The republicans are laughing as the intellectually honest part of the world parce and analyze the witness testimony. @Corrosion is right. Dems will impeach, Senate won't remove from office, the polling of swing states are moving in the pro Trump direction, and the Republicans are laughing. The reality is that a large portion of America lacks the bandwidth or intellect to wade through the misdirection and lies from the Trump camp. They can only process soundbites and filter them through their personal lenses and world views. It is unfortunate and dispicable that the Trump camp is successfully amassing power because they are able and willing to lead this portion of the public by the nose. Democrats need to change the way they think and operate to deal with this post-fact world. Nothing matters except winning the swing states. The Democratic party needs to 100% formulate their platform to whatever it takes to win the swing states. Will the more liberal part of the party complain? Yes, and they are idiots. Amass power first, and then execute your priorities to the best of your ability. Heck, amass power first, then govern for all. Whatever your philosophy, amass power first. I watched a good part of the Dem debate the other night, and only Buttigeg, Biden and Yang seem to understand the battle. The rest are flying high in their echo chamber and have zero shot at winning those states.
and this is precisely the basket-of-deplorables type of arrogance that dehumanizes vast swaths of the American population and contributes to Trump's success, but not for the reasons you give here.
Again, this is what I wrote: I bolded the part you refer to. Did I write they were the only ones acting on them? No. But you wish to claim that trump supporters are not acting on the traits I listed? What are trump's key themes? (1) the wall and related immigration (2) the tax cut (3) nationalism (4) attacks on media, Democrats. Which one of the traits I listed don't apply?
I legitimately don't understand what you just said. I'm happy to engage, but I'm confused. Help me out here.
Am I the only one that wonders with all the attorneys in this world, why choose the one that defended the russian spy?
I never get this narrative. When liberals are called "Muslim terrorist sympathizers", "unpatriotic", "libtards", "soy boys" or minorites are called "sand niggers(towards Arab and South Asian Muslims)", "faggots", "niggers" , "thugs", "rat infested shitholes" etc do they go out of their way to chose a divisive candidate who is known for hurling grade school insults to any one who criticises him? It seems to me that one party's extreme votes based on animosity and vindictiveness and the other party's extreme votes on what others percieve as unpramgamtic policies because they are possibly idealists with wishful thinking. This is the narrative you admitted to. You are admitting that the GOP base votes based on vindictiveness. That's petty as ****. At least the other party's "extremists" vote out of a desire for unpragamtic policy desires because they are idealists.
I'm not calling all Trump supporters "deplorable" (some are, but I choose to believe that that is the minority). I am saying that: (i) this impeachment process involves complicated fact pattern and unsettled areas of law; (ii) much of America, including Trump supporters, lack the intellect or bandwidth to process all of it. Accordingly, this makes them vulnerable -- through no fault of their own -- to having to process this information through soundbites, which they will process based on their own lens and world view. The trump camp knows this and is more than willing to flat out lie (the post-fact world) to take advantage of this situation. If you see this as dehumanizing, please explain. I think they're the victim. There is no dishonor in not being brilliant. There is no dishonor in not being able to sift through complicated fact patterns and unsettled areas of law. Hell, half the people here can't do it. Perhaps you think it's rude or arrogant to state these facts, or you think I'm trying to dehumanize someone. Humanity is a sea of different attributes. A standard jury is comprised of folks with high school level education/intellect. Is that a slander of jurors? It's basic fact really. I'm just saying they are being lied to and exploited.
sure that's the "vast swaths of the American population" I referred to i.e., they're "dumb" -- this is the "precisely the basket-of-deplorables type of arrogance" I referred to, because I believe the vast majority of Americans are NOT dumb. You may simply disagree with them, but that doesn't make THEM dumb this assertion is what "dehumanizes " those American people I was referring to It is the arrogance of self-congratulatory liberals contributes to Trump's success--not the dumbness of the vast majority of Americans. I actually give those Americans a lot of credit for rejecting that liberal arrogance, holding their noses, and exercising the franchise by voting for Trump. you are suggesting that Trump is "successfully amassing power" because he is somehow brainwashing these dumb, duped voters. I disagree that THAT is the reason that Trump is amassing power. Trump is amassing power because of liberal blindness and arrogance. hope that helps.
our responses crossed in the ether. These additional comments are helpful and reasonable. I agree with much of what you say here.
At this point if you aren't a wealthy individual and believe someone who is as divisive and toxic for the country as Donald Trump is good for this country, you either possibly just don't follow the news and politics close enough and are just enamoured by the cult of personality or believe a bull in a China shop tactic is necessary for America.
The best choice was what Pelosi did her best to do - avoid this fiasco to begin with , her party let her down. I guess now that we are here - How do we limit the damage ? In some of those polls , some 30% say they aren't paying attention to the investigation. These people are going to look at the results , not the details. You ever heard the saying "to the victor go the spoils"? …. Well , the victor also writes the history. Warren or Sanders … They will beat Dumpster just like Hillary did. Oops. Independents aint buying that democratic socialist schtick. The middle isn't ready to go full throttle left turn. Policy really isn't the problem with Dumpster - the problem is his execution of that policy and a lack of ethics , morals & civility. He's a douchebag. Biden , Buttigieg , Klobuchar .... beat Dumpster like a drum. If our choices are Bernie or Princess Wigwam Vs Dumpster - I wont check a box. Bad and Bad isn't a choice to me.
What I struggle with, and stop shy of saying, is that the Dems need to adopt the same tactic and lie in order to win those states, amass power, and get Trump out. I just can't go there. I don't know how you fight trump in a post-fact world, but I still hold on to the belief that truth must mean something. But with each Tweet, and with each additional dishonorable submission by a Republican to an outright lie, it makes you think about it. It makes you think that the ends justifies the means, because the liar in chief must be removed by any means possible. The only thing that keeps you from doing it is because it legitimizes that way of thinking, and you become the monster you reviled. But I don't know the answer. I just know the swing states must be won.
I will add here that besides the impeachment process involving an unsettled area of law, it also involves substantial philosophical ambiguity about intent, motivation, and inference. Was Trump attempting (looking ahead to 2020) to gain advantage over his presumed rival-to-be (Biden)? OR was a vengeful Trump looking BACKWARDS to 2016 and simply trying to exact some pound of flesh from a perceived political opponent (again, Biden). I think the distinction matters to the INTERPRETATION of Trump's actions, motives, and intent. I actually think the American public senses this ambiguity more readily than you give them credit for . . . or for that matter, more than the pro-impeachment Democrats in the House do. This is why (I believe) impeachment is not really playing well in Peoria. I really think there's a good chance impeachment backfires on the Democratic party. I really think there's an excellent chance that impeachment will make Trump a sympathetic figure, just as it did Bill Clinton.
Let's simplify it -- can anyone with a straight face say that Trump was not motivated, at least in part, by the unquestionable political gain he would receive from a mere announcement of an investigation re Biden? Anyone? Of course not. The best case scenario for Trump is that he had dual motives. And even then, I find it impossible to believe that any half way intelligent person who has been paying attention to Trump, his character, and how he operates, would conclude anything but Trump knew full damn well he was executing a hit job on Biden. Edit - The foregoing is the premise of what I wrote above. The truth is obvious. Even in this little clutchfans community, there are trump supporters and exactly zero have even attempted to rebut my statement of the obvious. But the truth is being obscured with outright lies, smears, conspiracy theories ... the more noise that's put out there, the more difficult it is for honest, simple people to reach the obvious conclusion. That's the trump machine at work.
that may be so. but I also believe (and think that the American public assumes this as well) that an awful lot of "sausage-making" goes on behind closed doors in politics. That's what we pay politicians to do: to make the sausage. Trump got caught "making sausage." (This is why the whistleblower identity question is still relevant by the way: did a disgruntled anti-Trumpian simply pick THIS time out of all the possible cases of sausage-making to blow the whistle? and why now?) Americans are now faced with the decision to make about how serious they think this sausage-making infraction is. I believe that because many if not most Americans simply assume there are all kinds of sausage-making infractions every day, 365 days a year, that what Trump got "caught" doing is different only in degree from the Washington norms of sausage-making, not radically different in kind. This is why (I believe) most Americans are ambivalent about removing Trump from office. I think they're happy to let the impeachment proceedings unfold as a kind of political-junkie-junk-food, but draw the line at actually kicking the President out of office. Was Trump executing a hit job on a political opponent? Yes, but so what? EVERY single politician does hit jobs on their opponents--different in degree, to be sure, but not substantially different in kind. So you're left with a kind of "Boo-Hoorah" outcome for the impeachment inquiry. Those that hate Trump get to say "Boo, Trump! Boo!" and those that admire Trump get to say "Hoorah, Trump! Hoorah!" And life will go on.
I would add Well, there are two separate topics at issue. First, intellectual honesty. I think we've covered that and there is no question that the Republican denials of what happened (note, I'm not referencing the legal question of impeachment or removal) is intellectually dishonest to put it mildly. The reality is the republicans are lying, they know it, and they don't want to admit it. That's the trump world in which they live. Second, there is what the public makes of all this. Absolutely these are several of many considerations as to what the public thinks about impeachment. I have zero problems with that. I have a problem with the public being lied to.