I'm in favor of those, with the possible exception of court packing, because once you start doing that, both parties will use it, and I fear that it won't stop until we have hundreds of Supreme Court justices.
To poke at this... I would say that your position is understandable, but the argument itself is significantly weakened by the simple fact that the GOP has been engaging in effectively the same thing as court packing for the last decade after they decided to break the rules and norms that were being followed before then in a blatant power grab - and have repeatedly demonstrated on a state level that they're very willing to engage in outright changing the size of the courts to add more of their favored judges, at last check. Seemingly, the only paths forward, then, are to just roll over (which would be entirely expectable from the Democratic Party), strike back righteously, or push hard for a more "fair" reform that might buy some time before the GOP/corporatists manage to corrupt it.
Wanna give the real deal a try? This guy is a super smart physicist and completely brainwashed.
https://motls.blogspot.com/2021/01/parasites-retards-scum-terrorists.html
I'm reminded of
this comic.
The GOP's denialism toward Global warming is incredible. I don't get why;most of the big corporations can see the handwriting on the wall and are moving towards renewable energy. Holdouts are the companies in the fossil fuel business,and even some of them are beginning to divesity
It'sot just a case of doing what business wants;it has developed a life ot it's own.
As has been noted, the GOP is serving business interests, but yes, not just businesses in general. The fossil fuel industries have courted them quite strongly, in particular, and the climate change denial/mitigation/can't do anything about it has been an almost foundational plank of Republican propaganda for many decades now, which means that it's really well ingrained in the GOP's alternative reality worldview.
Even worse, the vast majority of the Republicans in the Senate privately knew that he was guilty (they confessed this to their Democrat colleagues) but they were too afraid to vote that way because they knew they risked being primaried by Trump supporters next time they were up for election. Only one Senator had the courage to vote his convictions... Mitt Romney.
Trump was so obviously guilty that if the Senate trial had been a jury trial in a court, the jury would very likely have been out for less than an hour before coming back with a unanimous guilty verdict
I think I'll add to that. As I recall, a number of the Republicans
publicly stated that they knew he was guilty AND that what Trump did was very bad - it was just that him being so obviously guilty wasn't sufficient reason to get them to vote to remove him. Susan Collins was rather famous for suggesting that she thought that Trump had learned his lesson (*snerk*). Either way, an impeachment is not a criminal trial, after all, much as it would have effectively been necessary (for dumb reasons) to allow a timely criminal trial there.
Meaningful tit for tat would be to say "If you impeach my guy for his crimes, I'll impeach yours for his." It is not, as some seem to think, "If you impeach my guy for his crimes, I'll impeach yours for whatever idiotic reason I like." That's not tit for tat, that's blackmail, not only shamefully wrong but shamefully stupid.
Sorta reminds me of an old quote that went something like "If the Republicans would stop lying about Democrats, we Democrats might stop telling the truth about Republicans."
Yeah, that's pretty obvious- like most Trump supporters I've known (and living in Mississippi, that's quite a few), you don't know anything more than what you want to know. The information's out there, but it's up to you to look at it.
Not just "out there" all too frequently. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." comes to mind.
Even if Trump runs in 2024 and loses again, there is a possibility that he might pull the same stunt... make veiled calls to engage in violence, target the media or democratic politicians.
Very, very high probability, rather. It's pretty much part of his MO.