EPTWhat doesn't make sense is that he isnt sending his lawyer. This is a good time for the lawyer to be there
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1922
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
What doesn't make sense is that he isnt sending his lawyer. This is a good time for the lawyer to be there | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21712 Posts
On December 04 2019 00:30 JimmiC wrote: exactly, you decline to send a lawyer to represent you and then you complain on TV about how you didn't even have a lawyer there.My guess is he thinks that sending a lawyer makes it seem legitimate. This way he can just keep calling it a sham and whatever else. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On December 04 2019 00:48 Gorsameth wrote: exactly, you decline to send a lawyer to represent you and then you complain on TV about how you didn't even have a lawyer there. Not at all dissimilar to their tactic of refusing to let anyone in their circle testify at the hearings, then complain that Adam Schiff "hand-picked" people to testify. They're playing purely to people already in the Trump bubble. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:10 NewSunshine wrote: Not at all dissimilar to their tactic of refusing to let anyone in their circle testify at the hearings, then complain that Adam Schiff "hand-picked" people to testify. They're playing purely to people already in the Trump bubble. Is it your belief that most self-identified independents (and about 15% of Democrats) are "already in the Trump bubble"? | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:11 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it your belief that most self-identified independents (and about 15% of Democrats) are "already in the Trump bubble"? Depends if they choose to believe the way Trump's team presents the situation at every turn. If so, then sure. If you're talking about the self-proclaimed "free thinker" crowd, then that tracks. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding though. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:14 NewSunshine wrote: Depends if they choose to believe the way Trump's team presents the situation at every turn. If so, then sure. If you're talking about the self-proclaimed "free thinker" crowd, then that tracks. I'm talking about the 15% of Democrats and majority of Independents that don't support impeachment. I'm trying to decipher if you think they are "in the Trump bubble" or they have reasons for not supporting impeachment that aren't accurately summed up by being in a "Trump bubble" or your pejorative use of "free thinkers" that "believe Trump's team ...at every turn"? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21712 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:11 GreenHorizons wrote: Considering I believe a lot of self-identified independents are Republicans who are scared to admit they are to their friends and family for fear of awkward questions like "why do you think grandma doesn't deserve affordable healthcare".Is it your belief that most self-identified independents (and about 15% of Democrats) are "already in the Trump bubble"? Yeah, that scans. Edit: Also not everyone that doesn't think impeachment is worth it believes Trump is innocent. Trump is putting on a show for his supporters. Not everyone who doesn't actively oppose Trump is a supporter. Plenty simply don't give a shit about anything. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:18 GreenHorizons wrote: I'm talking about the 15% of Democrats and majority of Independents that don't support impeachment. I'm trying to decipher if you think they are "in the Trump bubble" or they have reasons for not supporting impeachment that aren't accurately summed up by being in a "Trump bubble" or your pejorative use of "free thinkers" that "believe Trump's team ...at every turn"? Well, I think there's a difference between not supporting impeachment, and choosing to accept Trump's portrayal of events when they refuse to cooperate. A number of Democrats and Independents don't support impeachment for strategic reasons, not political ones. To anyone who believes Trump's cries about who did and didn't testify, despite the plain-as-day fact that his people were subpoenaed and invited to testify, yes, they are squarely in Trump's alternate reality bubble. Nobody who knows the facts is going to believe anything he says. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:20 NewSunshine wrote: Well, I think there's a difference between supporting impeachment and accepting Trump's portrayal of events when they refuse to cooperate. A number of Democrats and Independents don't support impeachment for strategic reasons, not political ones. I'm not sure what you mean by "strategic reasons, not political ones"? So far the reasons we have the majority of Independents and about 15-20% of Democrats are not supporting impeachment -in the trump bubble -"strategic reasons not political ones" -don't give a shit about anything. Anyone have any others? | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:26 GreenHorizons wrote: I'm not sure what you mean by "strategic reasons, not political ones"? So far the reasons we have the majority of Independents and about 15-20% of Democrats are not supporting impeachment -in the trump bubble -"strategic reasons not political ones" -don't give a shit about anything. Anyone have any others? I don't see any issues. There can be multiple reasons for not supporting impeachment, since there are multiple people who make that decision for themselves. You seem to be conflating support for impeachment with the willful ignorance required to believe Trump's cries of it all being a witch hunt. I don't think those things are the same. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:29 NewSunshine wrote: I don't see any issues. There can be multiple reasons for not supporting impeachment, since there are multiple people who make that decision for themselves. You seem to be conflating support for impeachment with the gullibility required to believe Trump's cries of it all being a witch hunt. I don't think those things are the same. Indeed I agree there are multiple reasons people don't support impeachment. I'm trying to get at why it's still failing, beyond "Trump is playing to his supporters" and Republicans in the senate. I'm not conflating them, I'm establishing that the "they believe Trump" doesn't explain more than enough people to make the difference between where we are and a solid majority. Additionally, that understanding why they remain unconvinced is way more valuable than repeating that Trump is appealing to his supporters and they are unbelievably gullible/stupid/etc... for the umpteenth thousandth time. | ||
|
ThaddeusK
United States231 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:37 JimmiC wrote: Am I correct that the strategic reasons would be something along the lines, impeachment might fire up the Trump supporters and cause the Dems to lose. So while they might agree that he should be impeached based on his criminality they think the procedures hurt the parties chance of winning. Any variation of this, basically. Some think this isn't the time to go for it, which can sound like a post-shooting "not now", but is still something people think. The idea that us pushing for impeachment right now will backfire in some way. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On December 03 2019 23:17 KwarK wrote: They are losing their homes, livelihoods, and way of lives and you’re saying “well there’s more to life than money”. They don’t have good shelter, the farm is mortgaged and they can’t make the payments. You’re right that they probably have nice homes, I bet they wish they could stay in them. Could you miss the point any more? They’re not upset about the price of milk arbitrarily, they’re upset because the price of milk defines their value as human beings and they can no longer afford basic dignity. If their children who have less choice than they do, but can live their lives successfully, so can the parent. If they are alive and well fed, the problem is not their livelihood or capitalism, but their on psyche. There is something unfathomably jealous and selfish about killing yourself becuase your children can make a success of themselves when you cannot. Why should their oversaturated market be supported? Should people working in steel refining also be protected? How about Coal miners? The military? If lawyers or politicians have their homes, livelihoods, and way of lives lost, should the government also step in? Or is it a case that only certain protected classes should have this privilege? If they don't own the farm, they aren't "farmers" anyways, they are labourers. In any case, retracting reports is serious depending on the nature of redaction; I would guess this is simply a case of paid for agricultural lobbying. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On December 04 2019 01:48 ThaddeusK wrote: You listed the reasons already, I'm not sure why you are still acting so confused Not confused, I was asking what beyond those (if anything) people had in their minds for explanations. If that's it, it seems obvious to me why it's failing and why the Democrats worrying about it backfiring are right (while also kinda morally bankrupt). | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On December 04 2019 02:06 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The Democratic Party don't have a choice if they wish to preserve the rule of law. If they somehow fail, but win 2020, I fully expect to see the Democratic party to abuse state power like Trump but a thousand times worse without oversight. How easy it would be with the demonstration of voter ignorance and apathy. Yeah what we've learned from Trump is if you do something really illegal, and someone calls you out on it, all you have to say is "No it isn't. Here is who you should hate instead" and voters will just be like "yeah sounds good, I hate those guys" | ||
| ||
