"Although one-third of Americans endorsed impeaching Obama, according to the CNN poll, a sizable 65% said they wouldn't take that step. There were also, expectedly, partisan divisions on the question with 57% of Republicans but only 35% of independents and 13% of Democrats backing a move to impeach Obama."
So that's a poll unlikely to be sought out by non-impeachers, on a website that's bound to have bias, where still ~2/3 of the voters don't want to impeach.
Sounds more sane than the title makes out.
Dwarfs, gods among humanoids, giants among... gnomes...Originally Posted by The Hitch-hikers' Guide To The Galaxy: Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz
Man, am I glad to be a European.
1.No one can garner bipartisan support in the US Political Climate. You got two parties. Extreme Right with Tea party and friends and Center Right (Or in American terms "Liberal") and various smaller gorups such as the American Socialist party, Greens etc, who do not even exist outside of a few small towns. In fact the US is a Oligarchy. The fact that Americans vote the same Group in every time and wonder, why they are behind the rest of the devloped world.
He has deported more people then previous administrations. The US is deporting at record levels right now. Not much more he can do outside of something insane like recreating the N/S Korean Border.Also I dont think he cares about people illegally coming to our country!
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-any-other-pr/If you instead compare the two presidents’ monthly averages, it works out to 32,886 for Obama and 20,964 for Bush, putting Obama clearly in the lead. Bill Clinton is far behind with 869,676 total and 9,059 per month. All previous occupants of the White House going back to 1892 fell well short of the level of the three most recent presidents.
It is like you want to prove the sterotypes about Americans are true with all your heart.
Thats true. In fact the majority of elected Republicans in leadership positions have flat out said they wont even bring it up impeachment including the Person who would have to allow the proceedings to start (Boehner). He flat ruled it out. The ONLY prominent Republican Ive seen that said we should start impeachment proceedings was Sarah Palin, and she isnt even in any elected office so she doesnt matter. The Dems are trying to make people THINK that the Republicans want to impeach him to try and get votes and avoid losing the Senate this fall.
- - - Updated - - -
Like he ever would anyway, although it would be funny if someone hired him to defend them in a DUI case or something
- - - Updated - - -
Im pretty sure he was referencing Clinton being disbarred, not Obama. And Clinton wasnt actually disbarred because he resigned before they could do it, although he wouldve been disbarred.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah, it really annoys me when people dismiss anything you link if it doesnt come from Huffington Post, or MSNBC. If you read the article and disagree, then say so, but just because an article is on Fox News, or The Washington Post, or Newsmax, doesnt mean its automatically trash. If it is an opinion piece, sure go ahead and trash it. But when its an article the contains irrefutable facts, then you really should at least read it before bashing it.
- - - Updated - - -
It wouldnt matter if the House voted for impeachment. Its a politically dumb thing to even do because the Senate wouldnt remove him from office even if he slit the throat of a baby on the front porch of the White House in broad daylight, and many of the posters on this forum would defend him for it too, and say Fox News is making it out to be worse than it is or some such.
While I'll fully agree that the Democrats are unlikely to unseat a sitting Democratic president, the hyperbole is a bit much. There are limits to party loyalty, and I highly doubt the Dems would sacrifice the entire political party for the sake of the President, especially now that the VP is guaranteed to be the same party as the President is.
3DS Friend Code: 0146-9205-4817. Could show as either Chris or Chrysia.
Are we changing it from "the only people talking about it are democrats" to "the only prominent republican I see"? It has been discussed openly by republicans who have proudly talked about their constituents whining about wanting to impeach Obama. It's great to see you haven't lost your obliviousness to reality.
10 people vote. 3 say we gotta shoot Obama
"3rd of American people say Obama needs to be shot!"
Are there dumber people alive than those who think that things would be different in the United States if they just had a different president? The tie would be red rather than blue, so I guess you'd have that, at least.
EverQuest, City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, EverQuest II, World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, Star Wars TOR, Guild Wars 2, Rift.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-
1. You may, MAYBE, if you held all the Republicans' toes to the fire, actually get him impeached -- which remember, means the paperwork, not the trial or his removal from office. You will simply never get 67 votes in the Senate, which means it is nothing but an empty gesture.
2. The Democrats' narrative on the Republicans is very clear: They're a bunch of crybaby, do-nothing obstructionists more interested in scoring political points and making sure Obama never gets anything done than in actually having a hand in governing the nation. Can you think of any single thing the Republicans could possibly do to play right into that narrative more than to take time out to file completely political impeachment papers that they know will never under any circumstances actually remove the president from office?
2a. Let's not forgot the power of playing into existing narratives. Take as one example of many the ham-fisted but ultimately innocent "binders full of women" comment. It got national attention because it plays into the existing narrative of the GOP's "war against women." Doesn't matter if there is any such thing -- the narrative is working and he played right into it.
3. History. The last time they tried this game with Bill Clinton (against whom they actually had a better case) was one of the last times until only recently that more than 50% of the country had an unfavorable view of the Republican Party. They were widely expected to win the 1998 elections, but instead the impeachment nonsense turned off enough voters that they actually lost five seats. Even Newt Gingrich, the Speaker of the House in 1998 and the leading force for impeachment, regrets impeaching Clinton and has admitted that it tarnished Republicans for years to come. He resigned the speakership of the House after the election, and resigned from Congress two months later in January.
So yes, Republicans, keep pushing the impeachment agenda. Go vote! I hope you pass it. I can't think of a better way to help the Democrats out for years to come.
Question is now, what does the Obama Administration need to do to actually get a controversy crisis to stick?
Any ideas?
Actually get a controversy would be a start.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-