I spend 2-3 hours a day online in various places defending Nancy and

[Eliot Rosewater]

the party from bashers of her and the party.

She clearly has data that an unsuccessful impeachment will put enough seats at risk that we could lose the House. There is NO other reason for her to resist impeachment.

While she wrestles with that, rump and the GOP openly tell us the constitution and rule of law no longer apply to them and they are going to destroy us.

We are left with no win scenarios, witnesses that WONT testify, subpoenas that WONT be honored or enforced by the traitor running the DOJ.

I have NO ANSWERS but I do see more and more people who would vote for Democrats getting angry and acting like maybe they wont if Nancy doesnt impeach. Do they seem to care we dont even have enough DEMOCRATS in the House to vote for impeachment? They dont seem to understand that.

This is the lose-lose Nancy is in and we are in.

[Me.]

1. Read The Article Linked Below

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12236596

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. Skimmed it, that is what I know about the situation. Makes sense, but get most to hear it

is the problem

People are ignoring the reality of our situation

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. you are full of it

[Me.]

6. ...

agreed

[Eliot Rosewater]

7. Oh yes, now I know what you meant

[Me.]

8. ...

[Goodheart]

18. Do the right thing!

[Turin_C3PO]

5. Yeah she's definitely in a no win situation.

But she can handle it. She takes incoming fire so others don’t have to.

[Goodheart]

9. How about impressing the voting population by DOING THE RIGHT THING?

[Eliot Rosewater]

11. what is that? Having a vote on impeachment and have it lose 335 to 100? what if that

happens?

[Beartracks]

39. My fear: when impeachment fails, Dems are demotivated by MASSIVE...

Last edited Tue Jul 2, 2019, 09:49 PM - Edit history (1)

... Republican gloating amplified by the mainstream media, causing Dem voter participation to fall, and we lose the House. Maybe this is Nancy's concern?

======

[triron]

38. Agree. It is their constitutional duty.

[Crunchy Frog]

55. The voting public is always impressed by displays of impotence.

It's a surefire way to win more seats.

[Goodheart]

10. We don't seem to understand that there aren't enough Democrats for conviction?

Or for impeachment?

If Madame Pelosi says we should impeach she would INSTANTLY have enough Democrats to do so. So please clarify your point.

[Eliot Rosewater]

13. Not realistic, she doesnt call for them to vote in such a manner they lose their seat.

[Goodheart]

15. What makes you think that will happen? I say impeachment will strengthen their seats.

I've heard enough young voters disgusted with lack of accountability to know that her inaction is costing votes.

Prove me wrong.

[Eliot Rosewater]

17. How do you impeach if most of the witnesses dont show up?

Why did Mueller admit he couldnt indict most of them because they all lied about everything.

[Goodheart]

19. I think you're confused. Impeachment is easy enough with a majority vote...

or are you talking conviction?

I have zero confidence that we can convict but we should certainly plaster trump with the eternal stain of an impeachment.

[Eliot Rosewater]

22. No NOT confused, at last count we have 100 votes in the HOUSE from Democrats for impeachment

or less, and it takes a majority which is 218

[Goodheart]

24. It's not difficult to understand that as soon as Pelosi calls for an impeachment

she will have her 218 votes. It's all on her.

[Turin_C3PO]

25. Do you think Pelosi has a magic wand?

She can’t force the caucus to vote for impeachment.

[Celerity]

57. I dont think she can get enough of the centrists (the New Democrat Coalition, The Blue Dog Caucus,

and especially the very problematic No Labels/Problem Solvers group) to go forward with even an enquiry, let alone full blown hearings or a final vote

that is half of our House membership there (those centrists)

Many will not vote for impeachment, probably well over half, which makes it dead.

Those members are also going to block most all of the big tickets items almost all of our POTUS candidates are promising, even if we maintain 20 or so members and retake the Senate and win the POTUS.

If you think the fighting over the border bill (Problems Solvers back-stabbed Pelosi and the progs) was bad, wait until the centrists block the public option (I see some even blocking or trying to block lowering the age of Medicare to 55) or free community college (forget 4 years, lol) or even most all (other than super narrow) debt forgiveness. They will block a lot of even really watered down climate change actions. They will DEFFO block a wealth tax and extensive financial regulation.

It will be brutal brawls. The fucking Rethugs have gerrymandered and voter suppressed so hard, shoved the whole landscape so far to the right, that simply to have a majority we have to elect a tonne of centrists who are actually like ore woke versions of the most moderate Rockefeller Rethugs back decades ago especially on economics and spending. On some social issues, our Dem centrists are FAR more progressive than the rockefeller Rethugs were at least, other than regressive pro-life, anti-LGBTQ, anti immigrant outliers like Lipinski and Henry Cuellar.

Only way to change all that is we HAVE to again majorities in the STATE legislatures, so when re-districting based off the 2020 census occurs, we can unskew those artificially made pink and red districts and then primary the worst of the centrists out as the new seats will be back to safe blue ones. That is a MASSIVE lift, and so difficult and arduous a task, as you are talking about hundreds of seats at state level needing to be flipped or maintained, and all that is fought on a Rethug gerrymandered (at present) map.

The progressive left is going to go BONKERS if we win POTUS, retake the Senate and have 240, 250 House members and still cannot even pass the mild versions of reforms (like I said, big fails on even the public option, etc). If we cannot undo the gerrymanders with the new maps based off the 2020 census, and we still have to have an artificially centrist (let face it, some are centre right on econ) caucus to retain control, there is going to be a bloody civil war going on by 2023 or so (especially IF we retake the Senate) If we win the POTUS in 2020, and then our person is re-elected in 2024, plus we have control of bother chambers (a lot of huge ifs I do grant) and most all is STILL blocked, I fear for the Party's structural unity circa 2025, 2026.

[Turin_C3PO]

59. That's depressing but probably true.

You don’t think the moderates would go for a public option? That would be a line in the sand for my support.

Bottom line is that progressives have their work cut out for them.

[Celerity]

69. the giant healthcare provider lobbies (doctors, hospitals) the giant insurance lobbies

like AHIP (whose executive board directo, Dan Hilferty (he is also the Independence Blue Cross CEO) was Biden's Philadelphia kick-off giant fundraiser's co-chair) and big pharma lobbies have all vowed to fight it, with hundreds of millions backing their efforts. AHIP crushed the public option last time, and dropped over 100 million (in just the last 14 months prior to its passage) trying to stop Obamacare itself.

I am totally FOR the public option, but I do not think a lot of people (who see it as a completely moderate option when compared to M4A) realise how big and massive a move it will be. All those lobbies, all the Rethugs, and all the Dem centrists who are against any sort of national expansion, (even if they had zero electoral fears) and going to combine efforts to paint the public option as the end of US healthcare and pharma systems. They will be utterly ruthless and fear monger at massive systemic levels. Same on financial regulation, uni tuition/student debt reforms, and moving to increase (even slightly) the taxing rates of the top wealth strata and giant corps.

The Rethugs have utterly gamed the entire system over the last 50 years. At every level, from local to national. We are boxed in, as if we want to have majority control, we have to have a shit tonne of members representing artificially RW (in varying degrees) swing districts. It is like (if you allow me a football analogy) fucking Spurs being allowed to dictate my team's (Chelsea) midfield and centre backs based off a set of rules Tottenham got to write.

[Bettie]

75. So, Centrists are the only

people who matter in the party. If they are center right even more so.

You have no idea how frustrating it is to know my party has zero power, even when they are in charge because there are too many "centrists" who want to vote with Republicans whenever possible.

[watoos]

16. I disagree.

I have seen zero indication that Speaker Pelosi is pro impeachment.

If Speaker Pelosi called a 9PM press conference and spelled out the reasons for an impeachment inquiry she would INSTANTLY get 100% of her caucus behind her.

[Nevermypresident]

31. No question in my mind. At least it's being acknowledged that many Democrats

are disillusioned and frustrated because leadership is putting party over country. If Speaker Pelosi continues to run out the clock on impeachment, history will not be kind. I hope she's gaming out how many grassroots workers and small donors that feverishly worked on mid-term Dem campaigns in order to take on trump, will not be showing up next year.

[Turin_C3PO]

34. The midterms were won on kitchen table issues such as healthcare.

And if so-called “grassroots workers” decide to cut their nose to spite their face, that’s on them. It would show that they’re selfish and don’t care about the country. I know I’ll be working for 2020, impeachment or not.

[Turin_C3PO]

61. I voted for them to take on Trump also.

But surveys show that in those red districts that we flipped, healthcare was the driving issue. You’re right that nothing has been achieved due to the killer of democracy Mitch McConnell and his complicit Senate.

[Turin_C3PO]

63. Yeah, basically that's the way I read it.

[Trumpocalypse]

65. Very well said nt

[Nevermypresident]

79. Last House mid-terms were not a single issue election (kitchen table) GOTV. Our turnout was

also significant because of trump.

I certainly agree that passionate Democrats such as you and I will be working for 2020. There were quite a few people I worked with last year that were grassroots workers and donors for the first time in their life (mainly because of trump).

Every Democrat vote that is cast in this country, I maintain, are not necessarily made by people like us. I hope leadership takes this anger and disillusionist in mind and not "cut off their nose to spite their face".

[sprinkleeninow]

71. This I feel in my spirit to be true.

Daily the unthinkable, unimaginable, unfathomable continues. Six months now.

[watoos]

12. There is no good reason to not impeach.

Impeachment gives us the grand jury testimony.
Impeachment changes the right wing narrative.

I hope I am wrong and Speaker Pelosi is right, but I think back to 2010 when Republicans flipped 64 House seats.
I think back to 2010 when Former Speaker Pelosi handed over that oversized gavel to John Boehner.

[Eliot Rosewater]

14. Are you forgetting why Mueller gave up? Witnesses who lied about everything

and now witnesses who are told by DOJ they dont even have to abide by subpoenas?

Impeachment gives us nothing if the people who have the info refuse to tell us. Not saying for sure that will happen but it sure is possible

[Goodheart]

21. Impeachment "gives us nothing"? I beg to differ.

It gives us at the very least a powerful, eternal censure against a man unfit to be president.

[watoos]

27. I respectfully disagree.

Trump's biographer stated that impeachment would devastate Trump. An impeachment hearing would be televised, it would stop Trump and the far right from controlling the narrative. Control of the narrative is extremely important leading up to the election.

An impeachment hearing should give Congress the grand jury information that Barr is refusing to release. It should give us that information before the election.

What we are doing now will never be resolved before the election. Court cases will be delayed right up to the Supreme Court.

To me that amounts to doing nothing because if Trump is reelected we have lost our democracy. As a matter of fact, even if Trump loses the election who can guarantee that he will abide by the election results.

Our despot is getting the people ready to crown him king just look at the 4th of July tribute to Trump.

[Turin_C3PO]

29. I believe he'd be marched out of office

once a Democrat is sworn in. Either by Secret Service or US Marshalls. I have faith in them to uphold the law.

[Goodheart]

30. You AGREED with me. :)

[watoos]

23. Barr himself said that he would release grand jury information

for an impeachment hearing. An impeachment hearing carries more clout with the courts because it is a judicial hearing where regular House hearings are legislative hearings.

We already have the information of what people testified to before the grand jury. All we need is for Barr to release that information, it doesn't involve subpoenas.

[Eliot Rosewater]

26. when was that?

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/04/09/ag-barr-no-plans-to-ask-court-to-release-grand-jury-info-in-mueller-report/?slreturn=20190602180555

as of April he said no

BTW, there is NO reason to believe him when he says anything

[AncientGeezer]

64. No he didn't. He has NO authority to release JG-6E material

Last edited Tue Jul 2, 2019, 11:10 PM - Edit history (1)

[Trumpocalypse]

68. Is there any proof of that?

I keep hearing people make the claim that an impeachment hearing would carry more clout in the courts. But every time I ask for proof, I get crickets.

[Trumpocalypse]

66. What does 2010 have to do with it?

[Midnightwalk]

20. Why is understanding voting so hard?

The only message sent by losing an election is that the other side was more popular. Expect politicians to shift towards that position and live with the policies you didn’t oppose.

There are choices that aren’t forced on you but there are plenty that are. If you don’t like any of the movies playing no one forces you to see one.

If you have to go to work, you gave to choose to drive, walk, etc or lose your job. If you are hungry and the only food you have is lima beans or sardines you pick one or go to the store.

Is the problem that mentally we’re set up to not like decisions we have to make as opposed to choices we get to make? Maybe there actually us something to ranked choice voting. It may not actually change “the real choice” but maybe it gets people past the mental block we seem to have about forced choices.

Sorry this doesn’t completely fit in with your post. I don’t have any real comment other than i mostly agree.

[Skittles]

42. voting does not matter if Russia and the FBI game the system

[Midnightwalk]

50. It still does

If the vote counts in enough states are directly manipulated you would be right except doing the right thing matters anyway.

If they don’t manipulate enough of the right precincts by enough then not voting can give them the margin of victory.

If part of the manipulation is to supress votes then not voting also can give them the margin they need.

If poisoning turnout by selling that it is all hopeless so why bother voting ....same thing.

They will probably try any thing they can think of and will get away with some. Voting is the only option most of us have and doesn’t preclude any ither option.

The stupidest way to lose an election is to despair and not even vote.

[Skittles]

56. that's a lot of IFS

there's no IF about the fact that Russia is free to manipulate our next election, because NO ONE is doing anything to stop them

[Midnightwalk]

70. I'll make it simpler

Unless you know 100 percent that your vote doesn’t matter you should vote. Unless you know 100 percrnt that discouraging people to vote won’t matter you should stop.

There is no downside to voting

[Skittles]

76. I'll make it simpler

there could be 100% eligible voters voting and the results won't mean JACK SQUAT if nothing is done to stop election interference

DONE HERE

[Midnightwalk]

77. Mommy there's no hope so I'm done with it all

You are one of several reasons we lose. Voting is table stakes for having an opinion that matters.

You just make it easy for the Russians to play us.

[Stuart G]

28. Most people don't know the complications of the problem. Most people think this is as easy as

taking a vote and getting Trump out of there. Or easy as turning the lights on and off.
No, it is not that easy. If it were that easy, getting rid of Trump would already have been done. So many obstacles in the way, and many of those obstacles have very different solutions and complications deep within.
Yes, there are a whole lot of " party bashers but many of them are as stupid as Trump.

Again, If it were really that easy to get rid of Trump...(like one simple vote and he is out) it would have been done already.

Is that the truth, or is it a lie?

[Eliot Rosewater]

33. that is what I have been saying

My only caveat is since so many people on our side or who could be are demanding impeachment, NOT Knowing the reasons why that might be catastrophic to decent people everywhere, have to be talked to , acknowledged, educated.

There is a good article here somewhere someone showed me from The Atlantic.

[chowder66]

47. Here's the link to that article.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/nancy-pelosi-public-opinion-and-timing-matter/591385/

[Crunchy Frog]

58. I haven't seen ANYONE here who thinks that way.

Pretty much everyone here knows that impeachment won't remove him.

Most people that I see here think that the hearings themselves would have a negative impact on Trump, and get important information out to the public.

Many also think that an impeachment by the House would damage him.

If you've got links to people here, arguing what you posted, I'd sure like to see them.

[Nevermypresident]

80. +1000

[uponit7771]

32. Impeachment has never been a positive of the impeached for the control of government NEVER. I don't

... know what data she's looking at.

I do understand timing is an issue here

[JI7]

35. anyone who doesn't vote is a piece of shit and probably wants Republicans to win

[Eliot Rosewater]

36. Well, lots sure, but we have to understand a whole lotta people didnt vote because they

didnt get Exactly what they wanted, like spoiled children.

Do we think that cant happen again?

Or they voted for stein or whatever.

It can happen again.

[Turin_C3PO]

37. I'm hoping there's less of them this time.

In fact, with Donald Trump now proven as an existential threat, I expect there won’t be near as many selfish pouters this cycle.

[Gothmog]

40. I stand and support Nancy Pelosi

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

41. And not impeaching will allow Trump and all the Trumpistas out there

to point out that clearly there was nothing there, and to re-elect him.

THAT'S the message the Republicans are getting from doing nothing.

[stillcool]

49. who is doing nothing?

if the House ever gets the numbers needed to start impeachment hearings, the Democrats will have the foundation down.
this link from NBC is from a while back, but it takes you to links of the present day committee's work.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/house-investigations-trump-his-administration-full-list-n1010131

[stillcool]

67. I only know what I read...

We're up to 80 now + the 1 Republican. The New York Times keeps a running tally of who has come out for or against impeachment. Some members also explain their positions, but who cares....right?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/31/us/politics/trump-impeachment-congress-list.html

[Skittles]

43. you definitely seem to have a vested interest in promoting her

[Eliot Rosewater]

44. The leader of our party? The person primarily responsible for the ACA?

I sure do

[chowder66]

48. Ditto! nt

[betsuni]

45. K&R

[stillcool]

46. there's something up with people..

I think it's the tv. If people read, they would not speak as they do, I don't think. So they either don't care to find out why things are the way they are, or they have an agenda.

[Crunchy Frog]

60. Or they have a difference of opinion.

That can happen too.

[stillcool]

72. I don't think the smash-mouth

one-liners are opinions. There is no thought process involved. Just repetition. Although I guess that's about all that can be expected. Turn on the tv, and let them tell you what to think.

[Crunchy Frog]

74. Sorry, I don't watch TV.