In an ideal world, once Trump is out of office, we’d be able to remove all of his appointees.
Democrats can allow themselves to indulge in fantasies of impeaching justices (and even Trump himself) or they can ruminate over how things got to this place and, as you suggested, change their approach to get themselves back in the majority.
I’m not a Democrat. I just think that the only way to reverse the assaults on American freedom that Trump and his cronies have brought on us is to remove them from office. Things got to this place because Trump was savvy enough to appeal directly to the proud ignorance and stupidity that the Republican base likes while Hillary was too stupid and corrupt to appeal to what American voters actually wanted. To prevent this shit from happening again we need to abolish the Electoral College and outlaw corporate donations to political candidates and probably put in place some kind of IQ test requirement for people running for president so that someone as stupid as Trump can’t run again.
So we’re back to attributing Trump’s victory to ignorant, stupid Republicans. I could’ve sworn you’d said previously that wasn’t how Trump won and you didn’t label Republicans broadly. I didn’t believe you then, but at least your bias is back on full display now and you’re not pretending anymore.
Ignorant, stupid Republicans are part of it. He definitely mobilized them. It’s not the only reason why he won, but it’s a big part. And of course I’m biased. I’ve never pretended not to be biased. I hate the rightwing and wish it didn’t even exist. I’ve called Hillary supporters worse than Trump supporters. I’ve advocated for the removal of every corporate representative from office. I’ve even admitted to being in favor of some acts of political violence. When have I ever pretended to not be biased? That’s what you do.
I don’t pretend; I do my best not to be biased, but I acknowledge we all have biases. I try to consider mine when weighing issues, while you’re clearly ruled by yours.
Since you’re so obviously biased and admit as much, any judgment you’d place against another person about their beliefs would be suspect. Since you see everything through a far-left lens, I naturally appear far-right. I’m not.
I don’t have a strong opinion about the Electoral College. I do believe it has a purpose, but is open to abuse. However, I think addressing gerrymandering will solve those problems and is actually within the realm of possibility, whereas abolishing the EC is unlikely. I do agree that campaign finance reform is a massive issue and corporate donations should be banned.
It’s only unlikely because it gives Republicans an opportunity to win the Presidency without coming close to being selected by a plurality of the voters.
It’s unlikely in the same way all constitutional amendments are unlikely. They’re tough to pass and unless the issues they address are persistent, they fade from memory. It takes a long time to pass an amendment. As soon as the next Democrat president is elected, nobody will be saying anything about the EC (unless it’s a really bizarre election where the Dems win by EC but not popular, in which case hypocritical Republicans will be screeching about how the EC has to go).
EDIT: Do you think Trump should be impeached for his blatant obstruction of justice? He admitted that he fired James Comey simply because he was investigating him. I know you’re very sympathetic to the far-right, so I’m guessing not, especially given how you ignore the legitimate reasons why Trump should be impeached.
Again with the far-right nonsense. You know nothing, as you prove time and time again with your broken-record hot takes.
I actually do know a lot of things. I’m pretty well-informed. I’m not any more intelligent than most people, but I’m very well-read and I generally have at the very least a layman’s understanding of what I’m talking about. So, once again you’re wrong.
I meant you know nothing in regards to my thought patterns. You’ve lumped me in with the far-right and believe my sympathies always lie there, despite the fact that anyone reviewing my posts over the last year would find someone who falls right on some issues and left on others.
Anyone reading your posts would find your opinion always falls incontrovertibly to the left and there isn’t a hint of balanced thought to be found.
I’ll let Mueller make the case for Trump’s impeachment when he shares his findings since I’m neither a constitutional scholar nor an attorney/prosecutor. I’m glad you’re confident in your armchair legalese and that it brings you peace of mind. Part of me wishes I still subscribed to a hopelessly binary mode of thinking so that I could once again be certain about everything.
Why do you even talk about things then? Presumably you’re not an expert anything you’ve talked about in this thread before but that didn’t stop you from babbling about it. I don’t need to be a prosecutor to see that firing the person investigating you is obstruction of justice. I don’t even have a hopelessly binary mode of thinking, either. I’m just confident in what I believe. That’s not a bad thing when what you believe is grounded in reality. Why would I want to float around being unsure of everything and unwilling to just take a stance on something? That would a pathetic and sad existence.
It’s this simple: even legal scholars don’t agree that Trump committed a crime, so what’s the point in debating it with you? I’m generally avoiding direct debates with you now because your position is always clear and immovable from the outset. There’s no discussion to be had.
I’ve taken strong stances on plenty of issues. Setting aside this one thing isn’t “float[ing] around being unsure”. It’s recognizing a gap in my own knowledge and deciding I’m not informed enough to make a determination.
If I were to rely upon my limited knowledge of the legal situation, the separation between the DOJ and the executive isn’t a law, but a custom, and the AG serves at the pleasure of the President, which would mean Trump firing Comey was legal. But if Mueller’s investigation determines Trump himself was in bed with the Russians, they directly intervened in the election (systems breaches that altered vote tallies), and Trump fired Comey to keep him from digging up the truth, then I’d assume that’s a crime and an impeachable offense. But I don’t know what happened for sure, just like you don’t.
I’m comfortable with “I don’t know” and it doesn’t make me far-right because I won’t condemn Trump with the same uninformed fervor as you.