Posts: 3,956
Threads: 11
Joined: May 2016
12-01-2016, 11:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2016, 12:10 PM by Bob Butler 54.)
(12-01-2016, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (12-01-2016, 06:29 AM)Galen Wrote: What evidence do you have that Trump can be blackmailed?
What do people get blackmailed on?
1. Sex.
Been there. Done that. What seems like a horrible thing when the other guys do it is entirely forgivable when one's own guy does it. The red faction is entirely good with the sort of person Trump is, and elected him with the full knowledge.
(12-01-2016, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: 2. Crime.
Everyone knew he ran an illegal charity. There may or may not be worse things in his past, and I'm sure folks will be digging.
(12-01-2016, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: 3. Business.
His bankruptcies and fraud based businesses were well known at the time of the election.
In the current extreme partisan environment, the red faction will forgive all of the above and sincerely claim that Hillary was worse. Trump has proven himself the sort of person who can be accused of all sorts of stuff, thumb his nose at the accuser, launch personal attacks against the accuser, and lie about his guilt. No shame. No impact on his political clout.
It was said at the time that Nixon wasn't impeached for the Watergate break in or the cover up. He was impeached and forced to resign because he made the Republicans defending him in congress look really really bad. When they could no longer support him he resigned. In a similar way, I don't anticipate Trump being confronted without a smoking gun the size of a coal generator plant smokestack. He shrugs off ordinary sized smoking guns. Bill Clinton was called the teflon president as he could shrug off scandals without losing his popularity on the blue side or his ability to govern. Trump seems to be able to shrug off scandal to a similar degree.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Roy Zimmerman (he was better about ten years ago with "Chickenhawk")...
"T-Rump"
The Clown Has Taken Over the Party:
[video=dailymotion]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmanuxq3PEM[/video]
"I think about Donald Trump"
Enjoy these before they end up in the same range of legality as child pornography when Donald Trump and his legislative stooges criminalize (or try to criminalize) dissent.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(12-01-2016, 11:47 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: (12-01-2016, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (12-01-2016, 06:29 AM)Galen Wrote: What evidence do you have that Trump can be blackmailed?
What do people get blackmailed on?
1. Sex.
Been there. Done that. What seems like a horrible thing when the other guys do it is entirely forgivable when one's own guy does it. The red faction is entirely good with the sort of person Trump is, and elected him with the full knowledge.
(12-01-2016, 06:29 AM)Galen Wrote: 2. Crime.
Everyone knew he ran an illegal charity. There may or may not be worse things in his past, and I'm sure folks will be digging.
(12-01-2016, 06:29 AM)Galen Wrote: 3. Business.
His bankruptcies and fraud based businesses were well known at the time of the election.
In the current extreme partisan environment, the red faction will forgive all of the above and sincerely claim that Hillary was worse. Trump has proven himself the sort of person who can be accused of all sorts of stuff, thumb his nose at the accuser, launch personal attacks against the accuser, and lie about his guilt. No shame. No impact on his political clout.
It was said at the time that Nixon wasn't impeached for the Watergate break in or the cover up. He was impeached and forced to resign because he made the Republicans defending him in congress look really really bad. When they could no longer support him he resigned. In a similar way, I don't anticipate Trump being confronted without a smoking gun the size of a coal generator plant smokestack. He shrugs off ordinary sized smoking guns. Bill Clinton was called the teflon president as he could shrug off scandals without losing his popularity on the blue side or his ability to govern. Trump seems to be able to shrug off scandal to a similar degree.
It is ironic; had Richard Nixon avoided the Dirty Tricks he had the perfect situation for pushing his legislative agenda. Conservative Democrats of the South were on his side ideologically. But they did protect their Party from the dirty tricks. In the end it was indeed when Nixon's misconduct looked as bad as it was that Republicans had to protect themselves. It would have taken Republican votes to impeach and convict, but those seemed to be developing by the day.
Authoritarian right-wingers can tolerate all sorts of bad behavior, including hypocrisy, from their leaders so long as those leaders tell what those authoritarian right-wingers want to hear. When rational people attack the delusion, the authoritarians double down on the defense of their clay-footed idol, whether that idol be Benito Mussolini, Agosto Pinochet, Ion Antonescu, Satan Hussein, or Der Phooey. Left-wing extremism becomes reactionary very fast, so also Stalin, Mao, Castro, and any three of the "socialist" Kim Dynasty in North Korea.
I have my prediction on what sort of leader Donald Trump will be, and it isn't pretty. He is going to make Dubya look like a model of integrity and political astuteness by contrast. Dubya could be very wrong, but he usually had benign intentions. Donald Trump makes me think of foreign models -- and I don't mean Sara Sampaio. Or a Bentley. I mean Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, or his favorite "strong leaders" which somehow ignored Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
Reality has an unnerving habit of catching up to even the cleverest and most dedicated liars. A heritage of 200 years of competitive politics and far more of rule of law Let us remember that the American Revolution occurred as the British King tried to cut corners on the Rule of Law in the Colonies, violating the sensibilities of such conservatives as John Adams.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
12-01-2016, 12:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2016, 04:27 PM by Warren Dew.)
(12-01-2016, 10:23 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: (12-01-2016, 09:19 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (12-01-2016, 07:51 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Thus, the Obama / Hillary policy of getting the boys home, of avoiding occupation forces, of reducing the number of boots on the ground is the exact opposite of the original Republican neocon doctrine: serial unilateral preemptive nation building.
This isn't accurate, though, at least as applied to "the last 8 years". Bush was beginning to draw down forces in Iraq when he left office; Obama redirected those forces into a massive buildup in Afghanistan. It wasn't until Clinton was no longer Secretary of State that we left Afghanistan.
True enough. The neo-con doctrine, though, was troops near the oil, which is Iraq. Afghanistan was more about fighting factions that export terror. The Democrats in my opinion stuck with troops on the ground too long in Afghanistan, but Obama seems reluctant to concede Afghanistan to the Taliban.
The Wikipedia article you linked to doesn't highlight oil at all. I've run into the "Iraq invasion is about the oil" theory once before, also from someone on the left, and he later admitted that he'd been dissuaded from the theory after I suggested he work out the numbers regarding how small the value of Iraq's oil production was relative to the cost of invasion.
While "neocon" meant something different during the Reagan administration - it was basically about conservative willingness to run deficits - I think that for Bush it just meant "happy to use military force". That seems to apply to Bush, Obama, and Clinton, but ironically didn't apply to Reagan.
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(12-01-2016, 03:20 PM)taramarie Wrote: (12-01-2016, 06:21 AM)Galen Wrote: (11-30-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote: He's trying to bait people into actually burning US flags to protest him. Let's not take the bait and let's burn Confederate flags instead and watch all his supporters get all enraged.
I am pretty certain that he is baiting the left with that tweet. You can try burning Confederate flags if you like but it won't do you much good. The Trump will just take it as more evidence that the left is a bunch of spoiled brats.
Bingo. On top of it it will give the right more of the high ground, hurt the lefts message as well as just divide the country further. It really is a no brainer childish strategy. Take the lefts message and ACT on it. Not just push it onto others. In fact it is up to the individuals whether they want to believe in the message or not. Forcing people through shaming, suggestions of burning their flags, name calling.....generally anything that shuts down dialogue hurts more than helps. Do people actually think that acting this way will get people to listen to them?
You have hit upon the reason the Left is despised. If anything the recent protests have hardened attitudes against the left.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-30-2016, 09:36 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (11-30-2016, 05:47 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-29-2016, 03:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Our wonderful president whom supposed "libertarians" support, has a new proposal to violate our civil rights:
Trump suggests loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn U.S. flags
By John Wagner November 29 at 10:55 AM
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn the American flag, saying such protests — which the Supreme Court has declared to be free speech — should carry “consequences.”
Trump offered his thoughts in an early-morning post on Twitter, saying, “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag.”
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
3:55 AM - 29 Nov 2016
51,285 51,285 Retweets 142,220 142,220 likes
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post...litics_pop
I hope that this is just a random twitter message, and not a considered opinion. Certainly as a conservative veteran, the freedoms I was trying to protect included free speech and expression, even if that expression involved burning of the flag.
However, this is a good reason why the liberals on the left need to help confirm Trump's initial Supreme Court nominee quickly. The list from which Trump is currently working consists of justices similar to Scalia, and Scalia was among the 5 justice majority that ruled that flag burning was constitutionally protected speech. Let's not give Trump time to shift to a supposedly more "moderate" or leftist judge like Stevens, who was willing to jettison this first amendment freedom.
Is it really wise to burn the American flag on a regular in front of so many Americans who value and appreciate it. You're a soldier. Soldiers are professionally trained to over look the burning of the American flag. The vast majority of Americans aren't trained professionals like our cops and soldiers. I'm not going to be surprised/shocked when a group or groups of flag burners find themselves being harshly confronted or viciously attacked by groups of angry Americans. I'm not sure if Nancy Pelosi would be able to handle situations like that if they were to begin happening all over the place.
I don't know about "wise", but I question whether there will be many physical attacks. The right hasn't given up on responding to that kind of thing at the ballot box yet. That's a good thing, because the leftist press would make hay out of any mob attack on someone for burning the flag.
In addition, when something like this comes up on social media, there are often conservative vets like me to express our view that, however much one might disagree with it, the freedom to burn the flag is part of the freedom we signed up to protect. Because this comes up pretty often in conservative circles, I think most conservatives understand the "free speech includes speech we disagree with" point of view.
In fact, I strongly suspect that's why the left is so much more willing to try to suppress speech they disagree with, as happens often on college campuses: there are few on the left who have really invested enough of themselves into defending our freedoms to have thought deeply about what those freedoms mean.
Videos do circulate about conservative students confronting and arguing with people who desecrate the flag. Perhaps the right has more faith in rational argument.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
12-01-2016, 06:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2016, 06:06 PM by Eric the Green.)
Alan Watts used to say how remarkably unconscious the American congress was to pass a law against burning the American flag, while at the same time allowing the land it stands for to be burned up and destroyed.
That was 50 years ago. See how far we've progressed? We're still stuck in the same nonsense.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-30-2016, 05:47 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-29-2016, 03:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Our wonderful president whom supposed "libertarians" support, has a new proposal to violate our civil rights:
Trump suggests loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn U.S. flags
By John Wagner November 29 at 10:55 AM
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn the American flag, saying such protests — which the Supreme Court has declared to be free speech — should carry “consequences.”
Trump offered his thoughts in an early-morning post on Twitter, saying, “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag.”
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
3:55 AM - 29 Nov 2016
51,285 51,285 Retweets 142,220 142,220 likes
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post...litics_pop
I hope that this is just a random twitter message, and not a considered opinion. Certainly as a conservative veteran, the freedoms I was trying to protect included free speech and expression, even if that expression involved burning of the flag.
However, this is a good reason why the liberals on the left need to help confirm Trump's initial Supreme Court nominee quickly. The list from which Trump is currently working consists of justices similar to Scalia, and Scalia was among the 5 justice majority that ruled that flag burning was constitutionally protected speech. Let's not give Trump time to shift to a supposedly more "moderate" or leftist judge like Stevens, who was willing to jettison this first amendment freedom.
No-one should count on this. Trump has shown he has no concern for civil or human rights or freedom of expression. Just because Trump says he will appoint "judges like Scalia," in no way guarantees that such a judge will vote to uphold burning the flag or other acts of free expression. Scalia at least had some sense on some issues, once in a blue moon. Considering Trump's horrific appointments, nothing can be hoped for from this man at all.
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(12-01-2016, 03:20 PM)taramarie Wrote: (12-01-2016, 06:21 AM)Galen Wrote: (11-30-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote: (11-29-2016, 03:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Our wonderful president whom supposed "libertarians" support, has a new proposal to violate our civil rights:
Trump suggests loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn U.S. flags
By John Wagner November 29 at 10:55 AM
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened loss of citizenship or jail for those who burn the American flag, saying such protests — which the Supreme Court has declared to be free speech — should carry “consequences.”
Trump offered his thoughts in an early-morning post on Twitter, saying, “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag.”
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
3:55 AM - 29 Nov 2016
51,285 51,285 Retweets 142,220 142,220 likes
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post...litics_pop
He's trying to bait people into actually burning US flags to protest him. Let's not take the bait and let's burn Confederate flags instead and watch all his supporters get all enraged.
I am pretty certain that he is baiting the left with that tweet. You can try burning Confederate flags if you like but it won't do you much good. The Trump will just take it as more evidence that the left is a bunch of spoiled brats.
Bingo. On top of it it will give the right more of the high ground, hurt the lefts message as well as just divide the country further. It really is a no brainer childish strategy. Take the lefts message and ACT on it. Not just push it onto others. In fact it is up to the individuals whether they want to believe in the message or not. Forcing people through shaming, suggestions of burning their flags, name calling.....generally anything that shuts down dialogue hurts more than helps. Do people actually think that acting this way will get people to listen to them? Seriously?? Leave the message out there and let people decide. As for law making while I do totally side with the lefts on this it is the same issue. But then again....I do believe that when you have a job to do just do the job and leave personal out the door.
As far as I'm concerned, the left can burn all the American flags it wants at this point. A clear message has been sent to them. Shape up or ship out.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Who sent such a message? The swing voters in a few swing states?
Your state by a small margin voted for sanity, instead of sending a message to the Left to shape up or ship out. To bad YOU didn't get the message from your fellow MN voters that Trump is an idiot, and that it's he and HIS voters that should shape up or ship out. Everyone who voted for Trump voted to ruin the country and the world forever. NO, the only way to shape up is to resist.
If people get angry, they can burn the flag. I fully agree there are better ways to protest.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Classic X'er -- Donald Trump has been demanding ideological loyalty as no prior President has ever demanded. If this does not scare you, then you fail to understand how precarious democracy is.
He will be President of the United States, and we will be obliged to recognize the rights that go along with the office -- but nothing more. He has no right to expect that I will not use my First Amendment right to criticize the government at any level when it goes wrong. He cannot command me to align my thoughts and expressions with his. I will obey him no more than I will obey another President whose policies I generally despised (Dubya),
Be glad that I speak of using my First Amendment rights, and not of using my Second Amendment rights.
Resistance to any degradation of freedom is itself patriotism.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(12-01-2016, 07:45 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Classic X'er -- Donald Trump has been demanding ideological loyalty as no prior President has ever demanded. If this does not scare you, then you fail to understand how precarious democracy is.
He will be President of the United States, and we will be obliged to recognize the rights that go along with the office -- but nothing more. He has no right to expect that I will not use my First Amendment right to criticize the government at any level when it goes wrong. He cannot command me to align my thoughts and expressions with his. I will obey him no more than I will obey another President whose policies I generally despised (Dubya),
Be glad that I speak of using my First Amendment rights, and not of using my Second Amendment rights.
Resistance to any degradation of freedom is itself patriotism.
Well said, and it appears to me that it will gradually dawn on more people, that the only course of action now (besides our own personal priorities) is resistance to tyranny here in the USA. And we can hope it stays on the first and not the second amendment level. We wouldn't want to see some "second amendment people" (like our dear Mr. X AD) having to use IT to speak.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
12-07-2016, 07:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-07-2016, 07:12 PM by Eric the Green.)
Let's just keep bashing and laughing at him for the next 4 years. What else is there to do? We have Seth to help us:
Warren, do YOU believe there were 3 million illegal voters in California?
Om my God! You can't bash or make fun of Trump without doing the same to his amazingly dumb voters!!!
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(12-07-2016, 07:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Warren, do YOU believe there were 3 million illegal voters in California?
I think it's unlikely that the number is as high as 3 million. I think it's even less likely that voting machines in WI/MI/PA were hacked.
And speaking of dumb voters, 42% of Clinton supporters think the recounts will reverse the election result. Meanwhile, the WI recount is 2/3 done and the net change is less than 100 votes.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(12-08-2016, 10:08 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (12-07-2016, 07:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Warren, do YOU believe there were 3 million illegal voters in California?
I think it's unlikely that the number is as high as 3 million. I think it's even less likely that voting machines in WI/MI/PA were hacked.
And speaking of dumb voters, 42% of Clinton supporters think the recounts will reverse the election result. Meanwhile, the WI recount is 2/3 done and the net change is less than 100 votes.
I wonder what happened regarding the thousands of made-up votes that were discovered earlier.
The vote may be correct, or it may not be; and in any case we disagree with ID laws turning people away, and you disagree with no ID laws that may allow illegals to vote. Democracy in disarray no matter what side you are on. And an election system based on placating slaves states, and a gerrymandered congress where politicians choose their voters rather than voters choosing their politicians, and half the people eligible to vote not voting. And once elected, politicians spend 90% of their time asking for money for stupid TV ads that people may not pay attention to anyway, and listening to lobbyists for billionaires. A duopoly of two political parties that most people have no trust in, and a president who can start a war for no reason whenever (s)he wants. What a fucked up system we have. Thanks to you Republicans, it's in place likely for another generation.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
12-08-2016, 07:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2016, 07:51 PM by Eric the Green.)
Warren Dew and other Trumpsters look at over 8 million votes for Hillary against 4 million for Trump, as see vast hordes of illegals voting. People like me look upon it as millions of my fellow Californians giving Trump the repudiation that he so richly deserved, and serving as the example for what all voters in America should have done, had they voted in their right minds.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...rue#gid=19
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Donald Trump probably starts with a lower approval rating than Herbert Hoover
![[Image: hooveratlas.jpg]](http://www.kevincmurphy.com/hooveratlas.jpg)
To be sure, Hoover was a man of integrity, much more learned than Trump, and definitely a man of peace. By standards of the time he was no racial or religious bigot. His personal life was unexceptionable and he had no conflicts of interests.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 198
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2016
(12-09-2016, 03:03 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump probably starts with a lower approval rating than Herbert Hoover
To be sure, Hoover was a man of integrity, much more learned than Trump, and definitely a man of peace. By standards of the time he was no racial or religious bigot. His personal life was unexceptionable and he had no conflicts of interests.
Hoover was the right man at the wrong time.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Obama Just Called Out The Racists Who Disrespected His Presidency
ByChristine BranchPosted on December 8, 2016
COMMENTS
In the last weeks of his presidency, President Barack Obama is speaking out about the racism that has plagued his time in office over the last eight years. Yesterday, Obama sat down with Fareed Zakaria of CNN to discuss how he has been marginalized because of his race, including the racist attacks against him by Trump and the “birther movement.”
“Are there folks whose primary concern about me has been that I seem foreign ― the other? Are those who champion the birther movement feeding off of bias?” Obama questions. “Absolutely.”
Obama also addresses how he is perceived by whites in the north versus the south; it is clear that those in the Southern states do not support him simply because of his race “I think there’s a reason attitudes about my presidency among whites in northern states are very different from whites in southern states,” Obama offers, without explicitly saying that racism is to blame – but what else could it possibly be?
Among these white racists, many have supported the birther movement, as it was a way to de-legitimize President Obama’s status as an American citizen because of the color of his skin and his background. In spite of the fact that he released his birth certificate, ignorance has largely prevailed. With Donald Trump acting as their mouthpiece, these racists have continued to question whether Obama is a “real American,” simply because he is not white.
In an interview with Meredith Vieira on the Today Show, Trump made a typical baseless claim about Obama’s birth certificate, perfect to appeal to the paranoia of the uninformed far-right, saying: “I have people that actually have been studying it and they cannot believe what they are finding,” he ambiguously warned, continuing, “If he wasn’t born in this country, then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics.” This claim has absolutely no grounding because President Obama’s birth certificate was released. It is also totally ironic that the greatest conman in politics, Donald Trump, would call anyone out on a “con”.
Former Senior Advisor to President Obama, David Axelrod attests to the racism President Obama has experienced, being treated worse than any white president before him.
“It’s indisputable that there was a ferocity to the opposition and a lack of respect to him that was a function of race,” Axelrod confirms.
The supporters of the birther movement have hidden behind an idea of a birth certificate to cover their racism, but now that Trump has been elected, these feelings are out in the open. With racist attacks and events on a terrifying upsurge since Trump was elected, it is a sad situation that one of our most intelligent and qualified leaders in the history of this country has been belittled and disrespected by an ignorant and hateful white-right, who cannot see past skin color throughout his entire presidency.
Now that their ultra-conservative, unapologetically racist and uninformed candidate is in power, there’s nothing stopping us from doing everything they did to Obama, and then some, to Trump. We don’t need to claim Trump is not an American, but we know he is un-American—he is not who we want to represent us. He is a racist pig and it’s up to the Democrats to do what we can to get him out before he destroys this country from the inside out.
Watch it here:
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/12/08/ob...residency/
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
12-10-2016, 04:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2016, 04:53 AM by Eric the Green.)
Lichtman among others like Michael Moore and Rob Reiner are predicting Trump will be impeached. I wouldn't think so, since the Republicans wouldn't care about such things as the law. And after impeachment, the Senate must convict him in order to be removed from office. But Lichtman points out that in their hearts of hearts, they prefer the straight down-the-line, predictable conservative Mike Pence. And many Republicans, though they supported Trump, criticized and even defected from him during the campaign. So maybe it will happen.
It would certainly be better for the Democratic candidate on my cosmic scoring system if Pence runs in 2020 instead of Trump. And the Republicans might forget about Trump's particular appeal. Trump is a winning candidate, regardless of what he does or says. And if he survives in office and runs, he might win no matter what he does in office. But Pence does not even have a positive score on my system now; only 8-9. He does not have the appeal on a gut and personality or leadership-quality level to win.
That would certainly open the door for the Democrats to win in 2020, despite the new moon indicator that favors the incumbent to win the popular vote that year. An administration that has its president removed from office is not in a good position to win re-election, as the election of 1976 showed; Nixon would have been removed from office if he had not resigned. And what if Pence pardons Trump too? Gerald Ford tried that, and lost. It would likely be difficult too for an administration that suffered an impeachment and removal of its president to get many keys turned in its favor in Lichtman's system. Even Bill Clinton, with all his advantages, could not swing it for Al Gore after a term of constant distraction including an impeachment trial.
|
