The Impeachment Thread

#7,551
#7,551
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Yep, he makes the Democrats look dumb and dumber more each day.....a daily basis as a matter of FACT.
That's why he gets attacks from the loony left-wing dolts who have no common sense about TRUE FACTS.
Click to expand...
Funny how no left leaning network will have him on in a debate against their own. Shapiro the same.
 
#7,557
#7,557
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Yep, he makes the Democrats look dumb and dumber more each day.....on a daily basis as a matter of FACT.
That's why he gets attacks from the loony left-wing dolts who have no common sense about TRUE FACTS.
Click to expand...
Does he have any more of them alternative facts lying around? Trump could use a few more I'm sure.
 
#7,563
#7,563
Rifleman said:
Just for accuracy, he won independents by 4 points, 46-42 in the final tally. Gary Johnson pulled 7 percent and Jill Stein 2.
Click to expand...
Gotcha thanks I misread the article...they were talking about independents in this poll not last election 20191007_113639.jpg
 
#7,567
#7,567
Orangeburst65 said:
I thought this was proven false.
Click to expand...
Unless something new came out, he has no authority to “change the rules.” The letter that was released basically said they changed how the rules are explained to employees because their prior explanation was not consistent with the statute.

I’d be shocked if the whistleblower’s attorney didn’t say something to them about the form.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC and Orangeburst
#7,569
#7,569
This is a pretty good read of impeachment events... The Federalist is right leaning but also mostly factual.according to The media bias site
 
#7,571
#7,571
VolnJC said:
Gotcha thanks I misread the article...they were talking about independents in this poll not last election View attachment 229892
Click to expand...

Romney won independents 50-45 in 2012 as well, but fewer people identified as neutral in that election and it didn't help Romney much.

Another fun fact, 81% of "independents" lean solidly to one party or another. Vermont independents and Utah independents aren't up for grabs. So national polls of independents aren't indicators of much of anything.

If you have some good data for Trump in Florida among independents, then you're onto something. That is the key state for targeting truly neutral voters. New Hampshire used to be another, but that ship has sailed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#7,574
#7,574
So let's take stock of the excuses so far, and how they hold up on an effectiveness scale, 0 for no effect, 10 for defeats the charge.


1. The Dems have hated Trump since the beginning and have been looking for a way to get rid of him:

This is true, but it is irrelevant. The Dems' motivation has nothing to do with the objective merits of the criticism of Trump's actions. This matters only to the base, which was going nowhere anyway.
Effectiveness: 2

2. Trump is right to attack corruption:

This is true. But the excuse does not apply here because the evidence is overwhelming that this was not about some general, superseding power to combat crime, it was about using the office to seek foreign assistance in the election. No one really believes this was just Trump fighting crime. I doubt even his base really buys into that one.
Effectiveness: 0

3. Everybody does it and I can cite examples of the Clintons seeking at least foreign influence or money in a US campaign:

This is a weak comparison because the source of this claim, which is really quite murky and undefined, is the Clinton Foundation. Thing is, that did not occur whilst a sitting president. And it was not direct, as was Trump's calls for interference. It always involves some hard-to-understand deal with five moving parts. It works well for the base because they are already inclined to believe it. And guys like Jordan will be all over it come hearing time because he knows it is what Trump and the base want to hear. But it is so substantively different that the excuse is easily defeated.
Effectiveness: 3

4. There is no proof of a quid pro quo on the military aid.

This argument fails at two levels. First, the timing and other circumstances make claim of lack of a quid pro quo pretty dumb. Remember, the issue is not whether it was express. Put yourself in the Ukrainian President's shoes. First the aid is inexplicably held up. Then when you bring up the issue of buying more missiles, the first thing POTUS says is do us a solid, and its campaign related. Plus we have not seen everything else, yet. This argument is much more likely to get worse, rather than better, moving forward. And indeed even without an express quid pro quo, Trump having asked for assistance in such fashion is the real wrong, in and of itself.
Effectiveness: 1


5. Trump really did not understand that there was anything wrong with doing this, so he deserves a pass given his success in other areas.

Objectively this is a poor argument. The phone call to the Ukraine came on the heels of the Mueller report. It is difficult to see how Trump would not have understood that asking a foreign government to investigate your main political rival is unacceptable behavior. If he did think that, it suggests his ego is so enormous, and his intelligence so low, that he should not get this pass. Plus, the fact there was an effort to make it harder for people to see that transcript, even if not at Trump's personal direction, also suggests an awareness that Trump's overture to Ukraine was wrong.
Effectiveness: 1

In short, none of the themes offered so far as excuses and arguments for Trump's behavior is legitimate. At best, they will have low level effect with people who would never have turned on him, anyway. I know you supporters don't want to hear it, but it genuinely seems like the fight they are putting up now just makes this worse, not better.
 
#7,575
#7,575
lawgator1 said:
So let's take stock of the excuses so far, and how they hold up on an effectiveness scale, 0 for no effect, 10 for defeats the charge.


1. The Dems have hated Trump since the beginning and have been looking for a way to get rid of him:

This is true, but it is irrelevant. The Dems' motivation has nothing to do with the objective merits of the criticism of Trump's actions. This matters only to the base, which was going nowhere anyway.
Effectiveness: 2

2. Trump is right to attack corruption:

This is true. But the excuse does not apply here because the evidence is overwhelming that this was not about some general, superseding power to combat crime, it was about using the office to seek foreign assistance in the election. No one really believes this was just Trump fighting crime. I doubt even his base really buys into that one.
Effectiveness: 0

3. Everybody does it and I can cite examples of the Clintons seeking at least foreign influence or money in a US campaign:

This is a weak comparison because the source of this claim, which is really quite murky and undefined, is the Clinton Foundation. Thing is, that did not occur whilst a sitting president. And it was not direct, as was Trump's calls for interference. It always involves some hard-to-understand deal with five moving parts. It works well for the base because they are already inclined to believe it. And guys like Jordan will be all over it come hearing time because he knows it is what Trump and the base want to hear. But it is so substantively different that the excuse is easily defeated.
Effectiveness: 3

4. There is no proof of a quid pro quo on the military aid.

This argument fails at two levels. First, the timing and other circumstances make claim of lack of a quid pro quo pretty dumb. Remember, the issue is not whether it was express. Put yourself in the Ukrainian President's shoes. First the aid is inexplicably held up. Then when you bring up the issue of buying more missiles, the first thing POTUS says is do us a solid, and its campaign related. Plus we have not seen everything else, yet. This argument is much more likely to get worse, rather than better, moving forward. And indeed even without an express quid pro quo, Trump having asked for assistance in such fashion is the real wrong, in and of itself.
Effectiveness: 1


5. Trump really did not understand that there was anything wrong with doing this, so he deserves a pass given his success in other areas.

Objectively this is a poor argument. The phone call to the Ukraine came on the heels of the Mueller report. It is difficult to see how Trump would not have understood that asking a foreign government to investigate your main political rival is unacceptable behavior. If he did think that, it suggests his ego is so enormous, and his intelligence so low, that he should not get this pass. Plus, the fact there was an effort to make it harder for people to see that transcript, even if not at Trump's personal direction, also suggests an awareness that Trump's overture to Ukraine was wrong.
Effectiveness: 1

In short, none of the themes offered so far as excuses and arguments for Trump's behavior is legitimate. At best, they will have low level effect with people who would never have turned on him, anyway. I know you supporters don't want to hear it, but it genuinely seems like the fight they are putting up now just makes this worse, not better.
Click to expand...
1570467495695.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, AM64, W.TN.Orange Blood and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top