| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | It's too late this time around, but for 2024 if the Democrats are smart (which, let's face it, they aren't but....) they'll try to tap into the outsider energy and groom a left wing celebrity to run. People are tired of the establishment, on all sides of politics, looking out for themselves. They wan't someone who isn't beholden to the establishment, That's how they got Trump, that's why Bernie won't get the nomination and someone else will lose to Trump in 2020 and why the Democrats need a Robert De Niro or similar for 2024. |
I think you're on the money there; to win in a circus tent you need an entertainer.
Psychologically, Trumps and Brexits are a flailing in the face of a loss of control. This sense of insecurity is heightened everytime people look at a screen. Hopefully, nothing blows up while the system adapts and certain groups lurch full fundamentalist in a bid to cope (nationalist/racist/religionist/environmentalist/animal rightsist/white supremacist, etc.) .
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
 |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | that's why Bernie won't get the nomination and someone else will lose to Trump in 2020 |
Not sure I should exactly be getting my crystal ball out given my track record on this – and, look, I genuinely have no idea how things will play out – but I reckon Sanders is a very real chance of winning the nomination. If he picks up Iowa and New Hampshire, he’s going to have some real momentum going into March, and Biden (the only one really standing in the way at this point) is going to lose some of the "electability" veneer that he’s been trading off all this time. Meanwhile, Bloomberg keeps surging and ensuring that several candidates who might otherwise drop out (Warren, Yang, Buttigieg, Klobuchar) aren’t going anywhere – so it’ll be very hard for the establishment to coalesce around one figure and they’ll likely start to hope instead for a contested convention (which I think is very likely at this point). Basically, it’s looking a lot like the 2016 Republican race all over again. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Hard to see Bernie landing knockout blows on candidates like Trump did in the Republican debates and in a brokered convention he gets rolled every time. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Quote: | WASHINGTON, D.C.—Democratic leaders in the House called on their Republican colleagues in the Senate to run a fair and thorough impeachment trial instead of a farce as they did when they held impeachment hearings.
"We demand Republicans take this seriously and not make this into a circus as we did," Pelosi said sternly. "I would hope the Senate would carry out their solemn duty and not make this a big charade, you know, as we did in the House." |
https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-who-ran-sham-impeachment-hearings-shocked-as-republicans-run-sham-impeachment-trial
I laughed. 
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | Hard to see Bernie landing knockout blows on candidates like Trump did in the Republican debates and in a brokered convention he gets rolled every time. |
Don’t know if he even needs to – Warren and Buttigieg have proven pretty adept at punching themselves in the face, and then there’s Biden...
https://youtu.be/mHv8KKeiKoU
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
No new witnesses can be called. Senate trial drawing to a close and the Democrat House hasn't managed to convince anyone really that Trump's guilty.
Acquittal in the next couple of days. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | No new witnesses can be called. Senate trial drawing to a close and the Democrat House hasn't managed to convince anyone really that Trump's guilty.
Acquittal in the next couple of days. |
Factually incorrect. The republicans have chosen not to allow witnesses. Far different than “failed to convince anyone”.
Trump obviously has a lot to hide. Wonder what his tax records show. He is the President of the United States. He has made Russia, China and Iran great again: well done him .... perhaps not
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The senate voted largely on party lines not to have witnesses at the "trial" just as it voted on party lines in the house to conduct the inquiry and prepare the articles of impeachment.
Wanting to call witnesses was only ever a stalling tactic designed to drag the process out as long as possible, in the favour of the Democrats.
There was zero chance some new evidence was going to suddenly appear that would result in the Senate upholding the impeachment, and pretty sure his Tax records are utterly irrelevant to this, it's been a party lines sham since day 1.
CNN view
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/31/politics/senate-impeachment-trial-last-day/index.html
It'll all be over by next weekend.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | No new witnesses can be called. Senate trial drawing to a close and the Democrat House hasn't managed to convince anyone really that Trump's guilty.
Acquittal in the next couple of days. |
Never thought it would happen
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: |
Factually incorrect. The republicans have chosen not to allow witnesses. Far different than “failed to convince anyone”.
Trump obviously has a lot to hide. Wonder what his tax records show. He is the President of the United States. He has made Russia, China and Iran great again: well done him .... perhaps not |
The Senate hasn't allowed new witnesses, voting lines aren't really relevant to the information being correct.
The Democrats haven't met the high bar of Treason, Bribery, High Crimes or Misdemeanors, the rest is just CNN (or Guardian in your case) inspired fluff. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Republicans fear giving Trump his day in court and fear evidence. What’s the POTUS got to hide, I mean he’s got such a good record with disclosure: his taxes for example, oops, his military record oops, Trump University..oops
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
thesoretoothsayer
Joined: 26 Apr 2017
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It was never going to happen, whole thing has been a waste of time and money both better spent elsewhere
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
However, crime is not the sole determinant for impeachment, never was. This is a simple misdirection.
For example: Russia might attack though bombing the US. The POTUS might react by not doing anything. However given defending one’s citizens is a primary function of the POTUS then he could indeed should be impeached: nothing illegal was done by the POTUS as it were.
The argument has no weight and is merely a subterfuge
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: |
However, crime is not the sole determinant for impeachment, never was. This is a simple misdirection.
For example: Russia might attack though bombing the US. The POTUS might react by not doing anything. However given defending one’s citizens is a primary function of the POTUS then he could indeed should be impeached: nothing illegal was done by the POTUS as it were.
The argument has no weight and is merely a subterfuge |
Wrong, the scope for impeachment is incredibly narrow.
Treason (which your example would be), Bribery, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. That's it. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
