Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me
-
wrote on 9 Feb 2021, 20:44 last edited by jon-nyc 2 Sept 2021, 21:18
I accidentally caught 30s of Trump’s Senate defense. They argued that the ‘American people already spoke’ and removed him.
That’s rich. True and all. But rich.
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 04:43 last edited by
"I could have the worst defense team in the history of Congressional trials and they would still acquit me."
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 04:45 last edited by
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 12:51 last edited by Catseye3 2 Oct 2021, 12:56
"Deeply cosmically unfair . . ."
My ass. Get over it.
Oopsie Addendum: The above is directed at the writer of the memo Jon posted, and not to Jon himself.
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 12:56 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
I love the piety of the rabid dog that knows how to pose for the camera now. LOL
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 13:01 last edited by Jolly 2 Oct 2021, 13:01
As Hume said, this impeachment is purely political and carries the same weight as the first.
None.
-
As Hume said, this impeachment is purely political and carries the same weight as the first.
None.
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 16:50 last edited by@jolly said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
purely political
Isn't there room for another interpretation? What political advantage did Liz Cheney garner (within her own party)?
-
@jolly said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
purely political
Isn't there room for another interpretation? What political advantage did Liz Cheney garner (within her own party)?
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 22:50 last edited by@xenon said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
@jolly said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
purely political
Isn't there room for another interpretation? What political advantage did Liz Cheney garner (within her own party)?
None.
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 22:51 last edited by
And on another note...This place down here is going nuts over the Cassidy vote.
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 22:59 last edited by
In what way? Partying in the streets or prepping a lynching?
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 23:13 last edited by
@renauda said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
In what way? Partying in the streets or prepping a lynching?
Think rope.
-
wrote on 10 Feb 2021, 23:20 last edited by
On Bill Cassidy: https://nypost.com/2021/02/10/bill-cassidy-rebuked-by-state-gop-over-impeachment-trial-vote/
Sen. Bill Cassidy rebuked by state GOP for vote to call impeachment trial constitutional
...
Asked Wednesday if he stood by his vote after the rebuke, Cassidy said yes.“The issue was, is it constitutional? And at the end of the day, clearly it had been established that it is constitutional,” he said.
...
-
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 00:09 last edited by
Bill's staff is not answering any of his normal office lines.
I do know one person that took their ears off, having reached them on a line reserved for media...
-
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 00:28 last edited by
@jolly said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
And on another note...This place down here is going nuts over the Cassidy vote.
I guess the question is - should a representative vote in line with what he thinks his constituents believe or principles he stood for when elected?
-
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 00:29 last edited by Mik 2 Nov 2021, 00:30
A representative should reflect the views and desires of his constituency. That's what they are elected to do.
-
A representative should reflect the views and desires of his constituency. That's what they are elected to do.
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 00:33 last edited by xenon 2 Nov 2021, 00:36@mik said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
A representative should reflect the views and desires of his constituency. That's what they are elected to do.
Right - but let's say you as the representative are more informed on an issue and you know your constituents to have a poor understanding of a complex situation.
Let's not link it to this Trump impeachment thing - just in the abstract.
If your constituents believe X... but the rep knows X to be false, should he still act as if he also believes X?
A classic example would be tax policy. You elect representatives, because direct democracy would lead to poor decisions on complex policies.
-
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 01:20 last edited by
Then the rep is obligated to communicate that to his constituents. Not just take the high handed “I know what is good for them.”.
-
@renauda said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
In what way? Partying in the streets or prepping a lynching?
Think rope.
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 01:33 last edited by@jolly said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
@renauda said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
In what way? Partying in the streets or prepping a lynching?
Think rope.
That was my first thought.
-
Then the rep is obligated to communicate that to his constituents. Not just take the high handed “I know what is good for them.”.
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 01:57 last edited by@mik said in Trump Senate defense: the American people already rejected me:
Then the rep is obligated to communicate that to his constituents. Not just take the high handed “I know what is good for them.”.
I agree he should communicate it clearly to his constituents. But, I’m guessing there’s something to his vote. He didn’t just become a patron of kabuki arts.
-
wrote on 11 Feb 2021, 03:04 last edited by
Then you get some issues like 83% of American support "universal background check" as a gun control measure, yet the elected representatives don't vote that way.
The notion of "constituent" is also tricky.
The 'party system' also gets in the way. Should a Senator represent the will of the entire state pollution, or just the ones who voted for him, or even just the ones who voted for him in the primaries? Who, exactly, are the Senator's "constituents"?
Ideally a Senator should reflect the will of the entire state's population, but practically if he wants to be reelected he cannot lose in the primaries, which means s/he has to cater to the will of his party.
To make this concrete, if 55% of a state's general population thinks Trump should be convicted, but a Senator from that state happens to be a Republican and 65% of the Republicans in that state thinks Trump should not be convicted, then the Senator in practice would have to first cater to the 65% of the Republicans so s/he can win the next primary election before catering to the 55% of the state's general population who thinks Trump should be convicted.
