Impeachment Hearings

[*bfine32*]

(01-03-2020, 04:08 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Who are you quoting?

Paraphrasing the gist of the debate.

Fred said: "Polls show Trump is trouble for reelection"

Cool Matt said "What do polls matter, because they got the GE wrong"

Other Matt said; "The polls matter because they show what the population thinks and doesn't consider the EC"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "These current polls don't consider the EC, so again what do they matter IRT election"

Other Matt said: "They are good for numbers. Not when people use them to infer things"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "Inferring things such as Trump is in trouble for reelection"

Dino posted a lot of stuff about Trump while those discussing the point ignored him

[GMDino]

(01-03-2020, 05:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Paraphrasing the gist of the debate.

Fred said: "Polls show Trump is trouble for reelection"

Cool Matt said "What do polls matter, because they got the GE wrong"

Other Matt said; "The polls matter because they show what the population thinks and doesn't consider the EC"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "These current polls don't consider the EC, so again what do they matter IRT election"

Other Matt said: "They are good for numbers. Not when people use them to infer things"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "Inferring things such as Trump is in trouble for reelection"

Dino posted a lot of stuff about Trump while those discussing the point ignored him

"a lot of stuff" about the actual impeachment.

Not that I expect some people to read any of it.  

[Belsnickel]

(01-03-2020, 05:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Paraphrasing the gist of the debate.

Fred said: "Polls show Trump is trouble for reelection"

Cool Matt said "What do polls matter, because they got the GE wrong"

Other Matt said; "The polls matter because they show what the population thinks and doesn't consider the EC"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "These current polls don't consider the EC, so again what do they matter IRT election"

Other Matt said: "They are good for numbers. Not when people use them to infer things"

bfine/ cool Matt said: "Inferring things such as Trump is in trouble for reelection"

Dino posted a lot of stuff about Trump while those discussing the point ignored him

Actually, Fred started this off by calling it a problem. Just in general, a problem. I was engaging in this conversation with this broad idea of it being a problem, not "trouble for reelection" which it seems you have inferred.

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-03-2020, 03:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The polling data shows that the public supported the impeachment vote and has generally been trending in a way that is not favorable for Trump. That is a problem. Does it mean he won't win reelection? No one has said that (that I have seen) because there are too many other variables. However, Senators will watch these numbers and it will guide their votes more than anything else.

So then if this is not a problem for reelection then it's a problem for.....?

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-03-2020, 04:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He is talking about how you did not see a problem because only Democrats support impeachment.

I didnt say only Democrats support impeachment. I said he was impeached by a bunch of Democrats that dont like him anyway. Regardless, supporting impeachment and actually voting for the next president are 2 different things 

I'm sure a lot of people weren't fond of Trumps locker room talk episode and still voted for him when a lot of people said that was the nail in the coffin, especially for female votes. People can talk day in and day out about how what Trump did with Ukraine is wrong, but at the end of the day, how they will vote come election day is much more debatable than "This percentage of people support impeachment".

[fredtoast]

(01-03-2020, 06:32 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: So then if this is not a problem for reelection then it's a problem for.....?

Republican Senators all across the country who are up for election and being asked to not vote against Trump.  So even if Trump is re-elected he loses power if the Republicans lose the Senate.

[Belsnickel]

(01-03-2020, 06:32 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: So then if this is not a problem for reelection then it's a problem for.....?

Public opinion like that affects a great many things. Political actors are often swayed by public opinion in many ways and when this sort of thing happens it can decrease the president's ability to make things happen. For example, if his actions last night spark a war with Iran he may not have the political capital to sustain it with Congress.

[*bfine32*]

(01-03-2020, 06:32 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: So then if this is not a problem for reelection then it's a problem for.....?

Fred understands what he meant when he said the polls were a problem for Trump

You understand what Fred meant when he said the polls were a problem for Trump

I understand what Fred said when he said the polls were a problem for Trump

Apparently there were those that were unclear as to what he meant 

[*bfine32*]

(01-03-2020, 06:59 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Public opinion like that affects a great many things. Political actors are often swayed by public opinion in many ways and when this sort of thing happens it can decrease the president's ability to make things happen. For example, if his actions last night spark a war with Iran he may not have the political capital to sustain it with Congress.

Then why did your first reply on the matter address the EC?

[Belsnickel]

(01-03-2020, 08:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Then why did your first reply on the matter address the EC?

I mentioned the EC because it was the reason for the situation in 2016 during which the polls were misinterpreted and Matt was using as a way to try to discredit polling. It was being referenced in the context of the 2016 election, not the current situation.

[*bfine32*]

(01-03-2020, 09:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I mentioned the EC because it was the reason for the situation in 2016 during which the polls were misinterpreted and Matt was using as a way to try to discredit polling. It was being referenced in the context of the 2016 election, not the current situation.

But you're unsure that Fred was talking about the 2020 Election when he suggested these (current situation) polls are trouble for Trump? 

C'Mon man

[Belsnickel]

(01-03-2020, 09:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But you're unsure that Fred was talking about the 2020 Election when he suggested these (current situation) polls are trouble for Trump? 

C'Mon man

That wasn't how I interpreted his post.

[*bfine32*]

(01-03-2020, 09:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That wasn't how I interpreted his post.

I take you at your word, but post #800 removed any ambiguity. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-03-2020, 06:59 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Public opinion like that affects a great many things. Political actors are often swayed by public opinion in many ways and when this sort of thing happens it can decrease the president's ability to make things happen. For example, if his actions last night spark a war with Iran he may not have the political capital to sustain it with Congress.

I believe public opinion about a war with Iran would play out way more significantly in a war with Iran, than public opinion about an impeachment concerning Trump's actions with Ukraine. Would it not?

[BmorePat87]

John Bolton is willing to testify, giving Democrats some fire in their calls for witnesses.

McConnell is now open to possibly having 3 witnesses pre-taped, but he wants to agree to rules first and then allow that to be a possibility later in the trial. Democrats obviously want to confirm witnesses prior to the trial.

[GMDino]

(01-07-2020, 11:14 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: John Bolton is willing to testify, giving Democrats some fire in their calls for witnesses.

McConnell is now open to possibly having 3 witnesses pre-taped, but he wants to agree to rules first and then allow that to be a possibility later in the trial. Democrats obviously want to confirm witnesses prior to the trial.

Didn't he say if he was subpoenaed by the Senate?

[BmorePat87]

(01-07-2020, 11:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: Didn't he say if he was subpoenaed by the Senate?

Yes, he's willing to testify if he is asked to.

[fredtoast]

(01-03-2020, 10:45 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I believe public opinion about a war with Iran would play out way more significantly in a war with Iran, than public opinion about an impeachment concerning Trump's actions with Ukraine. Would it not?

No political move exists in a vacuum.  If it did then there would never be any discussions about "political capital" or a "mandate".

Trump has to work with Senators from all states, not just the swing states.

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-07-2020, 03:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No political move exists in a vacuum.  If it did then there would never be any discussions about "political capital" or a "mandate".

Trump has to work with Senators from all states, not just the swing states.

I'm not saying it exists in a vacuum.

I said public opinion about a war with Iran would matter significantly more than opinions on impeachment if we did in fact go to war with Iran. Do you disagree. If so, why?

[fredtoast]

(01-07-2020, 04:22 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I'm not saying it exists in a vacuum.

I said public opinion about a war with Iran would matter significantly more than opinions on impeachment if we did in fact go to war with Iran. Do you disagree. If so, why?

Trump needs the approval of Congress for somethings he wants to do.  How much influence he has over Congressmen often depends on his own standing with citizens.  If he goes to Congressmen to try and get their support for an invasion of Iran he can either say "The public likes me you better support what I want" or he can say "The public thinks I am a fraud you better support what I want". Which do you think would be more effective?

If a congressmen think Trump has the "political capital" to get them voted out of office if they disagrees then they will do what Trump wants.  If they does not think Trump has influence over voters in their state then they will do what they thinks is best instead of just doing what Trump wants.