The Trump Presidency VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
quadraginta said:
Why? If they don't have the votes in the senate it will just make them look dumb.
Click to expand...
Is that how it worked out for the Republicans when they sent articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton to a Senate where there was no way they would win a trial vote?
Click to expand...
Well, following the impeachment proceedings, support for Clinton rose ~10%, approval ratings for the republicans fell by 8%, and the majority of people felt that the republican congress critters had abused their power.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/

So, they went after Clinton, weren't able to actually remove him, and left him more popular than he was before.

Not sure if the same thing would happen to Trump if the democrats tried to remove him (the depth of Trump's crimes goes far beyond simply having an affair and lying about it, and the electorate might react differently). But Trump does have a rather hardcore base who like racism and they're pretty unshakable.
 
Segnosaur said:
Well, following the impeachment proceedings, support for Clinton rose ~10%, approval ratings for the republicans fell by 8%, and the majority of people felt that the republican congress critters had abused their power.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/

So, they went after Clinton, weren't able to actually remove him, and left him more popular than he was before.

Not sure if the same thing would happen to Trump if the democrats tried to remove him (the depth of Trump's crimes goes far beyond simply having an affair and lying about it, and the electorate might react differently). But Trump does have a rather hardcore base who like racism and they're pretty unshakable.
Click to expand...

It depends on if he manages to lose enough of the republican base, nixon lost half of it with the saturday night massacre but until then he was totally safe.

BUt now we have fox news and so forth, and they are really priming the base for supporting the president despite any evidence of crimes. So I don't know if they will lose enough base to let republican senators convict him.
 
Trump and Macron aren't buddies any more;Macron is calling on fellow G 7 leaders to confront Trump on trade.
I would not be surprised if it's the G6 after this weekend, with Trump pulling the US out ina hissy fit.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Well, following the impeachment proceedings, support for Clinton rose ~10%...So, they went after Clinton, weren't able to actually remove him, and left him more popular than he was before.

Not sure if the same thing would happen to Trump if the democrats tried to remove him (the depth of Trump's crimes goes far beyond simply having an affair and lying about it, and the electorate might react differently). But Trump does have a rather hardcore base who like racism and they're pretty unshakable.
Click to expand...
It depends on if he manages to lose enough of the republican base, nixon lost half of it with the saturday night massacre but until then he was totally safe.
Click to expand...
Sadly it is a different world today than it was back then.

Republican politicians were more likely to compromise or act in a moderate way, as opposed to today's environment where its "power at all costs even if I destroy the party and the country".

And among voters, the echo chamber provided by things like facebook and fox news did not allow "alternative facts" to become a thing. And the hypocritical evangelical Christian right had not infiltrated themselves so deeply into the republican party.
 
dudalb said:
Trump and Macron aren't buddies any more;Macron is calling on fellow G 7 leaders to confront Trump on trade.
I would not be surprised if it's the G6 after this weekend, with Trump pulling the US out ina hissy fit.
Click to expand...

Imposing tariffs on allies is even causing some discord in the GOP.

In a rare move to fight Donald Trump, six Republican senators have introduced a bill that would give Congress the power to approve or reject the president’s new steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada and other allies.

The bill represents the most significant legislative effort taken by a group of Republican senators to constrain Trump’s economic powers. It reflects widespread unease among Republican senators with Trump’s use of a “national security” provision to impose tariffs on friendly countries.
Click to expand...
 
Segnosaur said:
Well, following the impeachment proceedings, support for Clinton rose ~10%, approval ratings for the republicans fell by 8%, and the majority of people felt that the republican congress critters had abused their power.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/

So, they went after Clinton, weren't able to actually remove him, and left him more popular than he was before.

Not sure if the same thing would happen to Trump if the democrats tried to remove him (the depth of Trump's crimes goes far beyond simply having an affair and lying about it, and the electorate might react differently). But Trump does have a rather hardcore base who like racism and they're pretty unshakable.
Click to expand...

I dont think so. There are many many more differences between Trump and Clinton situations. To start with Clinton is personable and highly articulate. Trump is mean-spirited and clumsy. Second the Republicans were following a three year investigation that was supposed to be about Whitewater which produced zilch instead impeached Clinton for lying about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. There was no obstruction of justice, a cover up and an infiltration of our electoral process by the Russians.

If the public sees an impeachment trial as simply political nonsense, then yes, it's likely to backfire. However, if the public sees it as just and proper, then I doubt Trump increases his popularity.

Do you really think that if Nixon somehow survived an impeachment trial, his popularity would have risen?
 
Trump speculates about why the Coast Guard made so many rescues in Texas during Harvey.

“People went out in their boats to watch the hurricane. That didn’t work out too well.”
 
acbytesla said:
I dont think so. There are many many more differences between Trump and Clinton situations. To start with Clinton is personable and highly articulate. Trump is mean-spirited and clumsy.
Click to expand...
Yeah but Trump still manages to connect with his base (who are likewise mean-spirited and clumsy.)

Second the Republicans were following a three year investigation that was supposed to be about Whitewater which produced zilch instead impeached Clinton for lying about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. There was no obstruction of justice, a cover up and an infiltration of our electoral process by the Russians.
Click to expand...
I agree... that's why I mentioned that the depth of Trump's crimes goes well beyond what Clinton was guilty of.

Do you really think that if Nixon somehow survived an impeachment trial, his popularity would have risen?
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. (I suspect it might rise by a couple of percentage points by people "admiring his fighting back", but wouldn't get anywhere near a majority.)

Same thing would happen with Trump. His base is solid. Even if he gets impeached he would probably look maintain the same level of support. Even if they showed the video of Trump giving oral sex to Putin while Putin personally hacks into the Democrat's computer (while Assange lovingly looks on) I'm sure the majority of his base will probably find some justification to stick by Trump.

The problem is if the Democrats attempt Impeachment and fail they will end up looking really bad: Petty, ineffectual, etc. (Even if Trump himself does not get more popular as a result)
 
Segnosaur said:
Sadly it is a different world today than it was back then.

Republican politicians were more likely to compromise or act in a moderate way, as opposed to today's environment where its "power at all costs even if I destroy the party and the country".

And among voters, the echo chamber provided by things like facebook and fox news did not allow "alternative facts" to become a thing. And the hypocritical evangelical Christian right had not infiltrated themselves so deeply into the republican party.
Click to expand...
That whirring sound you hear is Howard Baker spinning in his grave.
 
varwoche said:
Sadly it is a different world today than it was back then.

Republican politicians were more likely to compromise or act in a moderate way, as opposed to today's environment where its "power at all costs even if I destroy the party and the country".
Click to expand...
That whirring sound you hear is Howard Baker spinning in his grave.
Click to expand...
Nowadays, someone like that would probably be attacked as a RINO (Republican in Name Only), Trump would tweet how he would prefer some other republican to be the senator, and he'd be sidelined by a republican party who thinks "compromise" involves the other people simply giving in.
 
Segnosaur said:
Yeah but Trump still manages to connect with his base (who are likewise mean-spirited and clumsy.)
Click to expand...
Yes, but it takes more than 25 percent of the electorate to win an election. Also, we were talking about Trump's popularity 'rising'which I believe will not happen. Clinton was definitely a horn dog when it came to chasing tail, but he was also the guy that people even his political enemies enjoyed his company.

Segnosaur said:
Maybe, maybe not. (I suspect it might rise by a couple of percentage points by people "admiring his fighting back", but wouldn't get anywhere near a majority.)

Same thing would happen with Trump. His base is solid. Even if he gets impeached he would probably look maintain the same level of support. Even if they showed the video of Trump giving oral sex to Putin while Putin personally hacks into the Democrat's computer (while Assange lovingly looks on) I'm sure the majority of his base will probably find some justification to stick by Trump.

The problem is if the Democrats attempt Impeachment and fail they will end up looking really bad: Petty, ineffectual, etc. (Even if Trump himself does not get more popular as a result)
Click to expand...

YES!! Maybe, maybe not. It depends on information we don't have yet. What is the case for impeachment? If real easily understandable crimes were committed and that case can be made, I think impeachment is the only choice.

Also, it depends on the political environment at the time. I can imagine a scenario next year where the GOP might want to get rid of him more than the Democrats. Imagine a blue wave come November. Trump not only has tiny fingers, but tiny coattails. He could be toxic and the party might hope that a sane Pence slows down an even bigger disaster in 2020.
 
acbytesla said:
YES!! Maybe, maybe not. It depends on information we don't have yet. What is the case for impeachment? If real easily understandable crimes were committed and that case can be made, I think impeachment is the only choice.
Click to expand...
It SHOULD be the only choice. However, the way I see it, unless Trump is caught digging up the corpse of Ronald Regan to have sex with it, nothing he does will cause them to support impeachment.
Also, it depends on the political environment at the time. I can imagine a scenario next year where the GOP might want to get rid of him more than the Democrats. Imagine a blue wave come November. Trump not only has tiny fingers, but tiny coattails. He could be toxic and the party might hope that a sane Pence slows down an even bigger disaster in 2020.
Click to expand...
The way I see it the republicans are screwed either way.

Yes, Pence may be a little more sane (although I can't really see Mr. "gay conversion therapy" being all that willing to compromise.) But he won't draw the attention or support of Trump fans. Turfing Trump will result in a split, with at least some of his fans deciding to sit out election day because they see Pence as a return to "politics as usual", or because Pence doesn't bring the spectacle that Trump does. And while they may get a few votes from never-Trumpers, Pence is unlikely to make many inroads with minorities or other voters that don't really like the Republicans right now.

So, keep Trump, stay stuck at ~40% support with no coat tails to help down ballot. Or turf trump, possibly pick up a few republicans who were turned off by Trump in the first place, but lose some of the racist support.
 
More from Macron


Macron calls on G7 members to confront Trump over trade
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/07/macron-g7-summit-trump-trade-policy-hegemony

Macron was even more emphatic, calling on the other G7 members to resist what he warned was a potential US drift towards “further isolationism and “crude hegemony”.
Click to expand...
It strikes me that a "crude hegemony" is exactly what some posters here would like Trump to achieve - or, rather, to restore, in their historical view.
 
Stacko said:

The tariffs are going over swimmingly.
Click to expand...

Man, I just can't take all this winning!

I think it's clear that Macron..and I suspect most of the other 6 leaders have had it with Trump, have decided that playing nice with him gets them nothing but a kick in the face, and so it's no more Mr.Nice .Guy from now on.
May is the only one who might still think she can manage Donald, but she might be in for a rude awakening as well.
 
Last edited:
CapelDodger said:
More from Macron


Macron calls on G7 members to confront Trump over trade
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/07/macron-g7-summit-trump-trade-policy-hegemony


It strikes me that a "crude hegemony" is exactly what some posters here would like Trump to achieve - or, rather, to restore, in their historical view.
Click to expand...

Which is stupid, because the 1950's and 1960's are not coming back, the US had such dominance then because everybody else was still exhausted from World War 2, and no way it could last.
 
dudalb said:
Which is stupid ...
Click to expand...
Your point being ...? :cool:


... because the 1950's and 1960's are not coming back, the US had such dominance then because everybody else was still exhausted from World War 2, and no way it could last.
Click to expand...
I was actually thinking of the period between Reagan's defeat of Soviet Russia (those were the days, eh?) and Obama giving it all away again. In a certain type of historical view, that is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom