USA Politics

I think it's more that nobody is really entertaining the idea of him actually being removed from office. The furthest I see this going is impeachment by a house controlled by Democrats and acquittal by the Senate.
Even with the news from Cohen, I see this as the most likely outcome today. If Mueller comes back with something probative (which, let's be honest, he almost certainly will), after the election, then a whole new set of dynamics is in play, specifically this: many many more Republican senators are defending in 2002 in blue or purple states.
Cory Gardiner (R-Co), Joni Ernst (R-Io), Susan Collins (R-Me), Thom Tillis (R-NC). Add in senators who detest Trump, such as Lindsay Graham and almost-certain 2018 winner Mitt Romney, you see a path towards 67 start to erupt.
 
So he can be found guilty, then acquitted which would let him stay anyway until the end of the term? o_O
No. Impeachment isn't finding someone guilty. Impeachment is equivalent to "charging someone with a crime". The House of Representatives impeaches someone by a simple majority, and then the Senate has a trial and votes on whether or not the impeached party is guilty or innocent of the impeachment.
 
So he can be found guilty, then acquitted which would let him stay anyway until the end of the term? o_O
Check out the impeachment of Bill Clinton for an example of what I’m talking about. The actual impeachment is by the house and just the process of bringing charges against the president. It’s the senate that will decide if he’s guilty and should be removed from office.

Edit: Sniped by LC. :jedi:
 
I was in the Pence is worse than Trump camp until he actually took office. I figured Pence would have the congressional support and political fortitude that Trump doesn’t have to enact his agenda (which would be just as, if not more extreme than Trump’s). I expected Trump to be not much more than a rubber stamp. While it has proven true that he will sign whatever shows up on his desk without much care for the content, his presidency has continued to be an embarrassment especially on the world stage.* Him staying in office while almost certainly having committed crimes also sends the message that a president is above the law. I’d rather have a lame duck Pence who wouldn’t win re-election, stays off Twitter, and doesn’t embarrass himself around other world leaders.

*More embarrassing though is that half the country seems to be fine with it.
 
Ah, that makes more sense. We don't have a word in Serbian for impeachment so I guess never knew it's correct meaning.
 
We have to extrapolate to look at a path to 67 in a possible post-election impeachment, but let's look at the current setup of the Senate:

Jones - AL
Harris - CA
Bennet - CO
Blumenthal - CT
Coons - DE
Schatz - HI
Durbin - IL
Duckworth - IL
Van Hollen - MD
Markey - MA
Peters - MI
Cortez Masto - NV
Shaheen - NH
Hassan - NH
Booker - NJ
Udall - NM
Schumer - NY
Wyden - OR
Merkley - OR
Reed - RI
Leahy - VT
Warner - VA
Murray - WA

Feinstein - CA
Murphy - CT
Carper - DE
Hirono - HI
King (I-ME)
Cardin - MD
Warren - MA
Stabenow - MI
Klobuchar - MN
Smith - MN
Heinrich - MN
Gilliband - NY
Brown - OH
Casey - PA
Whitehouse - RI
Sanders - (I-VT)
Kaine - VA
Cantwell - WA
Baldwin - WI

Sinema - AZ
Nelson - FL
Donnelly - IN
McCaskill - MO
Tester - MT
Rosen - NV
Menendez - NJ
Heitcamp - ND
Bredesen - TN
O'Rourke - TX
Manchin - WV

If all of these win, that takes us to 53. I think a couple of the Blue Wave Dems are a little iffy, specifically O'Rourke, and I figure at least one of McCaskill, Tester, or Nelson will go down, even in a blue wave. Manchin is beloved in WV, and I think he stays. So let's assume 51, that means 16 Republicans would have to jump ship. Let's start with some of the obvious:

Lindsay Graham (R-SC) - has been very vocal with opposing Trump from day 1.
Mitt Romney (R-UT) - will be elected in 2018, also very vocal against Trump.
Susan Collins (R-ME) - pretty much the lead female Republican hasn't forgotten that Trump likes to grab her by the pussy.
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) - see above, and like Collins, has a history of going rogue on the GOP when it's time to make social history (see Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal).
Cory Gardiner (R-CO) - from a pot loving state, up for election in 2020, and won on a razor in 2014. If he doesn't vote to impeach he's sunk.
Marco Rubio (R-FL) - a border case as he generally walks the party line, but he is Hispanic, and he was really ridiculed by Trump in the primaries. Quite a possibility for sweet, sweet revenge. Purple Florida might remember a "Not Guilty" vote pretty aggressively, too, but he's not up until 2020.
Joni Ernst (R-IA) - more orthodox than Collins or Murkowski, but she's up for election in a state that voted for Obama twice in 2020.
Chuck Grassley (R-IA) - border case too, but has a history of bucking orthodoxy when needed.
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) - no, hear me out. McConnell is the coldest, most calculating son of a bitch in American electoral history. If he determines the GOP needs to cut Trump loose to save Senate seats, he will cut Trump loose like the loser on the Apprentice.
Rand Paul (R-KY) - definitely hates Trump, and probably wants him gone so he can run for president in 2020.
Ben Sasse (R-NE) - has written several op-eds opposing various Trump viewpoints.
Thom Tillis (R-NC) - up for election in a blue-trending state in 2020. Seems quieter so who knows, unlike...
Richard Burr (R-NC) - not up for election, but he has certainly made lots of waves with quiet, but steady, anti-Trump comments. Usually reacts to the extreme Trump stuff.
Rob Portman (R-OH) - not up for election, hasn't made a big opposition of Trump, but Ohio is trending blue away from purple, and he has often been a leader (such as it is) in the GOP on social issues.
Pat Toomey (R-PA) - see above.
Tim Scott (R-SC) is a black man.
Ted Cruz (R-TX) - if he makes it through a strong challenge in 2018, might toss his vote against Trump as revenge/to clear the 2020 field. Long shot, if you ask me, as he seems to enjoy that his crazy has gone under the radar whilst Trump dominates the news.
Ron Johnson (R-WI) - pretty much see Portman/Toomey.

Cruz has been noted, of the other races where a Dem is in trouble in the Senate, I think the only one likely to be anti-Trump is Dean Heller (NV), who if he wins in 2018 it will be by the skin of his teeth in a state that trends more and more blue with more and more Latinos. Rick Scott in FL as well, for similar reasons as Rubio. Keep in mind that in a 51-49 Senate, they only need 16 of these names, and there's one I haven't mentioned:

John McCain (R-AZ) will somehow survive brain cancer long enough to be wheeled into the Senate to cast the final vote to impeach Donald Trump, watch his removal from office, then die with a smile on his face. Because that's the kind of guy John McCain is.
 
Speaking as a CO local, I think Gardner is done either way and he knows it. He’s been in ngaf mode since Trump took office and continues to ignore his constituents, especially on hot issues like net neutrality and health care. I wouldn’t be surprised if he is among the least popular senators. With that in mind, I don’t see him revolting against Trump. He likely won’t even survive a primary imo.

I’d also add that verbally speaking out against Trump is a far cry from voting to remove him from office. Many of these senators publicly oppose him but have been pretty supportive of him legislatively. I’d look at 538’s Trump score for each senator to get an idea of who would be likely flips. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

It’s not even so much that the Republican senators secretly like Trump, but in some ways they are held hostage by his base (which is their own fault). 2020 is shaping up to be an ugly year for GOP, removing their president might amplify it instead of weathering the storm.

It also depends on timing. If House dems jump the gun on impeachment proceedings then this can easily be framed as a partisan attack, in which case you get no Republicans and likely lose a couple dems too. Trump’s reelection prospects may increase too. I honestly have no idea how likely this scenario is. House dems have avoided impeachment talks but election season politicking is different than how they’ll actually govern. We don’t even know if Pelosi will be speaker or if she’ll be ousted for someone who is much more bullish on impeachment.
 
Speaking as a CO local, I think Gardner is done either way and he knows it. He’s been in ngaf mode since Trump took office and continues to ignore his constituents, especially on hot issues like net neutrality and health care. I wouldn’t be surprised if he is among the least popular senators. With that in mind, I don’t see him revolting against Trump. He likely won’t even survive a primary imo.
I think this more likely than less likely to vote against Trump. It's not about legislation - it's about history. You want to be the one who voted in the right way for your legacy.
 
Your last paragraph might be the essence of the issue - partisanship in the US.

There's a saying in Croatia, roughly translated, "at least he's ours!", said as a last resort response to question, why you vote for someone that's blatantly stealing your money for two decades. Only the nationalist ruling party could identify, locate, arrest, and transfer (exact quote) a cro General to Hague ICTY. Had the soc-dems done it, they'd have a right wing revolution on their hands.

This kind of climate is dangerous because politicians themselves aren't even split like the public. They'll go and ally between camps, exit a party then enter a competing party, just business. But they spew out a rhetoric which makes people think in these stupid boxes - red or blue. I'm one, and if someone is the other, he sucks.
 
Now for a more positive note, direct flights between US and Cro are being reopened after 28 years! Sweet. Now if they only ditched the visa thing...
 
Yeah I know, my bro was in Vancouver last year. No direct flight tho :)
I actually have a cousin in Tulsa that I haven't seen for 10 years. But Tulsa of all places.
 
Back
Top