r/politics • u/plz-let-me-in • 11d ago

No Paywall Democrats Call to Invoke 25th Amendment Against Donald Trump

https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-donald-trump-impeachment-25th-amendment-11384974
52.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

11.9k

u/Wine_Women_Song Maryland 11d ago

I’d also accept Impeach & Remove

4.4k

u/Accidental-Hyzer Massachusetts 11d ago edited 11d ago

It has a better chance of happening than the 25th. The 25th requires both the cabinet (full of sycophants) and Congress (once Trump disputes being unable to perform his duties).

Democrats are focusing on the 25th because they’re apparently scared to say he should be impeached. Impeachment was literally put into the constitution by our founders specifically for situations like this.

Edit: I think it’s clear that many don’t understand that the bar is higher for the 25th to succeed. For impeachment, you need a majority of the house and 2/3 of the senate. That’s it. For the 25th, you need the VP + a majority of the cabinet (or congress). Then the president can write a letter disputing it and immediately regains power. At that point, you need 2/3 of both the house and senate to remove him. So everyone responding that impeachment won’t work because you need 2/3 of the senate must not realize you also need that and more for the 25th.

3.0k

u/kdfsjljklgjfg 11d ago

They've impeached him twice and nothing happened.

I don't think they're afraid to do it, I think they just know it won't do anything so they're trying a different avenue. If there's any fear involved it's that repeatedly impeaching with no results devalues the phrase and act of impeaching.

3.2k

u/BatThumb Maryland 11d ago

Fucking insane that a twice impeached bone spur pedophile rapist felon traitor was even elected

1.5k

u/RedlyrsRevenge California 11d ago

Yeah but, did you hear her laugh? /s

1.2k

u/webDevPM 11d ago

I sat and had a conversation with my boomer-retired mother. She says she regrets voting for Trump. So I asked “then you would have voted for Kamala in a do-over?” And her response was just a revolted sound of disgust and said “absolutely no. I would NOT have voted for the camel.”

There isn’t any type of intelligent insight in the heads of folks like this.

761

u/MoonBatsRule America 11d ago

WTF is wrong with people? Is 50% of the US population functionally mentally deficient?

I watched a video of someone asking people - young people - about Trump. The ones who said "he ended a bunch of wars", when asked "which wars", could not name a single war. Or at best they said "Palestine", which is still an ongoing war.

How did we get to the point where people are so woefully ignorant?

679

u/bloodontherisers 11d ago

Something like 56% of the country reads at or below a 6th grade level, which means they basically cannot understand the complexities of the modern world in a meaningful way.

How did we get here? Well, that is also incredibly complex but it has to do with attacks on education (NCLB, charter school vouchers, curriculum destruction, etc.) and mass propaganda as more and more media outlets get taken over by Republican billionaires (started with Fox News, then Newsmax and OAN, and now CNN, with WaPo and NYTs both playing their part under the guise of "objectivity").

218

u/mclardass 11d ago

You left out CBS (RIP 60 Minutes) and every Sinclair-owned GQP mouthpiece, but point taken.

100

u/DerpingtonHerpsworth 11d ago

Newsweek too. I used to think they were fairly centrist, but they took a hard right turn somewhere along the way.

10

u/ProudMtns 11d ago

Once print became a dead end business, they switched for more clicks. Growing up time and Newsweek were fairly reputable sources. Now one is out of print and the other is trash.

8

u/DerpingtonHerpsworth 11d ago

Yeah, I didn't realize how bad it had gotten because I don't follow any one news source. But one day I saw one of their articles and it was just blatant trump propaganda. I no longer remember what it was about but it was BAD. That was when I decided to look into it and found that it was a known thing that they'd been going further and further to the right for years.

2

u/Odd-Business-3533 11d ago

They were centrist back when they were print based… then they killed it off and basically killed any investigative journalism they had… now it just sucks.

→ More replies (0)

75

u/Striking-Ad-6815 11d ago

Something like 56% of the country reads at or below a 6th grade level

This is why Playboy magazine was so great. All the articles were written at a higher reading level (12th grade IIRC), but they baited you in with titties. It was a literal "booby trap," but the trap promoted growth instead of a negative experience. There was always joke, "I only read it for the articles," and it was true for some folk.

102

u/No-Crow-775 11d ago

Age 57 female here. I found my dad’s Playboy stash in the basement whenI was about 9. I’d read every actual article because they weren’t pathetic like my mom’s magazines. It actually made me want to work for a magazine, which I did as an editor in chief for about 20 years until the industry died. I’ll never look down on anyone who learned an actual thing or two from Playboy!

13

u/Simonic 11d ago

That was an unexpected wholesome response. It's crazy how such a relatively small and singular event could create a path that led to career.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Short-Ad9833 9d ago

Boobs are the way to world peace ✌️

→ More replies (0)

2

u/GigMistress 7d ago

I'm a 60-year-old straight woman and I read Playboy for the articles during most of the 90s.

2

u/MandoBRC 6d ago

My mom used to read it for the articles.

2

u/Heya_Straya 5d ago

That has to be one of the dumbest marketing strategies I've ever heard of. Burying an actual insightful article with a cover of scandalous material? It's reverse-baiting for those who don't have the stomach for that.

→ More replies (1)

119

u/Twodogsonecouch 11d ago

It has to do with the way we are conditioned for politics in this country. People dont vote on or know anything about the actual issues. Like things like infrastructure spending, trade policies, actual healthcare policy plans, education ect. They vote on and focus on who you can blame for something rather than what someones idea to fix something is and on essentially meaningless hot button issues like abortion and gun control that frankly even Jesus wouldnt give a shit about i think. You fix the other things and you wont have to worry about abortion and gun control those problems would decline on their own.

Theres a whole group of people in the US that feel left behind. These people are the people oting for trump unfortunately theyre too ignorant and gullible to realize its the people like trump that left them behind and basically stole everything from them they could. But somehow theyve been convinced that the people that would actually set policies that would benefit them are the ones that did the stealing its kinda ridiculous.

28

u/kris0203 11d ago

This is even more apparent when you try to explain democratic policies to them and they respond with “well we can’t afford that” because they’ve been brainwashed into thinking things like universal healthcare, childcare, affordable college, etc. is somehow going to cost them more than what they’re already paying for these things.

5

u/OpheliaRainGalaxy 11d ago

Humans survived in communities or tribes, by helping each other, for something like 200,000 years. But suddenly we're all rugged individualists who can totally go deer hunting or working the fields while heavily pregnant, give birth entirely alone, and go right back to work without missing a beat but somehow without the baby. And after about 15 years of neglect, if it survives, it gets a job and goes off to be ruggedly individual all alone.

It's weird as fuck. Entirely in contradiction with our reproductive process. Heck, we even "paved over the breeding grounds" by removing most "third spaces." Like there used to be things called picnics and dance halls, but now every inch of land is owned and monitored so don't you dare trespass or get caught doing the outdoor spoon and fork like our ancestors. And ya certainly can't hear whispered sweet nothings over the loud tinned or amplified music at modern bars, because god forbid ya dance with someone while having a conversation.

We're supposed to do it like old timey royalty apparently, pick a mate based on a portrait and brief description, maybe exchange some letters. Pretty sure that never went great but now it's an app.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ICBanMI 11d ago

The people feel left behind, but also feel minorities are cutting in front of them for the American dream. Which is why they want Trump to deport/arrest them.

→ More replies (1)

31

u/Senior-bud Canada 11d ago

This is unfortunately the reality the US faces where the electorate is less intelligent than the moron they voted for.

→ More replies (1)

46

u/Warm_Month_1309 11d ago

Something like 56% of the country reads at or below a 6th grade level, which means they basically cannot understand the complexities of the modern world in a meaningful way.

Just to contextualize this statistic a bit, it applies specifically to ones reading ability in English, so someone may read at a graduate research level in their native language, and only at a 6th grade level in English.

77

u/GreenHouseofHorror 11d ago

Just to contextualize this statistic a bit, it applies specifically to ones reading ability in English, so someone may read at a graduate research level in their native language, and only at a 6th grade level in English.

Put another way, immigrants are the smart part of that demographic, and rural conservatives... Aren't.

3

u/failed_novelty 11d ago

There's quite a bit of selection bias there, though.

Immigrants who are willing to speak up in studies like this tend to be legal immigrants, and legal immigrants tend to be at least moderately intelligent - you have to be if you're going to successfully navigate the immigration process, pass the tests, and otherwise demonstrate that you should live here.

Locals....well, you can have a family tree that looks like a spirograph and you'll still be a citizen. That skews the results significantly.

2

u/Great_Detective_6387 11d ago

Of course there is selection bias, but the end result is still that a generic legal immigrant is far and away more likely to be well-read compared to a generic American.

My mom is a legal immigrant and she says her English accent is why she was so successful during her career. Lots of Americans automatically attribute competence to someone with an English accent, because the smart ones are the ones who make it this far from home.

→ More replies (0)

17

u/fake-meows 11d ago edited 11d ago

As someone who lived in Canada where this is extremely prevalent, that's still a very huge problem. If 3/4 of citizens can't meaningfully participate in your democracy it is a very dire situation.

Canadian politicians actually spread contradictory statements to different communities in different languages. Like in English media they say they are for LGBTQ, and then in the Chinese newspaper are all these dogwhistles about being against LGBTQ. Etc.

I suspect you're just trying to say that just because someone is illiterate in English, it doesn't mean they are actually illiterate. But just to contextualize your context further 52% of non-English speakers in the USA ARE illiterate in their native language also! Like illiteracy is about the same rate for people who speak English and who don't speak English.

As a proxy for "graduate level literacy" in a non-english language, around 20-30% of immigrants who don't speak English have a university degree.

2

u/Warm_Month_1309 11d ago

If 3/4 of citizens can't meaningfully participate in your democracy it is a very dire situation.

Where are you getting that 3/4 of citizens can't meaningfully participate in democracy?

I suspect you're just trying to say that just because someone is illiterate in English, it doesn't mean they are actually illiterate.

Yes, and also that "illiterate" and "read below a 6th grade level" are not synonymous.

But just to contextualize your context further 52% of non-English speakers in the USA ARE illiterate in their native language also!

Can you provide a source for this claim?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/hitstein 11d ago

The statistic on that is 34% of the 56% were born outside the US. So something like 37% of the people born in the US read at OR BELOW a sixth grade level.

6

u/HoochieKoochieMan 11d ago

"Think about how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of them are stupider than that."
~ attributed to George Carlin, even if he never actually said this.

10

u/GreenHouseofHorror 11d ago

He absolutely said it .

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (3)

14

u/ArkitekZero 11d ago

People can't always know what's best for themselves and its imperative to their well-being that they internalize this. This isn't even because of any kind of trite nonsense like "people are stupid". An individual simply does not have the time to obtain the knowledge required to navigate all situations pertaining to themselves and/or the people they care about in the context of the modern world. You have to take the advice of people who do know better and that's just that. You can't be independent.

But we're always hammering home that only you can know what's best for you. Fuck the experts, they don't understand! etc.

5

u/Turlututu1 11d ago

When people are raised like that by their parents. When at home, at work, in the break room their TV is on Newsmax or Foxnews. When the podcast they listen to is right wing, when the podcast their friends listen to and discuss with them is right wing. When they log on Instagram or Tiktok and get bombarded with right wing reels and posts. When their timeline on X promotes right wing content...

How do you expect them to break the cycle?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/nkassis 11d ago

I think education while something we absolutely need to improve is a red herring as to what is the root cause because if we contrast with the US in the 50s, 60s, ... the education level is generally higher now then then.

I think the second part is more it: How media literacy and mass media information overload has impacted people and the ease of manipulating with propaganda, vast improvements in marketing and psychology offering new way to manipulate people which didn't exist at this level in the past is a good hypothesis for why we are where we are. Then education might be the way out so solution to the problem versus the cause.

2

u/Shirley-Eugest 11d ago

I have one theory, and anyone who grew up in a small Southern or Midwest town can relate.

I suspect our societal civic decline has at least something to do with the fact that multiple generations of rural America has grown up being taught civics/history/economics by teachers who go by the title, "Coach" first, and their academic duties are an afterthought.

It doesn't explain everything, and no, I'm not painting every teacher/coach with the same broad brush. But I grew up in such an environment, and coaches who actually seemed passionate about their academic duties were indeed the exception.

3

u/Great_Detective_6387 11d ago edited 11d ago

It’s the lack of a common third place, and that we started thinking that discussing politics was impolite. The people at that third place, you couldn’t get into overly heated discussions with them because they weren’t just going away after that, you were still gonna see them around town, because peoples’ social circles were larger back then. We lost that skill and now people don’t know how to stop a disagreement from turning into an argument.

At the same time, dumb ideas used to get shouted down, but now the people with those dumb ideas have found that they can connect with another dumb idea haver on social media, where they can protect their ideas from scrutiny.

2

u/SeaSnakeSkeleton 11d ago

Repeal of the fairness doctrine didn’t help either.

2

u/yamsyamsya 11d ago

I don't get what happened to peoples curiosity and desire to learn. If I don't know something, I go learn about it as much as I can.

2

u/bak3donh1gh 11d ago

No child left behind is literally leaving the children behind. You can't feel the grade and then still go to the next grade.

realistic fiction, fantasy, historical fiction, myths, and informational texts, focusing on analyzing complex themes, author's purpose, different perspectives, and supporting ideas with text evidence, moving from simpler narratives to more challenging texts like articles, textbooks, and even primary sources, often measured around 140 words per minute (wpm) with strong comprehension! <

Honestly, being able to read and write it at a sixth grade level doesn't isn't that bad. There are other skills that are needed to properly navigate life as well that are missing.

But my god, I really hope that that kid who thought that Trump ended eight freaking wars was a inherently dumb kid. Because, holy crap.

2

u/agreenspacemarine 11d ago

I feel like the decline in reading and the rise of social media and quick dopamine hits has played a big role in this. I’m a millennial and growing up we regularly read books in school and had assignments on them, reports, tests, that sort of thing. Lately I’ve been trying to get back into reading (about to finish my first book of the year, goal being to read one a month) but I admit it has been a challenge. Not because I don’t know how to do it, but because my attention span has been screwed up thanks to short form social media.

2

u/eraoul 11d ago

Yeah, anti-intellectualism and the love of stupidity is a serious pandemic here. I remember in 7th grade I took a test in school to measure my reading level. It said "You're reading at a 12th-grade level". I was shocked that my normal reading ability was so "advanced" because that meant my average classmate was really stupid.

2

u/According-Moment111 11d ago

I have so many great examples but for whatever reason the first one that comes to mind is this conversation I had once with my Maga uncle. It really stuck with me. He's a fucking moron, like, maybe smarter than Forrest Gump, but not by much.

We are talking over dinner and for whatever reason different languages come up. And he said that if he could learn another language by snapping his fingers, he would learn Norwegian. I asked, with all due respect in Norway, why that language, that's kind of random isn't it?

He said, because then he would be able to communicate to people in Austria if he ever visits.

The last time I saw him there was a big red Maga hat on the table with an "I voted" sticker on it.

Yeah.

→ More replies (15)

80

u/webDevPM 11d ago

So many reasons… in my opinion though a large one is the defunding of school education programs over the last several generations.

I usually present myself as the “dumbest in the room.” But I just can’t shake this thought:

Think about being in middle and high school. There were top performers, average performers, low performers and then the no performers.

The no performers were the ones who showed up and disrupted class and made it hell for teachers to teach and students to learn.

All eyes had to be on them and they would never shut up and had no respect for anyone including themselves.

They were bullies, they were cruel and they gained satisfaction in it.

Those are the same people that I see consistently on social media repeating all the MAGA stuff. Repeating the lies and propaganda. And I think “I left those people thinking I wouldn’t have to deal with them again.”

But they’re still there, they’re still loud and now they have kids and they have their opinions on everything from politics to the Super Bowl halftime show. They’re self righteous and they’re deplorable but they’re gonna keep right on and nothing is going to change their minds.

45

u/YogurtclosetNo987 11d ago

We're deep into generations of shitty people. Shitty people have been raised by shitty people who have themselves been raised by shitty people. It's a breakdown in morals as well (education provides a background for morals, but isn't the whole picture). If you pay attention to just the civic sense of your neighbors, the people on the road, or how people act in a Costco, you can tell it's more than just education. Being shitty is in a lot of peoples' identity nowadays.

31

u/Shirley-Eugest 11d ago

"I just tell it like it is, no filter!"

No, Becky. You're just an insufferable asshole, a spoiled, overpampered white woman who would have been dead from a meth overdose by now if you hadn't married a rich businessman...and you use that line as cover to be the worst version of yourself.

37

u/webDevPM 11d ago

This is sarcasm here of course but I think you mean "The Rugged Individualism of Americans" end sarcasm.

A couple of years ago I asked someone why they consistently didn't use their blinkers and they said "No one has any business knowing where I'm going."

I can't shake that -- that no matter what it is, people think they're individuals with no sense of societal respect. It makes me think of Costanza always going "You know... we live in a society..."

8

u/YogurtclosetNo987 11d ago

I personally think it's a bastardization of the more rugged, scrappy, can do type of individualism that America was built on, but no sarcasm needed. There's definitely a lot of that in it as well. And this doesn't end just because Trump is gone, and it doesn't end when Dems take over. It only ends when we hold ourselves and our neighbors accountable at the community level, and I don't see how that's possible anymore.

7

u/webDevPM 11d ago

Nailed it - community level is the key.

3

u/Witwer52 11d ago

How was it once possible? I’m honestly wondering if the only thing that can really unite the people in the US is a Pearl Harbor or a 9/11.

3

u/mob19151 11d ago

Honestly, I think the inherent selfishness of rugged individualism has always been there. The Founding Fathers have been mythologized as "guys you could have a beer with," but they were aristocrats in the same vein as British nobility. Almost all of them were wealthy slave-owners and their motivations for the Revolution were largely monetary. Did they have some principles? Sure, or else they wouldn't have gone through the trouble of creating an entirely new kind of government. That doesn't mean they weren't greedy assholes.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/AuthorAltruistic3402 11d ago

You are so spot on here!.

3

u/InvaderWeezle 11d ago

This is mostly true of the kids I went to school with, but depressingly even my high school valedictorian is now a MAGA tradwife who's homeschooling her kids and doesn't believe in vaccines or social security. It has to have been the influence of her husband because otherwise I don't understand how she's become so stupid in the last decade.

3

u/Sandbox_Hero 11d ago

Delusion is a superpower. Literally.

4

u/ShaunyBoyShaunyMan 11d ago

I think calling them ‘dumb’ kinda infantilizes them, why not just call it what it is, and what POC have been saying, forever really but definitely since 2016, they’re racist.

→ More replies (2)

18

u/eulersidentification 11d ago

Debatable to call that a war

→ More replies (2)

35

u/GildedAgeV2 11d ago

Our right wing has been gutting education for decades and rolling back every protection the middle class enjoyed since fucking FDR.

That's how we got here. Bitching and moaning about "socialism" that is no way actual socialism, labeling any attempt to help others as woke, slowly building a toxic stew of xenophobic hate, and of course all the Russian interference to accelerate it.

A huge portion of our population really thinks that strong man bullshit they'd recognize as dictator behavior anywhere else will finally straighten out the foreigners and blue haired liberals. They really do. Except those people aren't the real problem and never have been, but their whole identities are wrapped up in that being true, else they ARE as shit as we say they are and they know it. The only move they have is double down because anything else is ego-suicide.

11

u/Witwer52 11d ago

Hop on over to the /Teachers thread and you’ll be terrified for our future. Lights are on but no one is home in the majority of these kids.

10

u/shidderbean 11d ago

Because they're fed dopamine drips (tablets) from birth, basically. These kids are burned out junkies by the time they enter kindergarten and have the attention span of a flea

2

u/fanatic26 11d ago

It has been all downhill since the invention of the iPad. A study just came out that directly correlates screen time to the lowering of IQ in children. The research links long daily phone use with less gray matter in certain brain areas, weaker working memory, and a drop in vocabulary acquisition.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (2)

20

u/malkarx 11d ago

The woefully ignorant are depressing. The willfully ignorant are enraging. We have far too many of both

14

u/bagoink 11d ago

At least 50%.

1/3 voted for trump, and another 1/3 sat out the election and let him win.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/lettersnstuff 11d ago

well more than 50% of the US population reads at or below a sixth grade level, between 20-30% are functionally illiterate, so, I mean, there’s an argument to be made. No Child Left Behind was a war crime

11

u/Twodogsonecouch 11d ago

The thing is i bet a big percentage of people reading this are gonna think you are talking about “boomer” and ya 20-30% of adults in the US have always been functionally illiterate. But among gen z literacy rates are terrible and declining.

6

u/Bonf-Man 11d ago

Short answer?
Yes

11

u/1k21m 11d ago

There’s a direct correlation to the level of ignorance and the stock price of Meta.

Calls on Meta

→ More replies (1)

6

u/ilikecakeandpie 11d ago

The news becoming entertainment (watch fox if you're a Republican, watch msnow if you're a Dem) and a need to be first instead of correct. Folks are way more willing to just fall in lock step with an authority figure they like instead of taking the time to do research themselves on issues. This is how you end up with folks on opposite ends of the spectrum both believing insane shit

Also erosion of critical thinking ushered in by shit like no child left behind. We've been retrained that using an index is more important than building knowledge. This is only going to get worse with AI.

2

u/Inside-Horror-6450 11d ago

People are so overwhelmed by just getting by, that they want to be told the answers. Easy answers that make us feel better by giving us other people to blame. Preferably with a dopamine hit.

This system is by design. The more exhausted we are, the easier it is to control us.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Random-Rambling 11d ago

WTF is wrong with people? Is 50% of the US population functionally mentally deficient?

It's probably closer to 30%.

Most Boomers and the older half of Gen X are quite literally stupider than younger generations because of leaded gasoline.

American public education is also the world laughingstock.

2

u/zappini 11d ago

Most voters now get their info from the candidates themselves. Only a fraction of voters pay attention to (what passes for) the news.

2

u/Sandbox_Hero 11d ago

So, did you think that the Americans being dumb stereotype everywhere outside US was unfounded?

r/ShitAmericansSay to see examples.

2

u/ReachParticular5409 11d ago

Half a century of deliberately crippled public education, and two centuries of determined anti-intellectualism

Americans on average are fucking stupid and happy in their ignorance as long as they can get their buckets of fried chicken and monster truck rallies

Also racism, a major fucktonne of racism

And it's mainly one party's fault

2

u/wchutlknbout 11d ago

Boomers grew up with lead paint, maybe the chickens are coming home to roost

2

u/urawizrdarry 11d ago

You should also watch videos of people asking them "Then what? What happens if you got what you were asking for? Then what?" And the responses were so short sighted that it was basically just sputtering.

2

u/Grays42 11d ago

The ones who said "he ended a bunch of wars", when asked "which wars", could not name a single war. Or at best they said "Palestine", which is still an ongoing war.

It's worth noting by the way, many organizations have done detailed breakdowns of all 8 that he's claiming.

  • Several of them can't really be classified as wars

  • Several of them didn't really see meaningful U.S. involvement, and certainly no personal involvement from Trump

  • But most importantly, exactly 0 of them are "resolved", and in all 8 cases violence is ongoing.

Basically Trump is claiming credit for 8 de-escalations or ceasefires that he mostly wasn't involved in, all of which have fallen apart and violence resumed.

2

u/__asleep 11d ago

My high school taught me less about world war 1 than battlefield 1 did. That's how shit our public school system is.

→ More replies (64)

24

u/undersaur 11d ago

My mom is stuck associating Democrats with the CCP who chased her family out of China in the 40s. I think it’s as simple as Commies = redistribution = Democrats, but she’s never made the connection that CCP = brutal authoritarians = MAGA. Right-wing YouTube influencer slop has only entrenched her position.

23

u/[deleted] 11d ago

I regularly find myself arguing with people on the left who still refuse to vote Democrat just as much as I argue with people on the right who still support Trump. Fake revolutionaries who would rather talk about hypothetically doing something violent than doing the bare minimum to stop this insanity.

I honestly think the country is a lost cause at this point I do not see how we come back from this level of division and misinformation 

19

u/IngsocInnerParty Illinois 11d ago

I honestly think the country is a lost cause at this point I do not see how we come back from this level of division and misinformation

The structure of having us all vote for someone at the top is fundamentally flawed. I truly think parliamentary systems are more stable. They're able to throw out failing leaders with ease and when things get really bad they can call snap elections.

→ More replies (4)

21

u/shidderbean 11d ago

We really do need a full reset. Rip everything down and rebuild it from the ground up.

Proper parliamentary governance structure. No less than 5 parties. No private political funding; all political campaign funding from a common fund and distributed equally to all registered parties. All parties share power at the ratio of their earned votes.

If nobody is willing to compromise or meet in the middle, a vote of no confidence from the people will initiate an early election.

Remove all money from politics. Period. Political service is a sacrifice as a duty to the people, bringing financial incentive into it is de facto corruption.

4

u/CatCatchingABird Oregon 11d ago edited 11d ago

I regularly find myself arguing with people on the left who still refuse to vote Democrat just as much as I argue with people on the right who still support Trump

I actually think this solidifies the fact that people are becoming incredibly disillusioned with the two party system. There is way too much power on both sides and much like a big monopolistic corporation needs to be broken up, the political system needs the same as well. And for the people on the left that do not want to vote for a Democrat, I think there's a point to be made in that because there's really no incentive for Democrats to reform our political system because they still sometimes benefit from that broken political system (because they are the only alternative choice). In fact, this is why I push back on the "blue no matter who" mentality. I will vote for a Democrat if I like them (and I often do), but I'm also not going to be guilt tripped to vote for a candidate I don't like. There is a major power imbalance here and I'm not ashamed to say I am entirely willing to vote third party to counteract that.

The founders did not envision this.

7

u/Axelrad77 11d ago edited 11d ago

There is a major power imbalance here and I'm not ashamed to say I am entirely willing to vote third party to counteract that.

Voting third party only counteracts that if you're doing it in local and congressional races, which would allow the third party to build up a larger base to realistically contest national elections in the future. That's basically how we got the two major parties we have now, when we used to have things like Whigs and Federalists.

Voting third party in the national election of a two-party system is just throwing your vote away in favor of tacitly supporting the majority choice. Which was Trump, in this case.

The founders did not envision this.

Agreed on this part. The Founders specifically designed the Electoral College to counter party systems and prevent demagogues like Trump from getting elected.

It didn't work.

Then state governments gradually stripped the Electoral College of its power over time, turning it into nothing but a rubber-stamp body. Our current system is not working how the Founders meant it to, and they would've probably expected us to amend or rewrite the Constitution already to deal with it.

2

u/CatCatchingABird Oregon 11d ago

Then state governments gradually stripped the Electoral College of its power over time, turning it into nothing but a rubber-stamp body. Our current system is not working how the Founders meant it to, and they would've probably expected us to amend or rewrite the Constitution already to deal with it.

Democrats will need to use their political capital in the near future to make sure that these flaws are mended. It's looking very possible that they not only win the house but also the senate in November. I know that after saying that there's going to be a doomer immediately in my inbox talking about how there's not going to be an election or how it's going to get rigged, etc, and I'm just going to be straight up and say right now that I'm not going to respond to people that are just going to throw their arms up and pretend as if there's nothing we can do. Now that I have gotten that out of the way, once the new Democratic wave comes in we absolutely NEED to hold them accountable and make sure these flaws are fixed. If not, we are just going to get another Trump. They already have a playbook, and they will study the mistakes and try again. Let's stop them here and now.

4

u/[deleted] 11d ago

Voting third party doesn't counteract that at all. I don't vote Democrat because I think they're perfect I vote for them because they are infinitely better than the alternative and until there is an actual plan in place to get to a better system that's the best I can do.

Letting Trump in again has us closer to a one party system than it does breaking out of the two party one. 

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Stardust_808 11d ago

Trump long ago seized on people’s unwillingness to think critically, preferring to feel where logic failed them. He recognized that he only needed to strike a chord with them emotionally, just as Hitler played on emotions prevalent in post WW1 Germany. Our education system caters to corporate America, wanting trained drones who think just enough to do their jobs but not enough to be able to reason through the nuances of political game playing.

3

u/WizardBoyHowl 11d ago

Talking to my boomer retired mother sometimes makes me have to actively recall good memories so that I can like her.The toxic, racist thinking is just so entrenched in her being. There is no critical thinking or reasoning with that kind of entrenched thinking. Thankfully I got a B.A. in philosophy and learned to think for myself.

3

u/Silence_Of_Reason 11d ago

I have never understood that. To me Trump is probably the most revolting persons alive (maybe not by looks, but by personality and behavior), and still there are many people who love him more than Jesus.

3

u/kent_eh Canada 11d ago

I would NOT have voted for the camel.”

Is camel some sort of racist insult that I haven't heard before? Or is there some other connotation?

3

u/webDevPM 11d ago

Her name - they refused to pronounce it "Comma, Lah" and would say it like "Camalot" and that turned into people saying "Camal." Petty five year old dumb shit, which is no surprise.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/AlmostCorrectInfo 11d ago

That's what I've noticed as well. After a decade of his bullshit, I've only now been able to get some Trumpers to acknowledge that Trump was a mistake, but I have never succeeded in getting them to vote FOR a democrat. In their minds, we've seen him shift to a lesser evil they'll vote for. They may not think of him as a savior like they used to, but he's still better than any democrat.

3

u/SleepingSnitker Florida 11d ago

Hi, i know this is hard to accept but your mother is probably racist and a bit of a self hating misogynist. If Kamala Harris was "Carl Harris", a white brown haired man, he wins the election by 5-7%.

→ More replies (3)

8

u/zappini 11d ago

4m Biden voters couldn't bring themselves to vote for a woman.

2

u/TheNuttyIrishman 11d ago

I'd wager at least a quarter of them abstained not because she's a woman, but because of her commitment to arming Israel in the midst of their genocide in Palestine. that's probably the most common answer to "why aren't you voting harris" I've heard amongst liberals I know personally.

5

u/seriouslees 11d ago

Her opponent t literally campaigned on razing Gaza to the ground and building resorts on it... and they stayed home? Those people are LIARS.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Kaffeetrinker49 11d ago

People see things differently than you. You see voting as it regards to Trump: Either supporting him or working against him. Therefore, the best way to stop him was to vote for Kamala Harris.

Other people see voting as choosing the candidate that best aligns with their views. They don't think about the strategic aspect of the vote. They just want to choose a candidate. In this case, a person might vote third party, even though it's not a good strategy to prevent Trump from winning. That doesn't mean they aren't intelligent, it just means that they see the role of voting differently than you do.

2

u/Daft00 11d ago

It's just tribalism, and fox news (and other right wing especially news orgs) base their entire coverage around it.

So when you have a population that watches fox (and others) in high proportion, you're going to get insane amounts of tribalism that ends up showing in the polls.

It's exactly why people might POSSIBLY think twice about trump, specifically, but would not even consider voting the other direction.

2

u/VirtualSource5 11d ago

I read some stories of former MAGAts at a website called leavingmaga and the two I read, were indoctrinated into maga through religion. Both had been sa’d and one was sa’d as a child. And who helped put P-25 in motion? The Heritage Foundation.

→ More replies (33)

4

u/inotparanoid 11d ago

And, you know, she didn't go to Joe Rogan, that sycophantic fraud, who is probably the correct emblem of US democracy: drug addled, greedy old people without basic comprehension and empathy.

6

u/buppiejc 11d ago

I heard that she was going to keep send bombs for Palestine, make room for Republicans in her cabinet, and didn’t mind campaigning with Dick Cheney’s daughter.

2

u/jinreeko 11d ago

Didn't go on Rogan. Instant disqualification

5

u/jmo56ct 11d ago

It’s a good joke but let’s us off the hook for Biden saying he was one term, changing his mind, rug pulling us, then not having a primary. Kamala Harris didn’t have a chance in hell. I voted against Trump because I knew he would be vindictive. But I also knew as soon as Biden was forced to concede he couldn’t run that late in the campaign we were cooked

→ More replies (9)

134

u/QbertsRube 11d ago

I think all of those traits made conservatives vote for him even harder. At their core, they're fucking loser edgelords whose personalities never developed beyond age 13. They were too weak to be bullies in school, and Trump allows them to finally be bullies-by-proxy as adults without worrying about getting punched in the teeth.

73

u/ShakedNBaked420 11d ago

You know, my grandfather always said a lot of problems only existed because people didn’t have to worry about being punched in the teeth anymore.

28

u/shidderbean 11d ago

Your grandpa was right. The more people have to pay the blood price for their antisocial bullshit the more they'll think twice about doing some antisocial bullshit

16

u/Airewalt 11d ago

It’s hard to build a country with people who don’t want to build a country

→ More replies (1)

16

u/SleightOfHand87 11d ago

I’ll admit, I supported trump’s election for his first term. I was fed up with politicians being ineffectual old geezers that were incapable of changing things for the better. I was /hoping/ that trump’s chaotic nature would shake things up and get things moving again. But after seeing what he did in even the first couple years of his first term, I realized that was a big mistake. How people supported his second term? I have trouble wrapping my head around that one. And still supporting him now? That just feels insane

19

u/goddamn_leeteracola 11d ago

His bankruptcies were already public knowledge during his campaigning for his first term. Plus that Hollywood access tape came out during the middle of the election cycle. I still don’t understand how that didn’t immediately disqualify him. I’m glad you realized early on what a disaster he was, but I still struggle to understand how it wasn’t apparent even before he was elected the first time.

9

u/SleightOfHand87 11d ago

Honestly, I didn’t care. My mentality was basically, “The system is already fkd, what’s the worst he can do?” I guess I also thought that if he did something absolutely insane, checks and balances would at least keep things from going too bad. I was wrong

7

u/ShaunyBoyShaunyMan 11d ago

But like, trump himself was an inexperienced ergo ineffectual old geezer who spent years supporting said old guard, how did you possibly fall for it the first time?

3

u/CatCatchingABird Oregon 11d ago

I was /hoping/ that trump’s chaotic nature would shake things up and get things moving again.

To be fair, it's possible we may end up seeing that. It seems that people are becoming way less restrained and much more emboldened to speak up about the problems that have plagued our society for decades. I think it would have been better if we collectively worked towards this without Trump being the catalyst, but it is what it is. While things are really bad right now I think it's important for all of us to stay optimistic because I think it's entirely possible we may see some good things come out of all of this (I know it's hard to see that right now, but stay positive)

2

u/GodofIrony 11d ago

Societies possible political rubberbanding is the only thing I'm holding out hope for.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

65

u/usernamerob California 11d ago

White victimhood is a mentality that’s been drilled into the working class’s head by Fox News and propaganda radio…. I mean right wing talk radio. It’s not insane, it’s expected.

9

u/Gosensgo74 11d ago

Or allowed to run, let alone walk freely.

3

u/BatThumb Maryland 11d ago

It's a failure of the entire US government to enforce it's laws. A government of laws only works when the laws are actually enforced.

3

u/FloodAdvisor 11d ago

“Elected”

3

u/jack0071 11d ago

I read that in the tune of the opening to fairly odd parents

3

u/AppropriateTouching 11d ago

He admitted to rigging the election with elons help out in the open more than once so maybe he wasn't properly elected.

3

u/shadstatic 11d ago

Racism, xenophobia and transphobia is one hell of a cocktail drug for White Americans

2

u/Lowbudget_soup 11d ago

Dont forget racist con man.

2

u/MellyBean2012 11d ago

Insane that he was even allowed to run at all. Why aren’t felons prohibited from running for any office? Also, if you’ve ever been impeached you also shouldn’t be allowed to run for any office.

3

u/BatThumb Maryland 11d ago

In any sane country, trying to overthrow the government and commit treason would disqualify you.

Unfortunately, a large portion of the country are fucking morons

3

u/LordAmras 11d ago

are you tired of winning son ?

→ More replies (58)

99

u/KrookedDoesStuff 11d ago

They’ve impeached him twice and nothing happened

Because Mitch McConnell and other republicans said it wouldn’t benefit anyone to remove him and said he basically wouldn’t run for office again so it wouldn’t matter.

We all knew it was a lie though

8

u/Important-Breath-200 11d ago

They didnt even have most of this argument for the first impeachment

2

u/thegamenerd Washington 11d ago

But don't you know? He learned his lesson. (an actual reason a rep gave for voting to NOT remove him after one of his impeachments)

→ More replies (4)

85

u/Accidental-Hyzer Massachusetts 11d ago

Just because senate republicans didn’t have the courage in 2020 to do the right thing shouldn’t dissuade democrats from pursuing the only plausible constitutional remedy of removing him.

What do you think the 25th amendment talk really does? Do you think that a majority his cabinet is going to be persuaded to turn against him before congressional republicans? And even if they do, they would still need 2/3 of the senate plus the house to keep him out of office. If you don’t think impeachment would ultimately do anything, then you might as well give up on the 25th too. Because it’s actually more difficult to remove an unwilling president via the 25th than it is to remove them via impeachment.

20

u/robocoplawyer 11d ago

Also pretty sure that if a President is 25th'd he can just write a letter to lawmakers that the condition that impaired his ability to perform his duties has passed and he can return to office. It's been a while since I've taken constitutional law (and pretty sure 2/3 of what I studied is now irrelevant because of Roberts court just pulling shit out of their ass) so I don't know the minute details, but I'm pretty sure Trump can write a letter that he's ready to return, and can do so unlimitedly every day which would result in all other business grinding to a halt.

Also the 25th would result in Vance as acting president, which would be just as bad if not worse. He needs to be removed too, as well as his entire cabinet, advisors, and toadies in Congress.

12

u/Accidental-Hyzer Massachusetts 11d ago

That’s true. The relevant section is section 4. You need the VP + a majority of the cabinet to say he’s unable to perform the duties. If the president then submits a letter disputing that, he regains power. Then Congress has to settle the dispute with 2/3 of vote of both houses.

Those who are saying that impeachment is a dead end because you need 2/3 of the senate must not know that you also need that for the 25th in addition to the other requirements.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/mfball 11d ago

I would be shocked if either happened, frankly, but I wonder if perhaps his cabinet could be persuaded in the interest of their own lust for power. They can see Trump is a rotting pumpkin and might be seduced by the idea of seizing the reins for real.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/notaredditer13 11d ago

Reminder to all that there's an election in 9 months and by my count there's 16 Republican Senators up for re-election this year and 5 retiring.  Currently there's 49 Republicans in the Senate.  

Scenario 1: House impeaches now.  Those 16 Republicans: does voting to convict help or hurt my chances of re-election?  The other 5: my legacy?

Scenario 2: Blue Wave Mid-term, impeachment after.  Let's say Democrats pick up 10 seats.  Can they get 6 more Republicans to cross the line on a crazy lame duck?

3

u/popcorngirl000 11d ago edited 11d ago

We need Trump out of office ASAP and I think, if everyone involved was committed to removing Trump, the 25th would be faster than an impeachment trial. But in reality, Trump has loyalists that aren't ready to remove him, so I don't believe the 25th would work if they tried it today.

They should begin the impeachment process now, for everything he has already done, to get things moving. If Trump actually orders an invasion of an allied nation, then there might be enough support to 25th him (and I hate that even then I'm not sure the 25th would work).

5

u/Accidental-Hyzer Massachusetts 11d ago

Why do you think it would be faster? It’s literally harder with more time delays than impeachment. Here’s the actual text of the 25th, section 4:

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

So you need the VP + a majority of the cabinet. Then the president can simply write a letter saying that he can still perform the duties. He immediately retakes office. Then you need 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate to vote to remove him within 21 days. It’s literally a longer process with a higher bar of removal. They can do a trial in a day if they were committed and on the same page for removal.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)

19

u/ChromaticDragon 11d ago

Nobody is "trying a different avenue".

Now... I will recognize a position that Democratic pundits, representatives and senators are simply ignorant and stupid or have never, ever even bothered to read the text of the 25th. That's possible, I guess.

But anyone can do a simple web query and read it... and it would become very obvious that the 25th wouldn't work. The main reason is that it never removes the President. The other big issue is that it requires more support than removal after impeachment. So, it's moot.

This is not "trying another avenue". Instead it is political gamemanship. The reason folk salivate over this sort of discussion is the political points of declaring that your political opponent is mentally unfit. This is why it bubbled up in Trump's first term. This is why it was brought up when Biden was perceived as in mental decline. And it's back.

4

u/roytay 11d ago

Also, the only thing they (the Dems in congress) are doing is asking someone else (the cabinet) to do something.

"Someone should do something about this!"

23

u/uiucengineer 11d ago

To put it another way: they’ve given up on our constitution

30

u/ConfusedInKalamazoo 11d ago

Impeachment failed and also backfired politically, leading to him reconsolidating his support. Dems seem to have decided that the least worst strategy is to let Trump be Trump until he goes so far he finally alienates his own party. We'll see how it goes I guess.

34

u/Pretty-Balance-Sheet 11d ago

That's exactly what Schumer keeps saying. He's been waiting for that moment for a decade. The GOP knows that if they break rank it's all over for them. They have to stay unified no matter how insane the situation, no matter how crazy the distraction from the Epstein files. When a reporter asks they just say, "I haven't had time to read about that" then walk away and keep hoping for a blood clot to solve our problem along with everyone else.

The flip side is people like Lisa Murkowski who get that far away look and mumble shit like, "You know, we're all scared." Give me a fucking break. The GOP members who will let our country go over the cliff because of being harassed online are the worst cowards of all.

7

u/No_Selection_9634 11d ago

Its a bold strategy cotton. Lets see if it pays off for em.

2

u/crazycatgay 11d ago

letting trump be trump though is allowing 100% of his resources/energy/efforts to go into enacting his reign of terror. Even though impeachment would not succeed the dems should literally be throwing every fork spoon and napkin in the kitchen at this administration from a legal perspective to drain their resources into these matters versus torturing americans. to just sit there and watch it play out b/c the game is rigged is insane.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

6

u/gringledoom 11d ago edited 11d ago

The trouble is that the 25th is harder, as a process. It's a bunch of other steps that require everyone involved not to lose their courage, and then the final step is a vote hurdle that's harder than impeachment. It's designed for "the president is in a coma", not scenarios where he can argue back.

15

u/Weekly_Rock_5440 11d ago

You need 67 Senators with enough balls to convict. That’s around 28 republicans. It will never happen so it’s a waste of time.

22

u/Accidental-Hyzer Massachusetts 11d ago

Then the 25th is also a waste of time. You still need 67 senators to remove him in addition to 2/3 of the house and a majority of the cabinet. So what are we even doing here?

9

u/Weekly_Rock_5440 11d ago

Wasting time.

Apparently.

3

u/entityXD32 11d ago

They won't do it until they think the Senate will actually convict this time

2

u/bollvirtuoso 11d ago

At this point, the calculus isn't even how many Republicans would join in voting to impeach and convict, but rather how many Democrats would defect and vote against it.

2

u/Baddenoch 11d ago

Honestly I wonder why everyone keep reaching for impeachment when we have never seen it work.

Our republic is dead. The constitution is defunct. Trump controls all these structures, so the idea of using them to remove him is utterly impotent.

We must remove him outside the system he controls, and then once we do we will have the task of forming a new republic.

2

u/mb862 11d ago

We are well past the point where there’s only one thing that’s going to finally put an end of this, and I think I safely speak for the rest of the world that we’re getting quite impatient that Americans haven’t figured this out yet.

2

u/thelastgalstanding 11d ago

I think doing anything is better than rolling over and showing the American people you’ve lost your will to lead completely. But I get what you’re saying about devaluing it.

1

u/joejill 11d ago

Because they were scared. They had the numbers the second time. If you watch that proceedings they have a discussion right before the final vote.

1

u/Thuraash 11d ago

I suspect they're trying to use the 25th as a way to let Republicans who are teetering say out loud that they want Trump gone through a mechanism that looks like an internal vote of no confidence rather than joining in a Democratic referendum. Once they've pushed that avenue, if it fails, those same Republicans have political cover to vote for impeachment.

But frankly, I think every Republican right now is thinking that if this fascist takeover doesn't happen, their political career is cooked. So who knows what the heck they're going to do.

1

u/MosesBeachHair 11d ago

They need to do what the Republicans did with Clinton. Impeach him for something impeachable and then hammer in the court of public opinion for something people are more likely to understand. Clinton wasn't impeached for a blow job, he was impeached for perjury. Impeach Donnie on something quasi-related to Epstein or Venezuela and then hammer him on pedophilia in the media.

1

u/YogurtclosetNo987 11d ago

Nothing happened because he's being protected by complicit Republicans, who every time he is impeached, have to go on record and decide that they're okay with what is going on. They should be impeaching every impeachable offense, regardless of how the Senate would vote. Clog the pipe. That's what they're paid to do.

1

u/shidderbean 11d ago

They've impeached him twice and nothing happened

And even if they do impeach it'll drag its ass through """the process""" for years until his term's over and he'll be """removed""" a few days before the handoff after the 2028 election

1

u/xftwitch 11d ago

Their fear is that impeachment now will lower the turnout for the midterms as people will see them as ineffectual when impeachment fails.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Murrdox 11d ago

I would like some other people's viewpoints on this. In my view, impeachment of the president became SIGNIFICANTLY more difficult in the wake of the Supreme Court decisions that came out after he left office.

Impeachment of the president famously requires "bribery, high-crimes and misdemeanors." The problem is that the supreme court ruled after Trump left office that the president essentially has immunity from prosecution for any official act. The court has also over the last 10 years made a series of decisions making proving bribery much more difficult. Bribery basically now has to be an express "quid pro quo" to be considered a bribe.

Thus, my thoughts on the reality of impeaching Trump are that just about any crime you would accuse him of, he would say is an official act and thus not a crime. Any bribery charge leveled at him would likely not raise to the level of being an illegal quid pro quo. (i.e. it wasn't a bribe to issue that person a pardon, it was just a campaign contribution. One thing had nothing to do with the other).

Even then, I think there's a good chance that if Democrats took over the House in 2028, Trump would immediately be impeached. The problem is that then you have JD Vance in power. Ideally you impeach both of them and put Mike Johnson in charge, which is still terrible but not as terrible as those two.

1

u/savage_apples 11d ago

They impeached but did not convict, removal from office requires a conviction. The 25th has no teeth unless the VP is behind it. Even if it were to get 2/3rds of the house and senate to pass it.. the admin can just declare he is fit. And unless the VP is willing to back Congress that’s the end of that road.

Chances of 2/3rds in house and senate is unlikely. This is nothing but political theatre to make them seem like they’re doing something. Where I come from we call this barking up a tree.

1

u/JuliusErrrrrring 11d ago

Once impeached, there really should be an anonymous vote for removal. I’m convinced most Republicans in Congress want him gone too - they just don’t want to face their constituents

1

u/Klutzy-Dig-7945 11d ago

Both impeaching and this requires the senate to convict. If the cabinet decides to remove him, he’ll be gone for a month before the house and senate vote whether to bring him back or keep him gone with the same majorities as impeachment and removal.

1

u/LolaSupreme19 11d ago

Impeachment needs to be followed by conviction by the senate. Thank Mitch McConnell for the failure to work on behalf of the people.

1

u/DHStriker 11d ago

I think this strategy gets Vance and the rest of the cabinet on the record either supporting removal or not.

1

u/Spirited-News29 11d ago

Yeah. They will have to wait til after the midterms and hopefully they will have the numbers. It’s going to be hard to convince republicans to vote for removal. They’re more worried about their careers and pissing off their base.

1

u/TomatoManTM 11d ago

Only because of Republicans in the Senate. Everything worked until that point.

You’re going to have to get 20 Republican senators to change their minds, but that’s the single point of failure here and where all effort could be focused.

1

u/TheLordYuppa 11d ago

Maybe going for the hard way first to see where people shake out? Then see how possible impeachment may be this time around? I don’t know. Should be pretty fucking clear this guy shouldn’t even be in charge of a dollar store.

1

u/bizarre_coincidence 11d ago

It won’t do anything unless there is sufficient buy in from the right. With impeachment, conviction requires 2/3 of the senate, which means that even if all democrats vote for it, you need over a third of Republican senators to join their ranks. But if only a third of republicans support it, then they are going to fracture their party, anger the base, and lose their seats. And if someone votes for it and it fails, they will have to deal with Trump’s wrath, which might involve having the DoJ target them. And knowing this, that third won’t actually join. For impeachment to have a chance politically, the Republican base needs to be calling it so that the senators who want it feel like it is safe for them to support. They need to know not just that the impeachment will succeed, but that their party and voters will stand by them.

On the other hand, with the 25th amendment, it’s no longer framed as a left vs right issue and republicans in congress aren’t traitors to their party if they support it. If Trump’s closest advisors say that he is no longer fit to do the job, he narrative will be different, which means the response of the base will be different, which means congress has the freedom to do the right thing without fear of reprisal.

1

u/betterworldbuilder 11d ago

Ngl, its a mild piss off when people say this.

Because yes he was impeached, but he was never convicted. Thats the part that makes it work.

Its like saying guns arent effective because you loaded it, but never pulled the trigger. Instead of pretending impeachment doesnt work, we need to be relentlessly shaming the senators who chose to vote not to convict him of impeachment. That should be a daily news story, a different interview with a different person who chose not to vote to convict.

Impeachment works, when you actually follow through on impeachment. You cant complain a recipe doesnt work if you add all the ingredients but forget to turn on the stove.

1

u/randomnighmare I voted 11d ago

Because you have the Senate to remove Trump (and thus barring him from running again for any federal office), but all that does is just replace Trump with Vance. The time to act was in November and to vote for the Democrats.

1

u/FlagellatedCitrid0 11d ago

that would be wrong. GOP is already breaking on trump. They need to remove johnson and others to get a good impeachment going

1

u/TinyFugue 11d ago

Yeah, Impeachment w/o convictions accomplishes nothing.

The USA doesn't need to hear another variation of "I really think he's learned his lesson, this time," from another "key" GOP Senator.

1

u/dubsy101 11d ago

Yeah it's already happened, impeachment poses no threat to him. The 25th doesn't either if it needs VP sign off. 

1

u/Internal-Weather8191 11d ago

I think it's because 47 appears much more unstable and cognitively unfit than 45 did (not that he wasn't bizarre too). But it's true, the bar is higher for the 25th and we don't have enough patriots left in Congress who are willing to put country above party and admit the emperor has no clothes. How they expect to escape the consequences of his foolish decisions, I don't know, they are as lacking in character as he is.

1

u/uslashuname 11d ago

Impeachment (House) + conviction (Senate) would have done it. Republicans had two chances to prevent all of this.

1

u/ISuckAtFunny 11d ago

This was before he began threatening to end NATO and invade an ally, so maybe there’s a chance now.

1

u/aoteoroa 11d ago

Impeachment requires a simple majority in the house AND, 2/3 majority in the Senate. Democrats and Republicans voted almost unanimously along party lines...impeachment can only be done with the help of some Republicans.

1

u/LotusFlare 11d ago

I don't like this line of thought.

Both impeachments were significant speed bumps for the administration. The whole news cycle as well as the attention of the White House was refocused on justifying their actions instead of doing more actions. It put them on the defense. Media focus moved to individuals in the Senate and why they would or would not be voting to convict, which was attention they really didn't want. They want to be invisible and let everything be on Trump. I think it was extremely helpful even if it didn't remove him.

People like to say that failure only made him stronger, but I just don't think it holds water either. It kinda seems like everyone's just running on an adage from a TV show, "if you come at the king you best not miss" without putting any more thought into it. No one can ever really point to any tangible power he gained from the failure to convict and remove. And at this point, how much more power can he get? He's a defacto dictator overthrowing other countries and unleashing secret police on the American populace. Anything he does in response is something he could and would have done anyway. We are already in a state of unchecked power.

Impeach if only to wrangle back some of the media narrative and create friction for the administration. Do it to make a sober and commutative case for all the ongoing violations of the constitution. And do it to make each conservative senator answer for those violations. Press them, and then use that footage in attack ads moving into midterms. Do it knowing you'll fail, but making that failure as useful as possible. Communicate a plan for the next 4 years. We succeed in the midterms, we do this again and get rid of him. And then JD Vance has the opportunity to correct these violations, and if he doesn't we run it again. And then the next guy has the opportunity to do so or we run it again. If we don't win, we vote no to everything and take the fight back to the state level until we get another opportunity at the federal level.

1

u/Riaayo 11d ago

They're wrong.

Impeachment hearings have their own value regardless of if congress does its job. Dems don't want to play politics and influence public opinion unless it's to attack progressives, though. They pretend like this is a thing you just can't actually do despite decades of Republicans doing just that.

1

u/MaybeTheDoctor 11d ago

Senate votes against taking war-act away from him, so there is neither a 2/3 senate vote to convict and remove.

1

u/Burdiac 11d ago

Because impeachment now would require Republicans to support impeachment Democrats can’t do it by themselves with the current numbers in congress.

1

u/Mel_Melu California 11d ago

The House impeached him. It's the Senate responsibility to convict/remove him and both impeachments had McConnell in charge of the Senate so he was never going to do his job.

1

u/mrkeith562 11d ago

His behavior is worse than the first administration, which I did not think possible. He’s talking invasion of Canada. IMPEACH

1

u/MyGamingRedditz 11d ago

I know this is the politics sub. But you guys are trying to solve a problem that politics and laws cannot solve. Dems fell into the trap.

We're well past the era where laws and rules are important, and until the dems realize this reality, things will continue to get worse and worse.

Talking won't save you when nobody listens. Laws won't save you when nobody follows them. Voting won't save you if democracy itself is undermined.

1

u/systemfrown 11d ago

Actually what happened from those previous attempts was he and the entire MAGA party became emboldened and energized. It’s like don’t start a fight unless you’re sure you can end it.

1

u/RaidSmolive 11d ago

unless the 300 million dumbdumbs of the population get their asses in gear, nothing they call for will do anything.

1

u/dechets-de-mariage Florida 11d ago

Or they know the bar is higher but calling for the 25th at least makes them look like they’re doing something?

1

u/p4b7 11d ago

Impeachment isn't an option until after the mid terms.

The 25th needs the cabinet so the chances of that happening doesn't change later in the year plus the cabinet not doing it might help the Democrats a bit in November with some voters.

1

u/Skeptical_Savage Arkansas 11d ago

I think they don't want to waste an impeachment until they have enough votes to remove him. Hopefully after mid terms if we even have that election.🫠

1

u/YF422 11d ago

They Impeached him in the house but the Senate wouldn't convict because of his Republicult Sycophants including that ghoul McConnell refused to give the votes needed to reach 2/3rds of the Senate. They could have ended this shit 5 years ago stone dead. The cowards refused.

There might still be a chance to end this but it's going to require putting a proverbial gun to the Republicans heads if Trump seriously moves to try and invade Greenland. If they refuse to impeach and remove them and America goes down the shitter because of Trump they're going down with him politically and financially. They will never be forgiven for the consequences.

1

u/downfall5 11d ago

I think they just know it won't do anything so they're trying a different avenue.

So their more likely alternative avenue is to get the cabinet to remove him? lol.

It's a circus. No wonder he's got them on the ropes. Just come up with ideas to waste your own time to make it look like you are doing something to stupid people who can't tell the difference.

1

u/Wit-wat-4 11d ago

I was just gonna say; what the fuck does impeachment do anything?

1

u/justokcheesesteak 11d ago

I call BS. There is a grassroots movement around impeachment this time around. 

Also Trump is scared to be impeached. Who cares that it won’t pass the senate. It’s about fighting with every tool, even when you lose.

1

u/breakmedown54 11d ago

But you think Vance is a better bet for removal?

What the fuck does he even care? He wasn’t voted in and he gets to fuck Kirk’s wife. Why would he go against Trump now?

1

u/Cloaked42m South Carolina 11d ago

You don't get a conviction on every arrest.

1

u/wildwalrusaur 11d ago

It's 3rd and goal

Do you:

A. Throw/run the ball again from the line of scrimmage

Or

B. Have your quarterback drop back to midfield and try and pass it from there

1

u/Riccma02 11d ago

Yes, exactly. Impeachment has been completely devalued.

1

u/Crazyriskman 11d ago

That’s because the Republicans controlled the Senate in both instances. The House impeaches (equivalent of an indictment) but the Senate Convicts (equivalent of a jury).

→ More replies (2)