top 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 155 points 6 months ago (11 children)

Is this idiot trying to lose the midterms?

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    When asked if impeachment was a top priority, Jeffries said “of course not” during an appearance on “Fox News Sunday.”

    “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 added. 

    Sounds like he's trying to win the midterms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    Sounds like you don't understand where we're at as a nation.

    Or what Americans actually want. it's not a "vocal minority" that want the pedophile, racist, bigoted asshole of a president that is jacking up our cost of living so he can be a fucking king gone. So ignoring that and saying you will do nothing about it IS NOT A WINNING STRATEGY.

    doing nothing except writing stern letters is not going to solve the problem, either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    How did Trump win? The economy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    that's excessively simplistic.

    Trump did not win "because of the economy."

    He won because he was able to motivate his base to vote where Harris had been less able to do so.

    Yes, Trump utilized "the economy" as a talking point, but he also utilized deregulation, and immigration (read: general bigotry and scapegoating) as well as LGBTQ+ and christofascist culture war bullshit. Trump's voters are too stupid to understand that he's lying to them, so that kind of messaging actually works.

    Harris on the other hand also campaigned on "the economy"- and the cost of living and continued work to supporting not-millionaires; as well as shit like Trump's former immigration plan and continued support for Israel and so on. harris/Democrat voters are not too stupid to see the problem with some of the things she adopted(immigration, supporting israel) and such like; while souring on economic messaging because Biden had been constantly running that out as if it were amazing while most Americans were struggling. (it took him until like the October before the presidential election to even acknowledge most Americans were still struggling.)

    Basically, Trump won because Harris did exactly what the Jefferies is now doing; and that's summed up as "Ignoring the American people".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 6 months ago*

    The democrats only want to bring us back to the exact conditions that brought us Trump.

  • source
  • [–] 108 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (14 children)

    Jeffries incumbency no longer a top priority for dems once they win House majority

    this just in from everyone hearing his weak-ass bullshit

    I can't believe I voted for this bullshit motherfucker twice just because I thought he was cute and he flirted with me once. like I organized for him. I knocked on (possibly thousands of) doors for him. I marched through streets for this useless motherfucker! canvassing and al that endless campaign bullshit.. FOR MONTHS!!!!

    and all for this? FOR THIS MEANINGLESS BULLSHIT NOTHING OF A STATE REP?? AAAARRGHH!!!!

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    And it begins.

    "Let's move past thus" "We have to think about the future" "We need to reach across the table"

    Fuck these corrupt politicians. They know what Trump is and just want more after a short break.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago*

    I mean, I’m not even gonna say Hakeem Jeffries is corrupt (because I don’t really know), but I sure as shit am gonna say that he’s a do-nothing coward piece of shit. And that’s just as bad. He needs to go!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    One of the problems with the Democratic Party is that the number one quality for choosing leadership is how well they fundraise. Obviously this makes leadership beholden to those with the biggest pockets, like AIPAC.

    We need to primary every Democrat incumbent who isn't a progressive in action as well as rhetoric.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    That is one strategy, the other would be to change the rules of the game and eliminate fundraising altogether or greatly limit it. Politicians should be chosen for their ability to champion needed legislation and to get policies that benefit their constituents passed. Not for their ability to cozy up to wealthy people to do their bidding

    As we can see with the current administration, fundraising has taken over politics completely. So much so that the fundraising never stops and has become the point instead of actual governance. This is a broken system that can't be fixed by voting people in or out unless that is directly leading to serious reforms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Two things are required before you can change the rules of the game. You need to have a super majority and that super majority has to want to change the rules. AIPAC captured candidates are not likely to change the rules they rely on to stay funded and in power.

    At this point Israel out spends the people on candidates, using US taxpayer money.

    As far as the current administration and "fundraising" is concerned. They aren't fundraising, they are grifting.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    If it makes you feel any better, he's still undoubtedly better than whatever Republican ran against him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 68 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    If only we can work hard to get him a majority, Jeffries promises he will only use it to play games strictly in his lane instead of actually leading and actively opposing trumps wild overreaches and global shenanigans. Thats heartening.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    Impeaching would be a pointless game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 21 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Impeaching would be a pointless game.

    Disagree, because I think a big part of politics is posturing, arguing, presenting your data as best you can, and putting on a show to get people charged enough to get off the couch. Its manufacturing support. So Jeffries job should be much more than just occasionally voting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago* (6 children)

    Right? Genuinely what the fuck is impeachment doing at this point? Nothing. The answer, at best, is obviously "nothing", and you'd have to be deluded to think otherwise.

    I don't even mean the obvious inevitability that it wouldn't remove Trump; I mean that, at best, it wouldn't sway public opinion effectively whatsoever. Trump right now is hanging himself by his own noose, and if anything, an impeachment could put angry Republicans on the defensive by redirecting their attention through a partisan lens.

    Impeachment should not be a priority; it's patently a waste of time at this point, especially if Democrats win a House majority and can at least work to meaningfully slow Republicans' flood of garbage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    I don't follow your logic here. You know what slows a flood of garbage legislation? Forcing impeachment over and over

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

    Forcing impeachment over and over

    I'm not even going to dignify this with a smarmy "wow, look at the strategic genius on display here" and breakdown of why this is dumb, because that'd be an insult to other people reading this.

    This is plainly the dumbest idea imaginable. House Democrats impotently jerking themselves off on the national stage over and over again is a strategy completely divorced from reality; Trump, by being such an astoundingly terrible leader, may have given them one more chance to turn the country around, and the second they actually seize on that (see: the article), your grand idea is to overshadow Republicans' ire toward Trump and piss away all precious political momentum in a torturously useless quagmire of "orange man bad!" instead of at least attempting something feasibly useful.

    Just agonizingly stupid. Also, you clearly have zero idea how "slowing down Republicans' flood of garbage" (notice I didn't say "legislation"; I meant generally) works if you think that it helps to hold impeachment hearings over and over if Democrats already have the majority.

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

    Congress's main duties are legislation, budgeting and impeachment. To fully realize those powers they need a super majority or a cooperative president, and they'll have neither.

    The administration will veto any legislation and has fucked with budgets. There is quite literally nothing useful Congress can do (unless you think they'll have a sufficient super-majority) except obstruct or compromise with fascists.

    If they had the power to do anything useful I would expect several Constitutional amendments to top the list along with impeaching the whole executive branch and some Supreme Court justices. But they won't have that so what performative bullshit would you rather have them do?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (2 children)

    I would rather have them do "performative bullshit" about things that actually affect people's lives in a real, material way. Take a popular, progressive issue (or issues) and hammer it in repeatedly that you're the side trying to help people and the Republicans are blocking you.

    They could be coming out with like, abolish ICE, end the war in Iran, give people healthcare, etc. It would still be "performative bullshit" in the sense that they don't have the votes, but it would allow them to define a positive platform consistent with the public interest rather than simply running on being anti-Trump.

    They won't, because the interest groups opposing the public interests are too entrenched for them to even pretend to go against them, but it would certainly be better messaging than "vote for us, and we'll impeach Trump (again, with no consequence)."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Just look at the reaction to the proposed minimum wage hike.

    • "They're only pushing this bill now because they know it won't pass"
    • "This will make inflation skyrocket"
    • "This will kill small businesses"

    Blah blah blah...

    The same song and dance happens for every bill. Universal health care? "Boohoo my taxes, waiting lines, traaaaans..."

    Abolish ICE [through budget whack a mole due to veto]? "Dems are destroying the country, another Dem shut down, they want illegals to take your job..."

    Limit Iran war? "Unconstitutional, un-American, they hate the troops, antisemitic..."

    There is one clear and obvious problem that is much harder to equivocate: the admin is shitting all over the constitution and lining their own pockets at our expense. The abductions are right there, the paper trail is right there, the election rigging is right there, the pedophilia is right there, the economic and material damage is everywhere.

    it would certainly be better messaging than "vote for us, and we'll impeach Trump...

    Idk, being a contrarian got Trump elected after a brutal first term because eggs were expensive. You think it's not gonna work with these gas prices??

    If you care about policy then stump for progressives and call for corporate ghouls to get primaried. But when you're talking about keeping a sliver of a chance to resuscitate the USA's corpse then veto is the only answer.

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

    The same song and dance happens for every bill.

    Yeah, your political opponents are going to oppose things you try to do. That's not a good reason to not try to do things.

    They can use whatever line they like but that doesn't mean it's effective at swaying public opinion. 82% of Americans support tying the minimum wage to inflation. 60% disapprove of ICE. A majority of Americans oppose the Iran War, it's really just Trump's 30-ish percent "floor" that do. Those people were never going to vote democrat no matter what.

    What I'm talking about the 1/3 of Americans who don't vote because they're politically disengaged and/or don't feel like either party is going to do anything for them.

    There is one clear and obvious problem that is much harder to equivocate: the admin is shitting all over the constitution and lining their own pockets at our expense. The abductions are right there, the paper trail is right there, the election rigging is right there, the pedophilia is right there, the economic and material damage is everywhere.

    That's like 6 problems, not 1. The only thing I'm arguing against here is the supposed importance of impeaching Trump over and over again.

    Idk, being a contrarian got Trump elected after a brutal first term because eggs were expensive. You think it’s not gonna work with these gas prices??

    Certainly, the Democrats have the advantage but they're still capable of blowing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Won't succeed in removing him from office and "pointless" are not the same thing.

    A referendum on his abhorrent behavior as president is absolutely called for. And a spotlight on the complicity of the entire Republican party is worth making hay out of. Jefferies is a spineless jellyfish who should be primaried out of political existence.

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

    A referendum on his abhorrent behavior as president is absolutely called for.

    Sure, but of the "torches and pitchforks" style of referendum and not in the "meaningless symbolic gesture within a broken system where you can't do anything" style. Otherwise you're just wasting time and energy on meaningless political theater.

    Jefferies is a spineless jellyfish who should be primaried out of political existence.

    100%. I'd be happy to see an effective referendum on his behavior too. Just over the actual bad things he's done and not because the way he dances on stage isn't to your liking.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago

    Fuck that, even without the votes in the Senate, make them go through the process anyway. Get all the evidence in public.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago

    Please VOTE Democrats in the Primary so we can Impeach Trump! Repeal Trump's HURTFUL Legislations! Pass MEANINGFUL Legislation! Do what Trump asks us to Do!

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Yep, he was already worthless, he just confirmed it. Could you imagine being in the most consequential election since the Civil War, and this "leader" just announced his intention to surrender before it's even started, and he still expects people to vote for him?

    This should be career ending.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 6 months ago

    Fuuuuuuuuuck you, buddy.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Getting that fucker out of office should be a priority. Along with Schumer and any other trash that voted along with the Pedo Party.

    Then impeach the Pedo-in-Chief.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago

    That's fine, it's failed three times now.

    But if they have the votes to remove him & don't, that's going to be a huge problem.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    What about 25th amendmenting or 14th amendmenting or Article 5ing?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    fun fact, all those failing is why the founders added the 2nd ammendment.

    No. this is not an endorsment of civil war or assassination- it's a warning. if you remove all legal avenues for justice... then there's only illegal avenues, and eventually people will be pushed to pursue those.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I mean, hell, look at the list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence and what happened next. Violence is quintessentially American and a foundational part of our history. Those who've benefited from extended periods of peace may have forgotten that. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time..." and all that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    I’m so tired of Congress abdicating their responsibilities as elected officials.

    Impeach Jeffries!

    Trump deserves far more than impeachment for the breadth and depravity of his crimes.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    They never learn right?

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Holy fucking shit! Why not? Because AIPAC/Isreal controls him

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    AIPAC isn't enjoying the spotlight they're in now and are scrambling to hide their influence. People will need to pay a lot closer attention to how candidates are funded as Israel shifts to opaque entities to fund candidates with.

    I wonder how much of our aid to Israel ends up being spent on funding AIPAC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    There is no reason we can't take it out on MAGA at the ballot box, take back power, and then use that power to crush MAGA. All we need are political leaders with the courage and strength to do what we are SCREAMING at them to do.

    If he is already saying that he doesn't intend to impeach Trump, it means he probably doesn't plan to impeach anyone else either. If he won't commit to fight MAGA, that makes him ineligible for his job.

    Jeffries' primary is on June 23, and he is being challenged by 27 year old Chi Osse, who just filed paperwork to run against him a couple of days ago. Osse is a Democratic Socialist, a Mamdani follower, and with Mamdani killing it in NYC, and Jeffries performing as badly as if he was being paid by MAGA, he might actually have a chance. I can't believe Jeffries constituents are that thrilled with the half-assed job he's been doing for YEARS.

    We need to spread the word far & wide, as loud as possible, that Jeffries has already said that when they regain power, he intends to squander it AGAIN, and allow MAGA to rise AGAIN! He has already proven to be weak, cowardly, and incompetent. I literally can't think of a single substantial thing he has done to resist MAGA's breathtaking corruption. He doesn't deserve another chance to fail us. Primary him out, and send a shocking message to ALL weak incumbent Democrats: Get in the game, or get the fuck out.

    And once he's out, we need to investigate both Jeffries, and Schmuck. I'm not convinced those losers aren't Manchurian MAGAs. If the word came in that Schmuck & Jeffries would sell out for a billion bucks, the money would be in a Cayman account by noon. Let's see if they accepted, my bet is Yes.

    Hakeem Jeffries challenged to 2026 primary by 27-year-old New York councilman

    Fuck him up, Chi!

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I'm ok if we work around him to fix shit while prepping the case that sends him to jail.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 11 points 6 months ago*

    yeah fair point. we need to get the dems a majority but we also badly need to get these centrist do-nothings out of power and off Aipacs tit or they will only do what Israel wants, which is to keep trump empowered.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Goddamnit I can't believe jordanlund of all people is like the only one with a correct take in this entire thread.

    I literally don't even know how many times Trump has been impeached. Three maybe? Is it three? Could be four. I think it was more than one. I don't remember what any of the charges were, if I ever heard.

    Caring about that shit is such performative lib shit. The only people who care about Trump's "permanent record" are politically engaged liberals who were 100% going to "vote blue no matter who" anyway. Do you seriously think you could walk into like a random warehouse and ask people what crimes Trump has been impeached over and get correct answers from anyone who wasn't already a guaranteed vote?

    The way you actually reach people is by promoting things that *make a material difference in their lives," not some DC soap opera shit. You say something like, "No tax on tips," you start cutting through the culture war barriers and media environments and catching the attention of people who normally wouldn't give two shits about politics. But libs are so far up their own asses about "decorum" and "permanent records" and shit that even Republicans have managed to outflank them, which is an utter embarrassment.

    Also, for the record, the justice system is a complete joke regardless. Bush never got impeached for all the illegal torture and spying he did. Anyone with good sense who's paying attention should know better than to look to the law (of all things!) as some kind of moral guide. The law only matters as far as it exerts power, a purely symbolic "victory" within a fundamentally broken system could not be more meaningless.

    Oh but to be clear fuck Jefferies, just like, not for this specific thing.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    Vote that fucker out.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    Jefferies never was impressive to me

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    "There will be no justice. We will let you down."

    Great way to throw an election.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago*

    He's got a point. Step one: remove Jeffries. Step two: remove Trump. Also remove Schumer ASAP.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    Fuck this guy

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    When asked if impeachment was a top priority, Jeffries said “of course not” during an appearance on “Fox News Sunday.”

    “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 added. 

    “We believe in this country, you work hard, you play by the rules. You should be able to live an affordable life, a comfortable life, in fact, to live the good life, and that means a good paying job and good housing, good health care, good education for your children, and when it’s all said and done, a good retirement,” he added. 

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Is there a progressive or, you know, anyone with a pulse running against this useless lump of flesh in the primary?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    GOOD NEWS!

    Jeffries' primary is on June 23, and he is being challenged by 27 year old Chi Osse, who just filed paperwork to run against him a couple of days ago. Osse is a Democratic Socialist, a Mamdani follower, and with Mamdani killing it in NYC, and Jeffries performing as badly as if he was being paid by MAGA, he might actually have a chance. I can't believe Jeffries constituents are that thrilled with the half-assed job he's been doing for YEARS.

    We need to spread the word far & wide, as loud as possible, that Jeffries has already said that when they regain power, he intends to squander it AGAIN, and allow MAGA to rise AGAIN! He has already proven to be weak, cowardly, and incompetent. I literally can't think of a single substantial thing he has done to resist MAGA's breathtaking corruption. He doesn't deserve another chance to fail us. Primary him out, and send a shocking message to ALL weak incumbent Democrats: Get in the game, or get the fuck out.

    Hakeem Jeffries challenged to 2026 primary by 27-year-old New York councilman

    Fuck him up, Chi!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago (16 children)

    It shouldn't be, because unless there's a 2/3rds majority in the Senate it will be the exact same as the last two times.

    Performative impeachment is pointless. Draft good legislation, then either let the Senate shoot it down or Trump veto it, and hold them all accountable in the '28 election.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago* (5 children)

    I can think of three problems with this way of thinking:

    1. Trump has committed impeachable offenses, and to act otherwise cedes reality itself. It loses the game before even playing, and normalizes impeachable conduct. For a narcissistic sociopath like Trump and his Wormtongue Miller, this is an invitation to continue to ignore the Constitution. Their conduct will get worse without impeachment.

    2. The impeachment process itself changes public opinion. A recent story said that Trump's approval is already at Nixon's lowest point during Watergate. Republicans likely will do nothing, I get it, but impeachment forces them to stand up for a traitor. When push comes to shove, they may flinch. We won't know until we try.

    3. The corollary of Democrats' choice to "focus on other agenda" is true here: Republicans can't focus on Project 2025 if they're spending all their time defending against impeachment. Right now a depressing amount of Project 2025 has been pushed through, so ending their offensive is itself a win.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 6 months ago
    1. People want Trump to face consequences; and that's a not-insignificant motivation for voters. If they want to win in november, and win in 2028, they're going to have to be seen as doing everything within their power to fight this bastard; and they're simply not.
    2. this message screams of "who the fuck cares about justice anyways?"
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    He absolutely has committed impeachable offenses, the problem is we need 67 votes in the Senate to convict him and the Senate absolutely will not do it.

    So we'd end up with the same results as the last two times, Susan Collins and "I think he learned his lesson" and all that.

    Nobody held the Senators accountable either. So there's no point even pretending at this point.

    What moves the needle is flipping the House in '26, getting good legislation passed, then holding the House in '28, flipping the Senate, and winning the Presidency.

    THEN we can talk about the best ways to change the system.

    I'd start with upper end age limits across the board for all three branches. It would need an amendment to do that.

    Ideally, make it so convicted felons can't be President.

    And term limits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Sorry to respond so abstractly, but, I think the main lesson the modern political era has is: be a tactician, not a strategist.

    A strategist may plan twelve moves ahead, but has a huge Achilles heel. They won't move until they are sure there is a winning path.

    A tactician weighs the costs and benefits of acting in the moment, and acts in a way that improves position even without having a clear path to victory.

    Putin is a tactician. For example, he flooded the US with propaganda and leaked emails starting in 2015 to do nothing except destabilize an adversary, kept it up as a cheap side-bet, and ended up getting two Trump terms in return. He attacked Ukraine without a clear plan, and will probably end up (I hope not, but probably - in conjunction with the last sentence) with semi-legitimized control of Donbas and Luhansk.

    Republicans are tacticians. They kept attacking "Obamacare" despite healthcare being a top issue with voters and offering no alternative, and eventually the weight of their attacks made it so unpopular, voters were voting in politicians promising to remove it, despite that it would remove their own healthcare. They have been tacticians for a years with voter suppression (they succeeded in getting many state governments, the House, and so on). Stephen Miller is a tactician, and we saw it in how he kept pushing ICE's unconstitutional policies.

    The point is that each move we make, even without a clear strategy to the final goal, itself changes the reality on the ground. And tacticians are winning because their maneuvers take weeks, each time a free swing and way of moving the reality, the Overton windows, a little closer to their goal. If they fail, they have five other plans brewing, all free swings. Meanwhile, strategists' maneuvers take years to show any effect. No long-term strategy adapts fast enough to counter those tactics.

    We have become the stereotype of that republican quote: They act, we react; and while we react, they act again, changing the reality and killing our still-gestating plans.

    So I'd humbly argue: The only way out of this is not to wait until 2028 (2029, actually, before a new president is hypothetically seated). It's to act, now, using every legal tool we have, even if we don't know the full path to victory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    There are legal tools besides impeachment, but like I say, it's not a matter of not knowing the full path to victory when it comes to impeachment, there literally is no path to victory. Plus the legal tools are currently controlled by the opposition.

    If 2026 goes the way we expect, the 50% majority in the House will be easy enough.

    If we want impeachment, we have to run on it now. Get No Kings to swing the Senate races.

    Right now it's 53 Republican, 45 Democratic, 2 Independent (caucusing with Democrats).

    33 Senate seats are up for re-election in '26, we need to flip 22 seats to win impeachment, maybe only 20 if Collins and Murkowski are willing to play ball. 4 seats will flip control, but control is not enough to impeach.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_Senate_elections

    If we can't get 20-22 Senate seats, there is no point pushing impeachment. It only has the desired effect of making the Democrats look bad and that hurts them in the run up to '28.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I don't see why performative impeachment is more or less pointless than performative legislation. I would say they should do both; I think it is important to get on record who is for and against things. Although in this case, given that he has been impeached before, I am willing to accept the political calculus that a third performative attempt may not be beneficial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Performative impeachment lets the Republicans play the victim card in '28.

    Passing good legislation that gets defeated by Republicans in the Senate or vetoed by Trump gives them ammunition for even more flips in '28.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Shouldn't be so ham-tied that it's not possible. Hell, why wait till mid-terms, get drafting now so things are ready on day one. Not like they're doing anything productive or meaningful at the moment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Except impeachment lets the Republicans play the victim card in '28. So impeachment both does nothing, and lets the Republicans go "See those Democrats are just mean!" in '28.

    Instead, you pass good legislation and if the Republicans kill it, you hang them with it in '28.

    "Living minimum wage? Republicans say no. Universl health care? Republicans say no. Functional immigration? Republicans say no."

    Way harder to do that if you hand them the loaded gun of a 3rd failed impeachment.

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

    Except impeachment lets the Republicans play the victim card in '28.

    They're going to do that anyway. Don't let their bullshit stop us from doing what's right. Otherwise we're just allowing him to continue his criminal activity with no pushback. And that depresses voter turnout.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    There is literally nothing we can do to hold him accountable as long as Republicans control the Senate and he controls the Justice Department, that's the problem.

    Fixing the system means a major, major overhaul of, well, everything and that starts with regaining the House and Senate. That will not happen if we get sidetracked with a 3rd doomed impeachment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    You can't overhaul anything without a supermajority. So throwing sand in the gears is worth the effort.

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

    Sand in the gears won't win votes. At a minimum, we need a majority in the Senate and kill the filibuster. If the Republicans want to vote down good legislation, let them, and then hang their votes around their necks in the next election.

    Current example, raising the minimum wage to $25:

    https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_c2590dcd-be1b-40db-ba35-89fa602f813d.html

    The problem here is that it's raised by Democrats, which means it won't even come up for a vote, you can't hold them responsible for votes that don't happen.

    So, win the House, pass the legislation, and let the Republicans vote it down in the Senate.

    "Here are the people keeping you from earning $25 an hour!"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    I'd like him gone but it would be fun for him to stick around while a lot of his bad work is dismantled.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    well duh. where’s the profit in the change of rhetoric?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Pretty lame of him.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    64 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post