“I’ve made clear from the very beginning that our top priority is going to be to drive down the high cost of living,” the House minority leader said on Fox News Sunday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 6 days ago (13 children)

Bad take. Impeaching Trump reduces the amount of time he's in charge/has the authority to direct people. Committing more and more illegal acts...

They MIGHT be able to get some Rs on board to do it too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (6 children)

    Impeaching trump does nothing to trump, only conviction has a direct impact. It may be possible to secure that conviction, but we don't yet know what the GOP attitude will be going forward from here. Rep. Kiros said it quite well:

    Rep.-elect Melat Kiros, a Colorado Democrat, told CBS News in a recent interview. "I'm not convinced that there is a path forward for impeaching the president that would lead to removal. And if we don't have a hope for removal, I think our time would be better spent focusing on legislation that we could actually pass that could support working families in this moment."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    You misunderstand me. I mean to fully impeach.

    What do you think they'll be able to pass without a veto? Can't veto impeachment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

    I understood you.

    If history is anything to go by, securing enough bipartisan support to override a veto will be far easier than getting 11-13 opposition senators to side with sanity in an impeachment trial. Overriding a veto will be no casual task, but while both seem unlikely, we won't know how unlikely either option truly is until the GOP response flocculates...

    And that's the unfortunate situation, we just don't know yet. And as much as I dislike it, I can't quite bring myself to believe a pessimistic outlook on securing enough support to convict on impeachment is unwarranted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 child)

    So attempt to get MULTIPLE supermajorities to enact laws.... Or get 1 supermajority to impeach/convict.

    We don't know, what we don't know. Either of us could be correct, but I don't think anyone really knows what's going to happen.

    Edit: it seemed like you didn't understand me, because you specified conviction, not trying to be combative, just wanted to be on the same page

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago

    Yep, pretty much! Right now I agree with Kiros that focusing on impeachment as an immediate concern is likely to be a poor use of resources, as bipartisan support that hits or surpasses a supermajority for legislation is relatively common compared to the ouster of a president. But I am just guessing that that's the most reasonable approach, as you say anyone could be right at the moment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Bingo. Focus on trying to get legislation passed that will last long beyond Trump's presidency. He may veto everything, but at least there's genuine effort being made.

    And here's what I'm wondering - are any republican congresspeople who are up for reelection in 2028 gonna take the blue wave to heart and consider actually passing legislation to help people?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (5 children)

    Impeaching him doesn't do shit unless he's convicted in The Senate, and they don't have the votes for that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    Yes, I know. Next time I'll be more specific.

    They don't have the votes to pass ANYTHING. So it's either try to impeach/convict, so that they can maybe pass things (and remove him from further shenanigans).

    I think removing him from committing further actions is paramount personally.

    Other path, hope we can get a supermajority for literally everything else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    But my point is that even if you remove Trump, what exactly makes you think Vance will be more rational? Vance has no scruples about lying through is teeth to get what he wants, he has no issues with demonizing his political oponents. He has backed the party and talked their talking points every step of the way.

    This isn't like the first time when Pence was next in line. Someone who stood a chance of being reasonable. Someone who still had enough honor to certify the vote despite what Nacho Supreme cold him. Vance is a yes man, and if it isn't Trump pulling his strings, it'll be someone else like Steven Miller.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    And you think Vance has the same support Trump had?

    I think we have a better chance of harm reduction or even getting things done with Vance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    I think cultists gonna cult. They've been so brainwashed that all democrats are demons that they will vote republican no matter what even if you point to a democrat who has supported everything they care about..

    But maybe you're right - except for the fact that he won't be removed by the senate. If they could find the votes, then absolutely they should

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago

    It reassures the Dem base that the party is working for them. The Dem base is weak right now and eroded across almost every demographic in the last presidential election. Running genocider racist idiot Biden and then his clone, Harris has a cost and it needs to be reconciled or we move forward with structural weakness. Harris lost for a reason.

  • source
  • parent