Impeachment hearings

[_EAllusion]

Most of his money came from large elite donors. Without it he doesn't win.

Most of Trump's money came from large, elite donors and that continues to be the case. I thought you were arguing Trump was an election in defiance of elites because party establishment leaders would not have selected him, but he was able to end-run their control through access to primary voters and free media. You're correct in that elite control of parties being weak is why Trump won, but are incorrect to think Trump is sui generis in this regard. Heck, in that exact same primary season, a dude who technically isn't a Democrat came reasonably close to winning the Democrat nomination. The decline of party elites has been going on for a while, and it has affected elections prior to Trump's. We live in an age of strong partisanship, but weak parties and it is continuing to trend in that direction. That's bad.

He was without a doubt the press' choice.

Which was not the case for the person who got more free press attention than any candidate in history and whose media agenda dominated press coverage wire to wire? "Choice" is an interesting term here insofar as it is relevant. Obama definitely got more favorable coverage at the time it mattered in the 2020 primary. By the time the narrative turn hit him, it was too late to matter.

And he was without a doubt the pre-primary's choice of the democratic party.

Weird given that he had fewer endorsements than his opponent and there was a whole hullabaloo about whether Clinton would use her superior institutional support to contest the convention

What happened with Trump was part of the press believed in having a close race so they gave Trump a lot of air time, this back fired.

Probably true to an extent. Horserace coverage does have this effect, though I think this neglects that Trump rallies got good ratings and allowed mainstream press to think they were "fair" in giving him these infomercials because his buffoonery is self-evident in their eyes.

Trump fans get to see Trump be Trump. Trump haters get to see Trump be by turns scary and a clown. Cable News gets to butter their bread. Win, win win, except for America.

Bush was definitely the pre primary choice.

Yeah...

Nate Cohn wrote in the New York Times near the end of Obama's persidency, "grass-roots conservatives and liberals may resent it but, many analysts, including me, argue the outcome of presidential nominations is shaped or even decided by party elites." Obama didn't seem to bother shaking his belief. Neither did the schill Hayes. And neither did the money.

This paragraph would do better with some more coherence.

How did I argue this brand new thought, I didn't say that. I disagree with Hayes. Nothing he wrote about demonstrated anything different from the The University of Chicago's 2009 The Party Decides.

Have you read the book? Hayes is just following a trend in political science arguing that the era of the party decides is fading due to systemic decline in institutional and cultural factors that give elites their influence. To pick an obvious example, popular vote primaries make parties weaker. It's weird that you're casting yourself as an opponent of this thesis while simultaneously arguing in favor of it with respect to Donald Trump. Way to take both sides of this debate.

Respecting Bush impeachment, what else the hell do you think I was talking about when I specifically mentioned Pelosi? So I am glad we agree.

I didn't know what the hell you were talking about, because once we clear up that there was such a movement to impeach Bush, your broader point gets weaker.

[_moksha]

Moscow Mitch announcing there would be a rigged jury in the Senate trial was disheartening. Says he will make sure Trump can continue his crime spree.

[_Gunnar]

Interesting conclusion of an op ed from the L.A. Times:

Instead of being mad at Democrats and the process, Republicans should be mad that Trump imperiled his presidency and his party by acting like a mobster instead of a head of state.

Maybe they are, but it’s too painful to admit.

Therapists have a word for that, too: denial.

I definitely agree that Republicans should be far more outraged and angry at Trump's behavior, which imperiled both himself and the GOP, and severely damaged American prestige and influence in the world, by making him, and by extension, The United States, a laughing stock in most of the world. Plus, can there really be any serious doubt his actions and irrationality have boosted the influence and power of our chief rival, Russia? I'm quite sure that Vladimir Putin is delighted with what Trump has done to affect international relations and balance of power in Russia's favor.

I am also confident that if a Democrat President had done or said even a fraction of the stupid and/or corrupt things that most of the world knows Trump has said and done, there would be overwhelming support from all parties, including Democrat, for his impeachment and removal.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

The reason why Republicans don’t care about the legality of Trump’s actions is because this is a representative government.

Think about that for a hot minute.

-Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

For example, this wildly childish tantrum-post isn't directed to anyone but his base:



Read that again in the voice of a kid, and you'll not only understand Trump, but you'll understand his base. What's even crazier is he's done this enough you could actually, literally, make a book out of these kinds of online fits:



- Doc

[_Some Schmo]

I definitely agree that Republicans should be far more outraged and angry at Trump's behavior, which imperiled both himself and the GOP, and severely damaged American prestige and influence in the world, by making him, and by extension, The United States, a laughing stock in most of the world.

I really see this as a marked failure of leadership. The GOP has no leaders. They're a bunch of lemmings trying to navigate Trump's capricious whims. It's the party of wet noodles. You notice you never see Ted Cruz stand up any more? He lost his backbone.

And this makes it even more amazing to me that people actually vote for these idiots. It's a symbiotic relationship between GOP pols and the base where they rely on each other's stupidity to command attention and stay relevant.

[_EAllusion]

If you are curious how Trump is going to do in Wisconsin, a Republican state judge just ordered a huge purge of voter rolls predominately affecting Democrats. That'll be contested, but almost certainly be upheld in the Republican controlled Supreme Court. We have same day registration, which blunts the effect to an extent, but this kind of stuff chips away marginal voters with ruthless efficiency. Some people just don't vote if it is too much of a hassle, and Republicans know how to target the Democratic versions of them enough to shade elections in their favor.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

If you are curious how Trump is going to do in Wisconsin, a Republican state judge just ordered a huge purge of voter rolls predominately affecting Democrats. That'll be contested, but almost certainly be upheld in the Republican controlled Supreme Court. We have same day registration, which blunts the effect to an extent, but this kind of stuff chips away marginal voters with ruthless efficiency. Some people just don't vote if it is too much of a hassle, and Republicans know how to target the Democratic versions of them enough to shade elections in their favor.

Are you suggesting Democratic voters are lazier than Republican ones?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

If you are curious how Trump is going to do in Wisconsin, a Republican state judge just ordered a huge purge of voter rolls predominantly affecting Democrats. That'll be contested, but almost certainly be upheld in the Republican controlled Supreme Court. We have same day registration, which blunts the effect to an extent, but this kind of stuff chips away marginal voters with ruthless efficiency. Some people just don't vote if it is too much of a hassle, and Republicans know how to target the Democratic versions of them enough to shade elections in their favor.

Are you suggesting Democratic voters are lazier than Republican ones?

- Doc

If they were equally lazy and you used methods that targeted Democrats more efficiently, which going after more frequent movers does, you'd disproportionately push Democratic voters away from voting. I don't know if "lazy" is the right term, but yes, Democratic voters traditionally have greater reluctance to jump through hoops to vote. I wouldn't necessarily call someone who has a hard time getting off work to vote "lazy," but that's how it's worked. Because of the influx of poorly educated whites into the Republican camp, this isn't as clear now though, especially in states like Wisconsin. That's why you have to target Democratic constituencies.

Here's an article on a study that estimates that Georgia's voter purge suppressed the vote by about 87k people with the purge intended to disproportionately hit Democratic voters:

https://www.apmreports.org/story/2019/1 ... ds-removed

Kemp won by 55k votes.

And here's an article saying that it plans on engaging in another massive voter purge leading up to the 2020 election:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/30/us/p ... purge.html

[_EAllusion]

Democrats don't have it in 'em to play hardball in the same way, but you can't beat this particular bully by giving them your lunch money every election. They need to start targeting Republican voters in response. Close down rural polling stations so they have to travel much further to vote. Don't let polling stations be setup in retirement communities. Make people whose birth certificates are before 1950 have to get new ones and re register to vote.

People like yourself Doc might even reply to these dirty tactics by just insisting that you're calling Republicans lazy if they complain.

One would hope this would force a peace with better norms around protecting the right to vote.