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.
So come up with your own polls. I don't have the energy or resources to conduct my own polls. If you can find contradictory evidence I will look at it.
That is a logical fallacy. And the contradictory evidence is that you believe that a few hundred people called on land lines, or a few thousand responding to a targeted cell phone advert represent the views of 330,000,000 Americans.
With all due respect, comparing this impeachment to Clinton's is like comparing WWII to a bar fistfight. With Clinton the only thing at risk was staining of the antique furniture. trump's transgressions have much more critical consequences so please give 1999 a rest.
Trump's isnt even at the level of barfight. More like a bunch of name calling on a playground.
With all due respect, comparing this impeachment to Clinton's is like comparing WWII to a bar fistfight. With Clinton the only thing at risk was staining of the antique furniture. trump's transgressions have much more critical consequences so please give 1999 a rest.
You've got it exactly backwards, Clinton was allowed to get away with multiple felonies because partisanship, Trump is accused of winning the 2016 election which is seen as treason against the DNC by Democrats but isn't actually illegal.
That is a logical fallacy. And the contradictory evidence is that you believe that a few hundred people called on land lines, or a few thousand responding to a targeted cell phone advert represent the views of 330,000,000 Americans.
They certainly didn't in 2016.
But they nailed it in 2018 and 2012. It's amazing to me how accurate pollsters are given the sample size. It truly is a science and most pollsters just want to get it right. Of course you have Push polls on both sides. 2016 isn't the first time they missed....and they were highly accurate as far as popular vote that year. They missed in 1948 "Dewey Defeats Truman". So they get a big miss every 60 years or so...that's not bad.
Nate Silver has the best aggregate...his primary focus has always been Sports.
Pro tip: Repeating the claim that Trunpnis being impeached for “winning the 2016 election” over and over again won’t make it true, but it will make you look like a woefully uninformed and/or intellectually dishonest partisan.
So now is your big chance to pass a moral judgment. Do you believe that the Senate should allow witnesses so that they can make the most informed decision possible or do you believe the Senate should not allow witnesses so that they can pass judgment on a less-than-complete record?
My morals side with the individual over the bureaucracy in virtually every instance where a moral judgment matters. In the case of any sort of court or trial proceeding, I side with making it easier on the accused and harder on the accuser. I side with the burden of proving guilt and the assumption of innocence.
So in this case, I believe the Senate is already being more than fair by giving the prosecution the same time to present its case as they are giving the defense, as well as equal time for questions and closing statements. That the case hasn't been dismissed is the Senate being more than fair, imho. And yes, I said the exact same thing when the Clinton impeachment happened. I say it about perjury trap interviews, and I say it every time an individual goes up against any large effort from the bureaucracy to "get them!"
I want it to be hard to prove guilt and easy to assume innocence, and I want that to be the rule of law from top to bottom. If the President can be railroaded by a simple majority in one chamber, what hope does any individual have if the government turns their hateful tyrannical eye on them? If guilt can be conferred merely by accusation, what hope is there for the rule of law?
And I don't care about Trump because I like him, I care about him as an individual who should have due process, the assumption of innocence, and the burden of proof and the difficulty of process heaped on his accuser, same as any individual anywhere.
Plus, they are accusing him of sleaziness, essentially, and getting away with it because he's unpopular in the media. That's like handing out speeding tickets, but only to the ugliest cars, at the Indy 500. It's rank hypocrisy and logically inconsistent. They also haven't charged him with a criminal act, just made up stuff they call "impeachable" which again is synonymous with "easy to get away with because he's unpopular."
I am no fan of sloppy, rushed, urgent prosecution of anyone. Do your due diligence, do the hard, laborious, time consuming work and make a rock solid case before you ever bring the case to trial. I say that in defense of a street criminal accused of murder, a rapist, a serial killer or the freaking President. I don't care who gets accused, I want the prosecution's burden and job to be tough. Welcome to the rule of law.
Pro tip: Repeating the claim that Trunpnis being impeached for “winning the 2016 election” over and over again won’t make it true, but it will make you look like a woefully uninformed and/or intellectually dishonest partisan.
“The President's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won“
Not only do they not accept the result of the 2016 election but they are preemptively questioning the results of an election that hasn't happened yet.
have they shown Schiff's Parody of Trump 6 months ago yet?
have they shown Pelosi dressed in black calling the impeachment a sad and somber moment in American history and then 3 months later dressed in pink handing out souvenir pens with a big grin on her face during the Impeachment signing?
cuz that's what this whole thing is about.....
So true. I can't stand that woman. She was so excited to be signing it and all giggly.
This impeachment is going to be a titanic electoral disaster for the Democrats.
Surely you must be kidding. No thinking adult could possibly be thinking that Trump won't destroy the Democrats this November.
Tell us you're kidding. Nobody can be that messed up.
I know right.
Folks who think like this honestly live in liberal bubbles and think the country is exactly this way. I have super liberal friends who live in Manhattan, LA and DC, who post on Facebook and think this way too. They think the whole country despises Trump, "orange man bad," that he puts kids in cages, and is a Russian agent.
The funny, yet sad thing is, these friends (and many folks like them) are very educated on a degree level, but not so sharp when it comes to thinking outside the box. They are eating up CNN, MSNBC, NY Times and far left media BS narratives. They are not curious beyond what these media outlets spoon feed them. They believe it. Scary but true.
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.
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.
