support for impeachment growing

[NewCreation435]

Support for impeaching President Donald Trump is growing.
A batch of recent polling confirms the Democratic impeachment push is gaining steam — including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult survey that shows for the first time that more voters support than oppose proceedings to remove Trump from office. The uptick is primarily among Democrats, as Republican voters surveyed continue to have Trump's back.
In the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, 46 percent of voters said Congress should begin impeachment proceedings vs. 43 percent who said they should not. Eleven percent had no opinion. That support represented a 3-point bump from last week, when voters were evenly split."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...rump-hits-new-high/ar-AAI9PVs?ocid=spartanntp

At one time it didn't seem that Trump could do no wrong among Republicans. Yet, support for impeachment seems to be growing especially among independents. What do you think? It still seems early days to me regarding this and polls can change quickly.

 

[Lamb]

Support for impeaching President Donald Trump is growing.
A batch of recent polling confirms the Democratic impeachment push is gaining steam — including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult survey that shows for the first time that more voters support than oppose proceedings to remove Trump from office. The uptick is primarily among Democrats, as Republican voters surveyed continue to have Trump's back.
In the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, 46 percent of voters said Congress should begin impeachment proceedings vs. 43 percent who said they should not. Eleven percent had no opinion. That support represented a 3-point bump from last week, when voters were evenly split."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...rump-hits-new-high/ar-AAI9PVs?ocid=spartanntp

At one time it didn't seem that Trump could do no wrong among Republicans. Yet, support for impeachment seems to be growing especially among independents. What do you think? It still seems early days to me regarding this and polls can change quickly.

The way I understand it is that the poll is for the impeachment inquiry...not necessarily for impeachment.

 

[Josiah]

HEARINGS does not mean impeachment...

IMPEACHMENT does not mean removal from office...


The whole thing is just pure politics. We have a gossiper who refuses to identify himself/herself (NOT a "whistleblower" since that legally requires an EYE witness, FIRST HAND witness - and this gossiper ADMITTED he/she had NO first hand knowledge at alk). It's simply attempt #3 after two failed attempts of the Democrats, and when this fails, there will be an attempt #4 and if that fails, #5.... The accusation is that this gossiper HEARD that Trump said something in a phone call that we ALL KNOW he didn't say. IMO, case closed - the gossiper heard wrong.

But it seems the Libs are very scared..... scared that NONE of the 19 Democrats running can defeat Trump via Democracy, via the way Democracies deal with elected officials which are deemed not good. They seem very scared that democratic approach will fail. And so they will continue to try to dig up something - even something we ALL KNOW isn't true because we've read the transcript ourselves - ANYTHING. Even though obviously Trump won't be removed from office and all this only reinforces the American FRUSTRATION that Congress is getting nothing done. But the press of course is giving this all the attention it dares to give it ... and of course Libs love it (and some Independents are being sucked in). I find all this disgusting.

IF the Democrats actually believed voters siupport them, we all know what they would be doing.... sending BIG, IMPORTANT bills to Trump, ones that would have the majority of Americans in full support ... only to show Trump vetoing them AND then could call for replacing him with one 0f their socialist candidates. They aren't doing that. WHY? They know they have NO concrete proposals Americans would siupport and can't get the votes to pass any of them. BTW, Trump has one of the LOWEST veto rates of any modern president... he hasn't needed to veto much because the Dems have nothing of importance or substance. Even when the Dems had the White House, BOTH houses and the Supreme Court in their pocket, they introduced NOT ONE gun control measure - because they had none and couldn't get their own to pass it if they did. Since they can't win the democratic way, they are pursuing another approach: advance personal HATE..... see if they can falsely accuse and condemn.... It's not how our country is suppose to work. Let the opposition party PROPOSE policies that matter - PASS THEM - and get support from the public. They won't. They can't.

 

[Andrew]

The Dems reminds me of Wile E Coyote trying every trick in the book and failing.. making a fool of themselves, meanwhile Trump sends out little tweets mocking them lol "meep meep"

 

[tango]

Support for impeaching President Donald Trump is growing.
A batch of recent polling confirms the Democratic impeachment push is gaining steam — including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult survey that shows for the first time that more voters support than oppose proceedings to remove Trump from office. The uptick is primarily among Democrats, as Republican voters surveyed continue to have Trump's back.
In the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, 46 percent of voters said Congress should begin impeachment proceedings vs. 43 percent who said they should not. Eleven percent had no opinion. That support represented a 3-point bump from last week, when voters were evenly split."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...rump-hits-new-high/ar-AAI9PVs?ocid=spartanntp

At one time it didn't seem that Trump could do no wrong among Republicans. Yet, support for impeachment seems to be growing especially among independents. What do you think? It still seems early days to me regarding this and polls can change quickly.

I'm not a particular fan of Trump (although I'm glad he beat Hillary). My take on this is little more than "meh".

The headline "Voters for losing candidate wish winning candidate was gone" doesn't have much attention grabbing potential.

 

[NewCreation435]

HEARINGS does not mean impeachment...

IMPEACHMENT does not mean removal from office...


The whole thing is just pure politics. We have a gossiper who refuses to identify himself/herself (NOT a "whistleblower" since that legally requires an EYE witness, FIRST HAND witness - and this gossiper ADMITTED he/she had NO first hand knowledge at alk). It's simply attempt #3 after two failed attempts of the Democrats, and when this fails, there will be an attempt #4 and if that fails, #5.... The accusation is that this gossiper HEARD that Trump said something in a phone call that we ALL KNOW he didn't say. IMO, case closed - the gossiper heard wrong.

But it seems the Libs are very scared..... scared that NONE of the 19 Democrats running can defeat Trump via Democracy, via the way Democracies deal with elected officials which are deemed not good. They seem very scared that democratic approach will fail. And so they will continue to try to dig up something - even something we ALL KNOW isn't true because we've read the transcript ourselves - ANYTHING. Even though obviously Trump won't be removed from office and all this only reinforces the American FRUSTRATION that Congress is getting nothing done. But the press of course is giving this all the attention it dares to give it ... and of course Libs love it (and some Independents are being sucked in). I find all this disgusting.

IF the Democrats actually believed voters siupport them, we all know what they would be doing.... sending BIG, IMPORTANT bills to Trump, ones that would have the majority of Americans in full support ... only to show Trump vetoing them AND then could call for replacing him with one 0f their socialist candidates. They aren't doing that. WHY? They know they have NO concrete proposals Americans would siupport and can't get the votes to pass any of them. BTW, Trump has one of the LOWEST veto rates of any modern president... he hasn't needed to veto much because the Dems have nothing of importance or substance. Even when the Dems had the White House, BOTH houses and the Supreme Court in their pocket, they introduced NOT ONE gun control measure - because they had none and couldn't get their own to pass it if they did. Since they can't win the democratic way, they are pursuing another approach: advance personal HATE..... see if they can falsely accuse and condemn.... It's not how our country is suppose to work. Let the opposition party PROPOSE policies that matter - PASS THEM - and get support from the public. They won't. They can't.

that's not exactly true as there have been polls that show that at least three Democrats have a good chance of beating Trump head to head if elections were today.
I'm not going to count Sanders as I think this latest health scare of his (had two stents put in recently) will not help his poll numbers

 

[tango]

that's not exactly true as there have been polls that show that at least three Democrats have a good chance of beating Trump head to head if elections were today.
I'm not going to count Sanders as I think this latest health scare of his (had two stents put in recently) will not help his poll numbers

The polls in 2016 showed that the only remaining question about the election was whether Hillary would win by a big margin or a huge margin. It seems many of the silent masses vote for Trump however much the mainstream media tries to make it socially unacceptable.

 

[Albion]

that's not exactly true as there have been polls that show that at least three Democrats have a good chance of beating Trump head to head if elections were today.

That's true, but the history of such polling shows that at this time in the election cycle, it's exciting to speculate about almost anybody knocking off the incumbent. It's more interesting than thinking of the upcoming election as changing, well, nothing.

More to the point, perhaps, is the fact that several of the incumbents in the recent past who faced re-election were WAY behind in the polls at about this time, only to win handily.

 

[psalms 91]

That's true, but the history of such polling shows that at this time in the election cycle, it's exciting to speculate about almost anybody knocking off the incumbent. It's more interesting than thinking of the upcoming election as changing, well, nothing.

More to the point, perhaps, is the fact that several of the incumbents in the recent past who faced re-election were WAY behind in the polls at about this time, only to win handily.

I dont think people are so out of touch that they would reelect a bully, a person that insults and demeans gold star families, veterans, and our intelligence community. Aman that has had dealings with forweign governments that leave us questioning his real intent. No, I do not think he will be reelected.

 

[Lamb]

I dont think people are so out of touch that they would reelect a bully, a person that insults and demeans gold star families, veterans, and our intelligence community. Aman that has had dealings with forweign governments that leave us questioning his real intent. No, I do not think he will be reelected.

Did you see the most recent bill passed into Law by Trump concerning Veterans? Surely someone so awful in your mind wouldn't have done that?

 

[tango]

I dont think people are so out of touch that they would reelect a bully, a person that insults and demeans gold star families, veterans, and our intelligence community. Aman that has had dealings with forweign governments that leave us questioning his real intent. No, I do not think he will be reelected.

It depends who he is up against. The last election was quite remarkable in that many people didn't like their own party's candidate but voted for them anyway because they thought the other party's candidate was even worse. If the Democrats field a candidate who is some hard-left nutjob I wouldn't be at all surprised if Trump gets re-elected.

 

[NewCreation435]

Trump tried to turn the tide Thursday, after struggling to counter the core Democratic argument that he had abused his power to hurt a political rival, Joe Biden, including staging a remarkable photo op in which he effectively asked China, America's rising geopolitical rival for global power, to help him win in 2020.
But an avalanche of disclosures about his administration's previous attempts to enlist Ukraine in his effort to smear Biden showed his White House is failing to contain a crisis that is threatening his presidency.
Perhaps the biggest problem for Trump is the release of text messages provided by his former special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, who gave a deposition on Capitol Hill. The texts include a key message from Volker to a Ukrainian aide to President Volodymyr Zelensky, sent just before the infamous July 25 call at the center of the impeachment probe, which lays out how an investigation into Trump's political interests could help assure a meeting between the two presidents.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-inquiry-defense/index.html

Basically now he's suggesting he has the right to ask other countries to interfere in our elections

 

[tango]

Trump tried to turn the tide Thursday, after struggling to counter the core Democratic argument that he had abused his power to hurt a political rival, Joe Biden, including staging a remarkable photo op in which he effectively asked China, America's rising geopolitical rival for global power, to help him win in 2020.
But an avalanche of disclosures about his administration's previous attempts to enlist Ukraine in his effort to smear Biden showed his White House is failing to contain a crisis that is threatening his presidency.
Perhaps the biggest problem for Trump is the release of text messages provided by his former special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, who gave a deposition on Capitol Hill. The texts include a key message from Volker to a Ukrainian aide to President Volodymyr Zelensky, sent just before the infamous July 25 call at the center of the impeachment probe, which lays out how an investigation into Trump's political interests could help assure a meeting between the two presidents.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-inquiry-defense/index.html

Basically now he's suggesting he has the right to ask other countries to interfere in our elections

The case would be more credible with a source other than CNN.

 

[vince284]

Trump tried to turn the tide Thursday, after struggling to counter the core Democratic argument that he had abused his power to hurt a political rival, Joe Biden, including staging a remarkable photo op in which he effectively asked China, America's rising geopolitical rival for global power, to help him win in 2020.
But an avalanche of disclosures about his administration's previous attempts to enlist Ukraine in his effort to smear Biden showed his White House is failing to contain a crisis that is threatening his presidency.
Perhaps the biggest problem for Trump is the release of text messages provided by his former special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, who gave a deposition on Capitol Hill. The texts include a key message from Volker to a Ukrainian aide to President Volodymyr Zelensky, sent just before the infamous July 25 call at the center of the impeachment probe, which lays out how an investigation into Trump's political interests could help assure a meeting between the two presidents.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-inquiry-defense/index.html

Basically now he's suggesting he has the right to ask other countries to interfere in our elections

There is a treaty between the Ukraine and the USA. We each have the right to ask for assistance in criminal matters. Signed on July 22, 1998.

Formal Title
Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998, and with an Exchange of Notes signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application.

https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/106th-congress/16/document-text

 

[Albion]

Trump tried to turn the tide Thursday, after struggling to counter the core Democratic argument that he had abused his power to hurt a political rival, Joe Biden, including staging a remarkable photo op in which he effectively asked China, America's rising geopolitical rival for global power, to help him win in 2020.

You must be quoting MSNBC's Morning Joe Scarborough or his sidekick. The President made no such request to China for that country to help him.

I assume that you knew you were shading the truth, by the way, because of the decision to include the word "effectively" in your statement.

Basically now he's suggesting he has the right to ask other countries to interfere in our elections

That's what the coup plotters want everything to think, all right. But how many people actually believe it is another matter.

A reasonable person, not a partisan, would think that a campaign to impeach the president which was announced as soon as he was elected and long before any of these latest gimmicks were birthed has now burned through a dozen different "Maybe this one will work!" episodes, one after another. That in itself indicates that the whole thing is phony.




.

 

[tango]

A reasonable person, not a partisan, would think that a campaign to impeach the president which was announced as soon as he was elected and long before any of these latest gimmicks were birthed has now burned through a dozen different "Maybe this one will work!" episodes, one after another. That in itself indicates that the whole thing is phony.

... and of course part of the problem is that the "impeach him" cries are now little more than the boy crying wolf, again. The left has been crying out for impeachment for just about anything for long enough that even if Donald Trump turned out to be a KGB agent or something the latest cry of "impeach him" probably wouldn't garner much interest.

 

[Albion]

... and of course part of the problem is that the "impeach him" cries are now little more than the boy crying wolf, again.

Yes. That's better said than my post did.

The left has been crying out for impeachment for just about anything for long enough that even if Donald Trump turned out to be a KGB agent or something the latest cry of "impeach him" probably wouldn't garner much interest.

Well, I don't know about that. The diehard RESIST! people who want him impeached and convicted, sentenced to solitary imprisonment, or killed surely would rally to just about any new claim. Look at how they have instantly signed on to the previous 10 or 15 "impeachable offenses" even after all the ones that came before fell flat.

 

[Josiah]

Perhaps it's EASY for the Liberals....


Seems to ME Trump DID (twice now) suggest that foreign governments should look into a matter, a matter involving the son of one of the 19 running for the Democrat Party nomination....


Okay, No need for hearings or testimony or witnesses. Seems to me he DID do that. He doesn't seem to deny that.


Easy. Now all the libs need to do is provide the law that makes that a felony; quote the law that says that's a "high crime" (understood for the last 130 years as a felony). This should not take more than 24 hours. They'd still need to vote on whether to take action on that felony but they'd have their basis.


What they might do, however, is go back to the universal mistake Congress did in the 1860s', universally condemned as a mistake never to be repeated. A standing president was impeached not for ANY crime (much less the required "HIGH CRIME" - at least a felony - that the Constitution requires). A president was impeached for POLITICAL reasons (not even a campaign law violation). Perhaps the libs will want to repeat this mistake universally condemned - uninterested in how the Republicans can equally use this against them, we'd be going back to the 1860's where the party in power can impeach a president for no crime, just something politically unaccepted by the other party.


After the whole mistake of the 1860's, it was universally upheld that at least an obvious FELONY is needed. Nixon had done that (he resigned before he could be impeached). Clinton did that (admitted it; he knowingly lied to a grand jury - a very serious felony). If suggesting a foriegn government investigate the son of a potential opponent in an upcoming election is a felony, then BINGO - Poloski is right, we're done. No need for any hearings, testimony, investigation. Just quote the law. If it's not then, well, we're done. Voters next year can decide whether what he did was appropriate and weigh that in their vote (it's how democracy works).


Either way, I think we're done.


.

 

[Albion]

Perhaps it's EASY for the Liberals....


Seems to ME Trump DID (twice now) suggest that foreign governments should look into a matter, a matter involving the son of one of the 19 running for the Democrat Party nomination....

That's an opinion voiced by him, however, not a directive or proposal put to a foreign government.

Yet the minute this comment was uttered, the charge made by the coup plotters was that he was negotiating with the Chinese or urging something on them.

 

[tango]

Well, I don't know about that. The diehard RESIST! people who want him impeached and convicted, sentenced to solitary imprisonment, or killed surely would rally to just about any new claim. Look at how they have instantly signed on to the previous 10 or 15 "impeachable offenses" even after all the ones that came before fell flat.

True, I was talking about the people who don't act like seagulls, squawking just because someone else is squawking