSLIDE because just a small fraction of the non-voters actually vote out of fear of 4 more years of exhausting drama. In the perpetual Peanuts analogy, Lucy is Nancy Pelosi, Mitch (and Trump also) is Charlie Brown, and the football is the Articles. Mitch and Trump both take turns charging at the ball to kick it, and Nancy pulls it away each time saying "Only when you promise a fair trial." Edited December 21, 2019 by Airbrush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted December 22, 2019 Author Share Posted December 22, 2019 Instead I ran across this foreboding comic in the news... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrock Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 Sorry I couldn't embed this... The story of impeachment, by a Christmas choir 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/our-poll-finds-a-majority-of-americans-think-the-evidence-supports-trumps-removal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangerx Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/17/us/politics/trump-impeachment-lawyers-starr-dershowitz.html This will be the greatest display of Republican hypocrisy in human history. Let's start with a Trump quote: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-called-ken-starr-freak-lunatic-disaster-impeachment-2020-1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangerx Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 *crickets* Are we so gas lit nowadays that an impending constitutional crisis is apethetic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now