Impeachment Jury

[yoink 321]

24 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

We will have to disagree.

A system that allows a Trump in is damaged, and broken.

A system that keeps a Pelosi is damaged and broken

A system that keeps a McConnell is damaged and broken.

I don't know how irreparable the damage is, but it's there.

Removing the ability of the speaker of the house to personally schedule what bills are voted on would fix McConnell and everyone after. Simple fix and it only hurts one power hungry person while improving our democracy.

 

I still don't understand your hostility to Pelosi - would you care to explain?

Edited January 20, 2020 by yoink

[gowlerk 1,912]

29 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

A system that allows a Trump in is damaged, and broken.

It is a flaw of democracy. The people got what they asked for, sort of. If you discount the Electoral College system.

[yoink 321]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

It is a flaw of democracy. The people got what they asked for, sort of. If you discount the Electoral College system.

A system that allows the Electoral College is damaged, and broken.

 

 

[gowlerk 1,912]

Just now, yoink said:

A system that allows the Electoral College is damaged, and broken.

It was a compromise that seems to have been a mistake. But without making the compromise they would have had to make a perhaps worse choice. The system has turned out leaders of differing quality, the current president seems to be a very poor leader, but others have been much better. But are his mistakes really that much worse than the ones made in the wake of 9/11 by the GWB regime? (so far, the danger is far from over)

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, yoink said:

Removing the ability of the speaker of the house to personally schedule what bills are voted on would fix McConnell and everyone after. Simple fix and it only hurts one power hungry person while improving our democracy.

 

I still don't understand your hostility to Pelosi - would you care to explain?

They would have to take that away from Both the house and the senate.

 

I am biased, to begin with.

I also have eyes and ears and know what an adolescent temper tantrum sounds like.

Edited January 20, 2020 by turtlespeed
I'd like to see the rest here be honest about their bias. But we won't see that.

[jakee 1,255]

5 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

That is a good question.

I know. Do you want to try answering it?

Quote

What it sounds like to me is the system is irretrievably broken. 

And how do you demonstrate that outside of attempting to use it?

[jakee 1,255]

18 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I am biased, to begin with.

And you have no idea how much.

 

Quote

I also have eyes and ears and know what an adolescent temper tantrum sounds like.

That's new. What does the temper tantrum look like?

[yoink 321]

49 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

They would have to take that away from Both the house and the senate.

 

They've made baby steps in Congress, but it's not enough. But, yes, I agree. Remove the ability from both and have the same system in each to let bills with support go for a vote.

 

A temper tantrum you say? Again, can you provide a link to that? Every time I've seen her she looks remarkably more presidential than the fuming toddler that is Trump.

It's looking more and more like you just don't like strong women in power. If that's your bias, fair enough. But your justifications are pretty weak so far.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

2 hours ago, yoink said:

it's just possible that he would do everything he promised.

Hi Will,

Not to anyone who has been following him since about 1989 or so.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-digs-central-park-5-they-admitted-their-guilt-n1019156

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Central_Park_Five

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

2 hours ago, yoink said:

 

Sorry about the double post.

Jerry Baumchen

Edited January 20, 2020 by JerryBaumchen

[JoeWeber 2,299]

13 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Will,

Not to anyone who has been following him since about 1989 or so.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-digs-central-park-5-they-admitted-their-guilt-n1019156

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Central_Park_Five

Jerry Baumchen

And that is the great big point. I don't believe there was a snow balls chance in hell that Trump would be a decent president or do a decent job based simply on his history and words. If you voted for him over Hillary on what you believe were their individual merits then you could not have spent much time looking at him.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

48 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

And that is the great big point. I don't believe there was a snow balls chance in hell that Trump would be a decent president or do a decent job based simply on his history and words. If you voted for him over Hillary on what you believe were their individual merits then you could not have spent much time looking at him.

Hi Joe,

I could not agree more.

Jerry Baumchen

[normiss 622]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

And that is the great big point. I don't believe there was a snow balls chance in hell that Trump would be a decent president or do a decent job based simply on his history and words. If you voted for him over Hillary on what you believe were their individual merits then you could not have spent much time looking at him.

Or her for that matter.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

18 minutes ago, normiss said:

Or her for that matter.

I'd add that if it was about shaking up Washington, draining the swamp or any similar excuse for not doing your proper civic duty and taking seriously your vote for our President then, for the sake of the republic, you need to stop voting.

[airdvr 197]

6 hours ago, yoink said:

I suspect this is a big part of it. It's also true that she was pretty unlikable and carried a serious amount of baggage.

OK airdvr, I've also stated before that the Dems are to blame in a big way for putting forward shit candidates last election, but at that point Trump was a wild card. I understand why people voted for him - it's just possible that he would do everything he promised.

The big question is that now you've seen 4 years of his lying, criminal narcissism would you STILL vote for him over a weak Democrat?

I really don't feel like I voted for Trump, more like voting against Hillary.

W/R/T lying and criminal narcissism...you wrongly assume that he is a stand out in DC.  The main difference between Trump and the others is he's totally unscripted.  Yes it makes me cringe sometimes but at least i know where he's coming from.  We've been spoon fed DC for as long as I can remember.  Do you seriously think the problem with Washington is Trump?  He's just the easy target.

Will I vote for him again?  I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[wmw999 2,122]

41 minutes ago, airdvr said:

W/R/T lying and criminal narcissism...you wrongly assume that he is a stand out in DC.  The main difference between Trump and the others is he's totally unscripted.  Yes it makes me cringe sometimes but at least i know where he's coming from.  We've been spoon fed DC for as long as I can remember.  Do you seriously think the problem with Washington is Trump?

“Unscripted” in this case is synonymous with “saying whatever it takes for a short-term gain or applause with no intention of carrying anything out” and “pulling it out of your ass because you don’t actually know anything.” America deserves better than that. 

Wendy P. 

[ryoder 1,384]

2 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

“Unscripted” in this case is synonymous with “saying whatever it takes for a short-term gain or applause with no intention of carrying anything out” and “pulling it out of your ass because you don’t actually know anything.”

QFT!

[airdvr 197]

11 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

“Unscripted” in this case is synonymous with “saying whatever it takes for a short-term gain or applause with no intention of carrying anything out” and “pulling it out of your ass because you don’t actually know anything.” America deserves better than that. 

Wendy P. 

I agree with the exception of you thinking that you've been getting anything different from DC in your lifetime.

[normiss 622]

53 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I agree with the exception of you thinking that you've been getting anything different from DC in your lifetime.

Then by all means we should totally destroy the country financially.

Since bankruptcy is Trump's specialty, how do we do that as a nation, and what happens when we do?

Can we just burn the constitution now too? It's not like the current admin respects it or follows it anyway.

The destruction of the country should never be the choice to replace the political boondoggle IMO. We should address the laws that permit the boondoggle, not ignore and dismiss all law.

Trump is a criminal idiot, he's not helping, he's destroying.

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

I agree with the exception of you thinking that you've been getting anything different from DC in your lifetime.

I am always surprised by the people who respond to the worst in government by saying "well I choose to believe all government is that level, so I can say there's no other option."

Air pollution being down between 30% and 95% is like Trump thinking that wind turbines cause cancer?  The cleaner air is saving tens of thousands of lives a year.

Providing access to public spaces for the disabled is as bad as Trump mocking a disabled reporter?  The life of someone in a wheelchair is a lot better than it was 40 years ago.

The CDC's remarkable success fighting communicable disease is like Trump claiming that multiple vaccines cause autism?  Dude, smallpox is GONE.

The US guiding not just one, but two private companies to develop their own manned spacecraft for NASA to use is like Trump claiming that the Moon is part of Mars?

The creation of the Internet is akin to Trump's support of white nationalism?  The creation of the solar and EV industries - industries that are actually giving us a positive trade balance in those areas - is just as bad as Trump's failed trade war?

Come on.  You know better than that.  Why not work to get back to those successes, instead of trying to drag down the US to the lowest common denominator because you can't see anything better?

[JoeWeber 2,299]

4 hours ago, airdvr said:

I really don't feel like I voted for Trump, more like voting against Hillary.

And you also really don't feel like we have a clusterfuck for a government or, now so conveniently, don't worry that we're now an international embarrassment.  You voted for what we now endure. You voted for Trump. If you can not own that failure then quit voting. 

[jakee 1,255]

6 hours ago, airdvr said:

I really don't feel like I voted for Trump, more like voting against Hillary.

W/R/T lying and criminal narcissism...you wrongly assume that he is a stand out in DC.  The main difference between Trump and the others is he's totally unscripted.  Yes it makes me cringe sometimes but at least i know where he's coming from. 

This is just willful disregard for reality. Trump is generally bad at following a script but he does have them, and he lies so much you have no idea where he's coming from. Take 'drain the swamp' as a prime example.

[wmw999 2,122]

10 hours ago, airdvr said:

I agree with the exception of you thinking that you've been getting anything different from DC in your lifetime.

If there is absolutely no one in DC who is competent in any way, then the job is impossible. We've made the system huge, what with lobbyists, aides, etc., but then we expect the government to be all things to all people (small, except for where we need it and in the military, or maybe instead it should be providing for all). 

There is no ideal answer, because the country is too big for that. No matter what, there will be millions of people unhappy with any result, because there are 350 million Americans. A 99% approval rating means that 3 and a half million people disapprove, and they'll be noisy about it.

Term limits are not a bad start, but they do throw out the good (congresscritters who have spent a lifetime becoming expert in some field, or who really care about the daily work of serving their constituents -- they do exist) with the bad. One consideration is that there are other people who can also do the same thing; this is not a specialized job like brain surgeon (I'm assuming you expect more from a brain surgeon than a President), so refreshing them periodically makes sense. But then you  have to expect that sometimes young people, who are less knowledgeable when they come in, will be elected.

Wendy P.

[sfzombie13 307]

there are no good congressmen, only placeholders and compromises. the real solution would be term limits for all, make them actually hold jobs for the off season like they used to, and ban lobbyists from using former congressmen.

[DJL 232]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

Term limits are not a bad start, but they do throw out the good (congresscritters who have spent a lifetime becoming expert in some field, or who really care about the daily work of serving their constituents -- they do exist) with the bad.

Campaign finance reform is the first place I'd start.  No single thing holds as much power over a politician as where their funding for the next election is coming from.  And....that starts with legislating past People's United.  We are in the grips of special interests until that happens.