Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Retrench what? I don't think he should worry about being impeached. The GOP would have to be idiots to even try--they would be underestimating the country's patience and tolerance for BS. As bad as Obama's polls are--they are higher than those of congress. Those idiots in congress don't get that outside of their own states--not so popular. If they insist on putting the country through something like that while the economy is still fragile and unemployment high--they will lose very badly in 2016. Uh--remember the shutdown? They would have to be very dumb to spend their time on something so unproductive during the lead up to the general.
No congressional representative has drawn up a list of articles of impeachment and proposed them to the Judiciary Committee.
Just a reminder....the OP deals with the threat of impeachment....not the actual act. The actual act would be terrible for the country....the threat however....is excellent for the country.
On one hand, I agree. On the other hand, I don't. There are many, many rabid Clinton hater's in this country. All of which will make themselves known should Hillary jump in to the race. Wait and see.
On this we agree. The rabid right has shown us exactly how nasty they can get over the last six years. I have no doubt they would not disappoint us in their efforts to top themselves should Clinton get into the race.
Just a reminder....the OP deals with the threat of impeachment....not the actual act. The actual act would be terrible for the country....the threat however....is excellent for the country.
If it were known that the Act would be terrible for the country, wouldn't that take a lot of the risk of the threat away? I mean, if your threat is big then it can affect things, but if the known result is highly negative then that means that the other side would have to contend with all of those negatives to go through with impeachment. So, the chance of them actually going through with things would be much lower, making the threat much less.
Just a reminder....the OP deals with the threat of impeachment....not the actual act. The actual act would be terrible for the country....the threat however....is excellent for the country.
I think if anyone mentions it, they are only hurting themselves on a national level. Maybe it will make the right wing extremists feel better, but I think NoDrama Obama will not let it affect him. If any of the wing nuts talk about it in order to keep the base happy with red meat, it will only reflect poorly on them. Seriously--people are very sick of congress screwing around and getting no real business done except under the threat of deadlines for their eternal 'breaks.'
After November 2014, when (not if) Republicans take the Senate majority and continue to capitalize on the nationwide momentum that has been gaining steam in their favor since 2010,.
bookmark this thread and return in November 2014 -
see if your soo right
but with impeachment requirements being so high (2/3rd vote) any impeachment hearings will be a waste of time and resources (actually impeaching will be near impossible).
Unlike some people, I don't think impeachment proceedings should be even considered unless there is a reasonable chance of success (and a real non-political offense). Otherwise, your pissing in the fan.
bookmark this thread and return in November 2014 -
see if your soo right
but with impeachment requirements being so high (2/3rd vote) any impeachment hearings will be a waste of time and resources (actually impeaching will be near impossible).
Unlike some people, I don't think impeachment proceedings should be even considered unless there is a reasonable chance of success (and a real non-political offense). Otherwise, your pissing in the fan.
A simple House majority is needed to impeach. 2/3rds of the Senate is needed to convict.
This thread is wishful thinking. The GOP will probably not regain the Senate and even if they did they will not a 2/3 majority in either house. The threat to Obama's presidency is grossly exaggerated.
This thread is wishful thinking. The GOP will probably not regain the Senate and even if they did they will not a 2/3 majority in either house. The threat to Obama's presidency is grossly exaggerated.
That is all.
Bottom line: it's B S
An impeachment by the House is still and impeachment, regardless if convicted or not. Also, a simple majority vote in the House is all that is needed to impeach. The 2/3 requirement is for the Senate only.
Further, this thread is about Obama treading lightly due to the threat of impeachment. Not the actual impeachment process.
An impeachment by the House is still and impeachment, regardless if convicted or not. Also, a simple majority vote in the House is all that is needed to impeach. The 2/3 requirement is for the Senate only.
Further, this thread is about Obama treading lightly due to the threat of impeachment. Not the actual impeachment process.
It's still nonsense.
It's not a realistic threat. Quite frankly, an impeachment of Obama by a GOP-controlled house would doom any GOP hopes for gaining the White House in 2016 and likely cost them the House that year as well. People are fed up with all the political bickering - which is why the GOP approval ratings were trashed by the GOP attempt to defund Obamacare at the expense of shutting down the government. A GOP impeachment of Obama would be a HUGE gift for the Democrats in 2016 - and the SMART members of the GOP leadership know that (it's only the idiot TP folks who think it would be a good idea).
Ken
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.