|
Raskolnikov38 posted:black people marching in the streets and sitting at whites only lunch counters was a direct affront to jim crow that could not go unchallenged. the system was not fundamentally challenged by people marching around for a single day in 2017 Next time they should seek a "Permit to Fundamentally Challenge the System" from SA forum poster Raskolnikov38.
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:
The one we currently occupy, not the same place that you seem to preside in. I'm not saying they weren't good, they just weren't protests. They were rallies. I'll drop this as there is an impeachment going on and probably more interesting than my opinions on the validity of modern protest movements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
Is there a tally of what total percentage of the population effectively voted "for" witnesses (through their Senate representation) and which voted against? I imagine the GOP Senate majority is only really a "majority"
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Kavros posted:Is there a tally of what total percentage of the population effectively voted "for" witnesses (through their Senate representation) and which voted against? I imagine the GOP Senate majority is only really a "majority" You can look at how the 2018 senate elections went. Democrats got 9 million more votes and lost seats. 2016 I think was similar but less extreme. House is similar - although they gained seats it wasn’t as many as the overall popular vote would have been. That brings us to an easy fix - radically expand the house. That would patch the electoral college too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
Kavros posted:Is there a tally of what total percentage of the population effectively voted "for" witnesses (through their Senate representation) and which voted against? I imagine the GOP Senate majority is only really a "majority" I did the math a while back on total constituents represented (giving a state to GOP if they held both seats, dems if they held both, and total pop to each party if the state was split) and I didn't save it but I seem to remember it coming out pretty even. Flipping Arizona was undone by losing Florida and Missouri. But that's going entirely by memory so I might be off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I think protest is not useful in today's politics like it was in previous generations. It's a show of support, but not actually doing anything. If a protest has a permit, how much of a protest is it? Anyway, interesting that the House managers didn't use their full time. In a world where the WH lawyers were not barking mad fuckholes I'd be wondering how much re-alignment they're doing right now, but I'm legitimately skeptical that any of them with the possible exception of Philbin have are capable of forming the concept of a contingency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
What is the most valuable thing everyone thinks will come from this impeachment? The most important thing is that this has shown just how corrupt and power hungry the GOP has become. I think this will show people that this batch of politicians are putting party over country and breaking their oath of office. My hope is that this stays in the news for a while and that the democrats, who are not known for their amazing messaging, actually keep hammering away on this. I'll be really interested to hear what the rest of you folks think because I'm having trouble seeing a lot of the silver lining in all of this and I could use a change of perspective. edit: reworded
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
Kavros posted:Is there a tally of what total percentage of the population effectively voted "for" witnesses (through their Senate representation) and which voted against? I imagine the GOP Senate majority is only really a "majority" The 50 votes for Kavanaugh represented 44% of the population so I suspect it’s only worse in the current Senate. But you have to remember that any form of winner-takes-all representation is going to be vulnerable to skewing - when I lived in red states, I certainly didn’t feel like my senators voted for me in any capacity. A truly representative system would need a pathway for every person’s vote to directly affect the power of some representative that they approve of.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:What is the most valuable thing everyone thinks will come from this impeachment? Also possibly foreign powers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
SubG posted:Yes, unless your political action is literally a vangardist revolution that immediately leads to the realisation of a perfect worker's paradise what is even the point, right? That's not what im saying at all, but I don't think we should elevate one to the status of the other. Otherwise we mistake symbolic gestures as actual protest. At this point the house has made their case as best as possible and taking more time would be a bit pointless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:34
|
|
|
I think it’s the message that the GOP isn’t better than Trump and just waiting for a return of normalcy, but actively excusing and allowing Trump’s corruption; and that you can just expect this forever if you let your distaste for Biden or Bernie keep you at home in November.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:36
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:What is the most valuable thing everyone thinks will come from this impeachment? Energizing the Democratic base and giving the American people another reason to kick Trump out of office in November. I'm not as convinced as a lot of others that impeachment will fade from voters' minds as we get closer to the election. Impeachment is a big event that doesn't come around that often, and the GOP didn't have its chance to spin the Ukraine scandal as they did with Mueller. "The GOP put party over country" is an easy talking point the Democrats can hammer and hammer the same way "her emails" was hammered in 2016. After 2016 I'm not confident enough to say that Trump will be defeated, but I tend to think that voters are sick of him and the chaos he brings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:37
|
|
|
F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:Energizing the Democratic base and giving the American people another reason to kick Trump out of office in November. I'm not as convinced as a lot of others that impeachment will fade from voters' minds as we get closer to the election. Impeachment is a big event that doesn't come around that often, and the GOP didn't have its chance to spin the Ukraine scandal as they did with Mueller. "The GOP put party over country" is an easy talking point the Democrats can hammer and hammer the same way "her emails" was hammered in 2016. The GOP is already trying to spin the whole Trump/Ukraine thing as being about Biden and his son and that they are going to impeach him as soon as he gets into office. They are trying to control the narrative again. I'm really hoping you are right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:The GOP is already trying to spin the whole Trump/Ukraine thing as being about Biden and his son and that they are going to impeach him as soon as he gets into office. They are trying to control the narrative again. I'm really hoping you are right. I don't think they can this time because unlike the Mueller report, they never have a consistent message for that to work. Like...their messaging is all over the place on this and their playbook is just not as effective for things they keep getting surprised by.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
Buffer posted:That brings us to an easy fix - radically expand the house. That would patch the electoral college too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:That's not what im saying at all, but I don't think we should elevate one to the status of the other. Otherwise we mistake symbolic gestures as actual protest. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:At this point the house has made their case as best as possible and taking more time would be a bit pointless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
SubG posted:
Is there a rebuttal to closing arguments?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 18:51
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Is there a rebuttal to closing arguments? Or at least I think so...I can't find a written copy of the adopted resolution to doublecheck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
SubG posted:Not in the sense that there's a formal rebuttal period, but the resolution adopted on Friday for the schedule for today just says that both sides get four hours evenly divided, and the House managers reserved their remaining time after using 50 minutes. That may be smart if they actually get to use that time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:The GOP is already trying to spin the whole Trump/Ukraine thing as being about Biden and his son and that they are going to impeach him as soon as he gets into office. They are trying to control the narrative again. I'm really hoping you are right. I hope I am too, and I don't want to have misplaced faith in the electorate. I made that mistake in 2016 and don't want to make the same one again in 2020. I'm not sure they'll have success, though, for the simple fact that they haven't really controlled the narrative since this story first started breaking in early September. It's also so easy to simply say that they voted for a cover up. I don't know, but I tend to agree with Dapper's assessments of our chances in November. I don't think it's a done deal by any means, and a lot will depend on the Democratic nominee (it can't be a decorum Dem like Biden).
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:14
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:What is the most valuable thing everyone thinks will come from this impeachment? Well the biggest thing of value is almost absolutely gaining 2-3 Senate seats in the Fall. I am sure everyone on the Democratic side knew that Trump would no be acquitted but I doubt anyone would have bet that the GOP Senate would have sacrificed so much to gain so little. The Democrats have a bat to beat on every Republican in the Fall, which was the plan. They forced every GOP House member and Senator to be on record and in the Senate they forced them to vote on every key witness and piece of evidence. When those bombs go off it will be yet another torpedo hitting the sinking ship of many Senate races. You will have a mass of voters fired up and even more ready to not only vote to remove Trump but also punish those that aided him in committing crimes. When the history is written about this era you will see that the strategy to vote against witnesses will have been one of the greatest blunders in politics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
Closing arguments by WH lawyers surprisingly restrained. So far it's been a relentless parade of mendacities but just the mostly tame, boring, procedural poo poo--Ukrainians didn't know aid was withheld until the story broke, when Mulvaney said quid pro quo he meant no quid pro quo, Trump and Zelensky bumped into each other in the hallway once, that was totally a meeting. No Biden Biden Biden server Mueller Biden horseshit so far.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:21
|
|
|
Djarum posted:
It looks bad whether theres witnesses or not because only Trumpists (not embarrassed rank and file GOP) dont care whats happening. I think a lot of the horse race stuff is so meaningless electorally, given how we knew the vote was gonna go. The impeachment and its vote were the only thing needed for November, any of the process stuff was superfluous
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
SubG posted:Closing arguments by WH lawyers surprisingly restrained. So far it's been a relentless parade of mendacities but just the mostly tame, boring, procedural poo poo--Ukrainians didn't know aid was withheld until the story broke, when Mulvaney said quid pro quo he meant no quid pro quo, Trump and Zelensky bumped into each other in the hallway once, that was totally a meeting. No Biden Biden Biden server Mueller Biden horseshit so far. Surprisingly restrained yet provably (frustratingly) false.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
I know the closing arguments from the White House counsel are the same poo poo they've been shoveling this entire time, but it's infuriating to hear arguments like "Accusing the president of obstructing congress would be an abuse of power by congress" and "There's no evidence in the record that Trump told anyone to talk to Ukraine about the aid hold being linked to the investigations."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
lol here we go. Sekulow now playing a montage of people talking about impeaching the President with ~*scary music*~ over it. lol Infowars-level material in the well of the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
Gotta love the lovely ominous music. If I was John Carpenter I would double check my music catalog and see if I was ripped off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
SubG posted:lol here we go. Sekulow now playing a montage of people talking about impeaching the President with ~*scary music*~ over it. That $65 Million Sekulow was given from Trump-aligned Charities is going to "good" use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:44
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:What was the alternative, though? Allow witnesses, try and cross them up in their testimony and convince people that Bureaucracy Elemental/Psychopath John Bolton is a liar before holding the same sham vote? Call witnesses, but include Bidens and staffers who outside of the conspiracy who could sit there and say, "I didn't see anything!" and anybody else they could get to muddy the waters. Basically, the ideal republican strategy at the start was "flush this turd as fast as possible" but as it became clear that there were people with major evidence then they needed to stir poo poo up as much as possible. Yeah, everyone here would have groaned at every conspiracy mongering question, but they could have used impeachment as a stage to play for their base. Something that would let your insane relatives talk about how unfair democrats were being because didn't you hear what they said in that five second sound bite on Fox news. Instead, the GOP has fumbled the ball pretty badly first by giving democrats a platform to pound "Republicans are totally corrupt!" into the national consciousness and then backing that up with their own actions. It's not the absolute best possible outcome of the impeachment hearings, but it's pretty close. It's also kind of boring (which is why it's not the absolute best possible outcome). Still, I can't really complain about the way democrats handled this impeachment trial. I can complain when they don't have the second impeachment ready to go in a month, however.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:47
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:black people marching in the streets and sitting at whites only lunch counters was a direct affront to jim crow that could not go unchallenged. the system was not fundamentally challenged by people marching around for a single day in 2017 ok boomer SubG posted:lol here we go. Sekulow now playing a montage of people talking about impeaching the President with ~*scary music*~ over it. you think they'll show an ad for brain force plus next?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I can complain when they don't have the second impeachment ready to go in a month, however. Second impeachment is a real catch-22 situation I fear. On the one hand yes they absolutely should (and they have no shortage of crimes to pick from), on the other hand I don't trust the American public to see it as something that should be done, and instead dismiss it as sour grapes, and end up damaging Democrats' chances in the election. Like, will that 71% of people who think there should have been witnesses called still be there when this hearing is over and done with? EDIT: To be clear I still think it'd ultimately be worth the risk to do another one although the outcome would probably still be the same Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Feb 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:ok boomer Jim Crow was literally about declaring spaces off limits to black people and those protests physically reclaimed them by placing black people in them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Sekulow showing the bi-partisan best hit's clip show now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Cops only kill fellow cops when they're exposing corruption. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
We believe the people should choose the President. *more people vote for the other candidate* No, not those people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Jim Crow was literally about declaring spaces off limits to black people and those protests physically reclaimed them by placing black people in them. it was, yes, but defending rask's boomer energy posting about how these new fangled protests just aren't good enough is a bad look additionally, old protests being much more impactful doesn't discount the efforts of modern protesting at all, because protesting is still direct action and direct action gets the goods are you going to complain about labor striking because they didn't see immediate success and can't strike as effectively due to lovely laws put in place by capitalist pigs to keep unions down?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Slowpoke! posted:Everyone with half a brain expected him to be acquitted. The best case scenario would have been getting witnesses, but the endgame was always going to be shining a light on Trump’s crimes and chaining the GOP senators to him and that was successful at least. A bunch of polls showed Americans in support of impeachment and removal, and upwards of 70% supported hearing from witnesses like Bolton. You have to believe that the GOP stonewalling the trial will create some movement in the election come November. The only "crimes" that were highlighted by this process were obscure foreign policy horse-trading stuff that most people don't really care about. Yeah, many Americans want Trump impeached, I know I do, but for a hundred other things more important than the Ukraine stuff. People are angry at Trump, but not because he considered withholding military aid from Ukraine. They're angry because they can't afford to go the hospital or send their kids to college, and Nazis are marching in the streets. I just don't think this is the huge win for Democrats' 2020 chances that some people ITT do. Do you think that solid Republican voters are suddenly going to go "whoa, the GOP is hypocritical and will say whatever it takes to win and advance their noxious agenda? I can't support that!"? Because Republicans know that already, and they approve. We need to motivate young people and nonvoters to get involved if we want to win in 2020, and I don't think Ukraine is the issue that will galvanize those people. That's why it's frustrating that this has been the Dems' primary focus for so long.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
If censure was on the table, when would that be brought up? Does it involve a separate hearing, or could a vote be tacked on following acquittal? I know it's a toothless gesture, but I feel at the bare minimum the Senate has got to do something to make it known that soliciting foreign influence in our elections should be beneath the office of the president, even if it doesn't rise to the level of removing him (which it would at any other point in our country's history).
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
Almost Smart posted:If censure was on the table, when would that be brought up? Does it involve a separate hearing, or could a vote be tacked on following acquittal? I know it's a toothless gesture, but I feel at the bare minimum the Senate has got to do something to make it known that soliciting foreign influence in our elections should be beneath the office of the president, even if it doesn't rise to the level of removing him (which it would at any other point in our country's history). I'm pretty sure that censure is something they can do at any time, so I doubt it would be folded into these proceedings, even if it were something that had any traction among Senators, which it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
Almost Smart posted:If censure was on the table, when would that be brought up? Does it involve a separate hearing, or could a vote be tacked on following acquittal? I know it's a toothless gesture, but I feel at the bare minimum the Senate has got to do something to make it known that soliciting foreign influence in our elections should be beneath the office of the president, even if it doesn't rise to the level of removing him (which it would at any other point in our country's history). They could bring it up anytime or attach it to the impeachment vote. They will not do either one of those things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:19
|
|
