Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44
Thanks Tree24Thanks

Thread: The Dark Side Of Impeaching Trump

  1. #21
    Member birdzeyez's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,142
    Thanks
    1680

    From
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Yes, he's incompetent and bigoted. Yes, impeachment is now virtually inevitable. Yes, it is great fun to kick a bigot.

    But.....the people running around saying "See! We should have elected Hillary!" are as wrong as it is humanely possible to be.

    Domestically, we need a progressive POTUS who will really protect the poor, revive the middle class and restrain the 0.01% to a reasonable degree. (Probably not Bernie. 81 is an unreasonable age for a POTUS, IMO.)

    Maybe Warren, but the problem there is, although she's a math and economics genius, I can't recall her every demonstrating any proficiency in justice or social issues.

    But no matter. Stop saying "We need to save Obamacare!" No, we are hideously injured by Obamacare. We need universal care.

    We need a POTUS who will attack our stupid drug laws and dismantle the prison industrial complex. We KNOW that is not Hillary, as she is the main architect of it. No Democrat of her corporatist type is at all acceptable.

    Trump refocused attention on the HUGE pockets of poverty and despair in this country. The Rust Belt. Appalachia. Etc. We need a POTUS who will carry out his trade agenda. Or something very near to it -- not another TPP proponent.

    So, as we throw the baby out with the bathwater, can we please exercise some care not to kill the middle class and bring about a Depression that never ends?

    We need REAL liberals. And the one place we know they won't be found is the Democratic party.
    How many liberals do you expect to find in the GOP?
    Thanks from OldGaffer

  2. #22
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    13,038
    Thanks
    2206

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank View Post
    Really? Why would you say that?

    While it's true that Pence is far more of a religious fanatic than Sunkist, it stands to reason that if the current occupier of the WH is removed from office (or, as is far more likely, resigns under pressure), that Pence would be such damaged goods, he'd be lucky to get a budget passed. Moreover, he's certainly not as unstable or impulsive as Sunkist.

    Either way, I'm certainly willing to roll the dice with that one.
    That's a reasonable explanation, but, good luck getting trump impeached. He probably laughs at the "pressure" applied by the left.

  3. #23
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,003
    Thanks
    29569

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueneck View Post
    I don't want to impeach Trump, I just want to make him so miserable he quits.

    That said, you are assuming that somehow, miraculously, if Trump were gone, Democrats would be in charge. That's nowhere near happening. It doesn't matter if it's Hillary, Bernie, Warren or God himself in the White House, you need a Dem majority to get anything done.

    I'd be fine with Pence in there if we could get a few more Dems in the Senate. Pence is establishment, the alt right isn't going to support him, what's left of the tea party types aren't going to support him on a lot of issues, in fact I'd wager Rand Paul would openly fight a lot of his policies which I suspect would wind up including trade deals just as a way to boost his profile for a 2020 run.

    If Pence was president, he could be blocked because he's not Trump and the people who love Trump aren't going to be loyal to him if he doesn't follow Trump's plans for a lot of things and I suspect he won't.

    As to who is going to lead the Dems in the future? My choice would be Sherrod Brown, should he choose to do it. I think he's got the right stuff and his record speaks for itself on rust belt issues.
    I like Sherrod, a lot. But to my knowledge, he has no record of rebelling against bad Democratic policies or leading on progressive issues.

    Plus, not for nothing, but could this country please elect a female POTUS before I die?

  4. #24
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,003
    Thanks
    29569

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    I disagree and I disagree with your assessment of Clinton. But wear yourself out.

    The evil is pretending to be perfect and never getting ANYTHING done because you refuse to compromise (and so do they) unless you get 100% of what you want.

    The complaint is gridlock. What causes gridlock? Holier than thou people, refusing to give, in order to get.

    America would never have become the United States of America in this day and age. It became a nation because after much debate, people decided they had to sh*t or get off the pot and they weren't going to do either unless they came to agreements and coming to agreements meant giving up some things to get the more important things.

    Grown-ups learn that about life, when they are children.

    Bernie is a progressive and recommended people vote for Hillary Clinton after being the VICTIM of the "evil" HRC and the DNC.......are you more progressive than him or just willing to whore yourself out to some imagined perfect candidate (that does not exist) you would ignore anyway, just like you did Bernie Sanders? Your "better" judgement, got America and you what? Something better than HRC?

    It's like cutting off your arm for fear you might cut your finger.
    Fuck yes, hands down, Trump is STILL better than Hillary would have been.

    I am not loyal to Bernie. I am loyal to progressive ideas.
    Thanks from OlGuy

  5. #25
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,003
    Thanks
    29569

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by birdzeyez View Post
    How many liberals do you expect to find in the GOP?
    I suspect there are many, outside DC. But who can tell?

    We live in bizzare times. Any Eisenhower Republican is now virtually indistinguishable from a progressive.

    And neither one is at all like a Democrat.

  6. #26
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    40,966
    Thanks
    24158

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    I like Sherrod, a lot. But to my knowledge, he has no record of rebelling against bad Democratic policies or leading on progressive issues.

    Plus, not for nothing, but could this country please elect a female POTUS before I die?
    Somebody here said Kasich was planning on running against Brown in Ohio. Not sure if that's true, if so could he actually win?
    Thanks from Madeline

  7. #27
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    12,651
    Thanks
    10527

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Fuck yes, hands down, Trump is STILL better than Hillary would have been.

    I am not loyal to Bernie. I am loyal to progressive ideas.
    Trump is BETTER than Hillary?

    Your holier than thou (Bernie and everyone else's) "progressive ideas" are going where, with your "better" Trump? Are you living in reality or some fantasy land? Denial is not a river in Africa.

    It's like you're constantly daydreaming about something you want instead of working towards it, realizing you may never get 100% of what you want, but getting better than the total opposite.

    Lots of people want all kinds of things and they realize simply wanting it, does not get it.

    Bernie Sanders said HRC was 100 better than any republican running, not just Donald Trump and he also laid out WHY HRC would be someone that would be a lot easier to work closer to a more progressive direction than Trump who would regress, not progress, but somehow, you seem to think regression is "better". Not sure why, but once again, knock yourself out.

    I was a Republican because of people like Lincoln ( the notion to free people from being other people's property in a nation that claims to be the home of the free) because of Theodore Roosevelt and his recognition that not every inch of the globe needs to be exploited and trashed so some fat cats like Trump can flaunt their wealth and imagined "greatness" in the face of the people that helped them gain that wealth (laborers)), because of people like Eisenhower who for all his own faults and failings, had the vision to see people like Trump and warn against them and their exploitation of the American taxpayer to make themselves and their cronies more wealthy at the expense of the ignorant, who can't see through the con artistry and actually appear thank the people that are robbing them blind.

    I left the Republican Party when the neo's came in (neo "conservative" being an oxymoron) and pushed the greed thing and all the things Lincoln, TR and Eisenhower warned and fought against. Were Lincoln, TR and Eisenhower, perfect? No and neither was Thomas Jefferson who penned the Declaration of Independence while keeping slaves, neither was FDR who forwarded many great things for human beings, but they were PROGRESSIVE in many ways and far more progressive than those whose slogan is "Make America Great Again" without specifying when that was, but for periods when greed and discrimination seemed to be more prevalent.

    I am an Independent who has seen the Democratic Party, especially in the south, go from Dixiecrat/Ku Klux Clan, Jim Crow mentalities, while the neo republicans took on those mentalities. Not that there weren't already republicans in the south at the time of the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that didn't already have that mentality, even more so than southern Democrats (see who voted for the Act, by region). For many years the republican platform has been that Democrats are tax and spenders meant to suggest they would somehow arbitrarily add needless programs and increase taxes to pay for them. Then came the neo republicans who somehow seem to think you can fight two wars and other spending also, but instead of taxing to pay for them, you give tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and token tax cuts to the "little people" and promise them the wealthy will voluntarily do what they whine about doing, when forced to do it.

    The main and significant difference I see between the neo republican party and the Democrats is in their tax proposals. There are things that they agree on, especially infrastructure maintenance, improvements and new, smarter infrastructure. Anything that anyone wants to do, is going to take money to do it. The Democrats like to tax to at least pay for some of what they want to do, the neo republicans want to cut the revenue needed to pay for all they want to do, borrowing money so the wealthy don't have to pitch in and help pay for what helps them make great profits, LIKE infrastructure.

    Money and wealth are not in of themselves, evil. Even the Bible says it is the "love of money" that is no go. There are some very wealthy people out there who pass much of their wealth through to do good things for people not so fortunate and there are some very wealthy people who, like Trump, are greedy and gluttonous and narcissistic as can be. Both exist in all political parties, BUT the distinct difference to me is in the view about taxation on themselves. Anyone that sees the nation's debt, sees people struggling, sees our crumbling infrastructure, lives in the lap of super luxury themselves, but wants a tax cut for themselves, is NOT getting it (but they are getting their own greed and gluttony). By contrast, anyone that says, I can pay more in taxes and still be uber wealthy and STILL make voluntary contributions DOES get it.

    No one wants to pay for fraud, whether it is people gaming the welfare system or to pay for corporate welfare, like subsidizing Wal-mart and other companies, unlivable wages among other things, but progressive people, from any party, do see how, like a human body, their nation's society works best, when all parts of it are healthy and doing well in a relative sense. When there are people that live in golden gilded penthouse apartments in buildings with their name on it while people, like veterans, sleep on the sidewalk and the person in the penthouse (just one of their multiple multi-million dollar residences) wants something like a tax cut for himself and all people like him, there is something IMMEDIATELY wrong and NOT progressive about that picture and there is something GREEDY about that picture.

    In my lifetime, I have seen the Republican Party go from being more interested in the greater good to being more interested in individual and crony greed and gluttony and it is something Republican Presidents of the past warned about, that came to fruition. I have seen the Democratic Party, more so in the south, go from being one more like today's neo republicans, to being more like Lincoln and his forwarding (progressive) moves to ultimately stop the practice of people being owned by other human beings as property, in this nation. Sentiments against his actions still pervade in some corners of our nation and as Reagan seemed to suggest some permission for people to be greedy again, Trump appears to have offered, not implicitly, but by his speeches and rhetoric, that the movement for equality in this nation in many instances, is to be considered PC (politically correct) and in Trump's mind, being PC is "evil", but you seem to think he is "better" than HRC.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 3rd March 2017 at 07:49 AM.
    Thanks from Madeline

  8. #28
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,003
    Thanks
    29569

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Somebody here said Kasich was planning on running against Brown in Ohio. Not sure if that's true, if so could he actually win?
    No. Kasich needs to move into national politics, but he's have a better chance running against Portman.

  9. #29
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,003
    Thanks
    29569

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    Trump is BETTER than Hillary?

    Your holier than thou (Bernie and everyone else's) "progressive ideas" are going where, with your "better" Trump? Are you living in reality or some fantasy land? Denial is not a river in Africa.

    It's like you're constantly daydreaming about something you want instead of working towards it, realizing you may never get 100% of what you want, but getting better than the total opposite.

    Lots of people want all kinds of things and they realize simply wanting it, does not get it.

    Bernie Sanders said HRC was 100 better than any republican running, not just Donald Trump and he also laid out WHY HRC would be someone that would be a lot easier to work closer to a more progressive direction than Trump who would regress, not progress, but somehow, you seem to think regression is "better". Not sure why, but once again, knock yourself out.

    I was a Republican because of people like Lincoln ( the notion to free people from being other people's property in a nation that claims to be the home of the free) because of Theodore Roosevelt and his recognition that not every inch of the globe needs to be exploited and trashed so some fat cats like Trump can flaunt their wealth and imagined "greatness" in the face of the people that helped them gain that wealth (laborers)), because of people like Eisenhower who for all his own faults and failings, had the vision to see people like Trump and warn against them and their exploitation of the American taxpayer to make themselves and their cronies more wealthy at the expense of the ignorant, who can't see through the con artistry and actually appear thank the people that are robbing them blind.

    I left the Republican Party when the neo's came in (neo "conservative" being an oxymoron) and pushed the greed thing and all the things Lincoln, TR and Eisenhower warned and fought against. Were Lincoln, TR and Eisenhower, perfect? No and neither was Thomas Jefferson who penned the Declaration of Independence while keeping slaves, neither was FDR who forwarded many great things for human beings, but they were PROGRESSIVE in many ways and far more progressive than those whose slogan is "Make America Great Again" without specifying when that was, but for periods when greed and discrimination seemed to be more prevalent.

    I am an Independent who has seen the Democratic Party, especially in the south, go from Dixiecrat/Ku Klux Clan, Jim Crow mentalities, while the neo republicans took on those mentalities. Not that there weren't already republicans in the south at the time of the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that didn't already have that mentality, even more so than southern Democrats (see who voted for the Act, by region). For many years the republican platform has been that Democrats are tax and spenders meant to suggest they would somehow arbitrarily add needless programs and increase taxes to pay for them. Then came the neo republicans who somehow seem to think you can fight two wars and other spending also, but instead of taxing to pay for them, you give tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and token tax cuts to the "little people" and promise them the wealthy will voluntarily do what they whine about doing, when forced to do it.

    The main and significant difference I see between the neo republican party and the Democrats is in their tax proposals. There are things that they agree on, especially infrastructure maintenance, improvements and new, smarter infrastructure. Anything that anyone wants to do, is going to take money to do it. The Democrats like to tax to at least pay for some of what they want to do, the neo republicans want to cut the revenue needed to pay for all they want to do, borrowing money so the wealthy don't have to pitch in and help pay for what helps them make great profits, LIKE infrastructure.

    Money and wealth are not in of themselves, evil. Even the Bible says it is the "love of money" that is no go. There are some very wealthy people out there who pass much of their wealth through to do good things for people not so fortunate and there are some very wealthy people who, like Trump, are greedy and gluttonous and narcissistic as can be. Both exist in all political parties, BUT the distinct difference to me is in the view about taxation on themselves. Anyone that sees the nation's debt, sees people struggling, sees our crumbling infrastructure, lives in the lap of super luxury themselves, but wants a tax cut for themselves, is NOT getting it (but they are getting their own greed and gluttony). By contrast, anyone that says, I can pay more in taxes and still be uber wealthy and STILL make voluntary contributions DOES get it.

    No one wants to pay for fraud, whether it is people gaming the welfare system or to pay for corporate welfare, like subsidizing Wal-mart and other companies, unlivable wages among other things, but progressive people, from any party, do see how, like a human body, their nation's society works best, when all parts of it are healthy and doing well in a relative sense. When there are people that live in golden gilded penthouse apartments in buildings with their name on it while people, like veterans, sleep on the sidewalk and the person in the penthouse (just one of their multiple multi-million dollar residences) wants something like a tax cut for himself and all people like him, there is something IMMEDIATELY wrong and NOT progressive about that picture and there is something GREEDY about that picture.

    In my lifetime, I have seen the Republican Party go from being more interested in the greater good to being more interested in individual and crony greed and gluttony and it is something Republican Presidents of the past warned about, that came to fruition. I have seen the Democratic Party, more so in the south, go from being one more like today's neo republicans, to being more like Lincoln and his forwarding (progressive) moves to ultimately stop the practice of people being owned by other human beings as property, in this nation. Sentiments against his actions still pervade in some corners of our nation and as Reagan seemed to suggest some permission for people to be greedy again, Trump appears to have offered, not implicitly, but by his speeches and rhetoric, that the movement for equality in this nation in many instances, is to be considered PC (politically correct) and in Trump's mind, being PC is "evil", but you seem to think he is "better" than HRC.
    Trump is 100% ineffectual and his monkey shines will kill the Religious Right.

    Hillary would have been 100% effective, and our grandchildren would have been enslaved and exploited like the Chinese do their poor kids.

    I'd rather be insulted than robbed of my future. Wouldn't you?

  10. #30
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    21,055
    Thanks
    4114

    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Yes, he's incompetent and bigoted. Yes, impeachment is now virtually inevitable. Yes, it is great fun to kick a bigot.

    But.....the people running around saying "See! We should have elected Hillary!" are as wrong as it is humanely possible to be.

    Domestically, we need a progressive POTUS who will really protect the poor, revive the middle class and restrain the 0.01% to a reasonable degree. (Probably not Bernie. 81 is an unreasonable age for a POTUS, IMO.)

    Maybe Warren, but the problem there is, although she's a math and economics genius, I can't recall her every demonstrating any proficiency in justice or social issues.

    But no matter. Stop saying "We need to save Obamacare!" No, we are hideously injured by Obamacare. We need universal care.

    We need a POTUS who will attack our stupid drug laws and dismantle the prison industrial complex. We KNOW that is not Hillary, as she is the main architect of it. No Democrat of her corporatist type is at all acceptable.

    Trump refocused attention on the HUGE pockets of poverty and despair in this country. The Rust Belt. Appalachia. Etc. We need a POTUS who will carry out his trade agenda. Or something very near to it -- not another TPP proponent.

    So, as we throw the baby out with the bathwater, can we please exercise some care not to kill the middle class and bring about a Depression that never ends?

    We need REAL liberals. And the one place we know they won't be found is the Democratic party.
    WE had eight years of your historic progressive and the the last election said not again. You want a president who will take of the poor while importing poor by the shit load. The math genius E. Warren ought to be able to see the numbers don't work.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Music From the Dark Side of the Moon
    By excalibur in forum Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 22nd February 2016, 04:59 AM
  2. The dark side of Silicon Valley
    By Paris in forum Current Events
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 9th February 2016, 09:47 PM
  3. Don't give in to the dark side
    By Liberal Doses in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 26th August 2013, 12:56 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed