128 Democrats vote against impeaching Trump.

[MayReasonRule]

This is accurate???

[ForgedCrank]

1. That horse

has been dead for several years now. A new approach is required

[FBaggins]

2. I'm shocked that it got more than a dozen votes

"Waste of time" was being generous. It can only hurt

[MayReasonRule]

7. How So? Personally I'd Have Every Representative Present A New Resolution Each Day

[ForgedCrank]

35. A lot of

people are tone deaf when it comes to this stuff.
I am smack in the middle of one of the most red states in the country, so I hear both sides of this stuff. And you would be surprised, most things MAGA are not as they are presented here.
As far as MAGA is concerned, getting impeached by the house is now considered a badge of honor, a joke, tired and old and no one takes it seriously anymore because it was overused. And in the same manner, the minority around here (Democrats) mostly see it as almost embarrassing now. All it does is make us look silly at this point.
We are losing ground fast because of this same old way of thinking. Going faster and harder on the same stuff we've been doing for the past 10 years is not a winning formula. If we keep listening to and following David Hogg and Alexandria Cortez and the like, we may be extinct before long. I'm not saying we have to like it, but it is the painful truth.

[Walleye]

78. Maga. They think being convicted of 34 felonies is a badge of honor

[kerry-is-my-prez]

36. Being impeached in the house was the best thing that happened to Clinton.

His approval numbers went way up and the Republican Party went way down.

[marble falls]

79. JD Vance. Mike Johnson. There's two good reasons. Better the devil you know. Do you want to deal with ...

... a possible 8-10 years of a Vance or Johnson White House???

[MayReasonRule]

4. Hmm... I Do Not See That...How Does A Vote Against Impeachment Benefit Us?

[StarryNite]

14. They don't care about benefitting us.

They only care about benefitting themselves.

[FBaggins]

24. It doesn't. It hurts us.

Almost as much as voting for it does.

[MayReasonRule]

28. I'm At A Loss To Understand The Particulars Of Your Assertion... Perhaps You Might Lay It Out For All Those Like I...

[FBaggins]

68. I rather doubt that I can - despite your excellent posting handle

But let's at least ask an initial question that might determine whether or not it's possible.
"
The professional strategists in the party universally agree that Green should not have brought the motion (let alone in a way that forces a vote on the record). There are hundreds of Democrats elected to national office and virtually every one of them tried to talk him out of it (including many of the ones who eventually voted "nay" on tabling the resolution.) and have already talked a handful of others out of similar actions this year. Yet you not only support the idea but think that all of our representatives should be bringing articles every day.

Can you describe what you think explains that chasm? They're the literal experts in getting Democrats elected to high office. What are you seeing that they don't?

[MayReasonRule]

82. What Leads You To Conclude That The Professional Strategists That All Agree Within The DNC Are Correct?

First off thank you for your well thought out incisive reply!


Reasonable people do disagree...

My analysis suggests that given the performance of "The DNC" within the last election cycle it is prudent to recognize that performance outcome and adjust course accordingly.

I see this as one of those direly needed course corrections.

What data factors are you privy to that I have not yet encountered, leading to your confidence in the professional strategists?

I just don't see it.

I'm just one more fella', but I'm damn sure always open to further understanding that I've not as of yet come to recognize and understand.

[Initech]

26. Getting rid of the 800 pound tumors known as Fox News and the Heritage Foundation would be a great start!

[ForgedCrank]

39. I can't

sign on to something that censors or silences opposing voices, no matter how ridiculous they are sometimes.
Maybe the better approach is to look at ourselves and see what it is about us that we are not offering the majority, and what are we doing or saying to turn them off. That is something we can actually change rather than just complaining. We can keep blaming Fox news and Rush for another century, and we can keep impeaching Trump every weekend, but we still aren't going to win until we merge more with the majority of voters. Yes, that means making some concessions, many of which we will not like. That is a foundational tenant of Democracy: accepting that you won't ever get everything you want.

[Initech]

41. What do we do though? Silencing isn't an option.

But neither is letting them get away with the most heinous and evil shit they are getting away with. Something has to be done - both of these wretched organizations have to be punished for creating this nightmare hellscape. I'm tired of republicans getting away with murder - and right now they are. The only way Trump and his goons are leaving is by death or force, and right now, waiting for the former option will take too long.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

45. We are not cutting through the propaganda. Fox News/Social media.

MSNBC is really the only media outlet and it’s about 1/4th as popular as Fox News.

[markodochartaigh]

77. "...only media outlet..."

I think that there is something coming up fast in our rear view mirror. Young people are getting their news, and propaganda, from Tricktok, and in the case of young men, from gaming platforms. It may be almost as many as watch any mainstream media outlet. And the Republicans have shown that they are adept at using social media used by youth. Certainly young people vote in smaller numbers but it would be unfortunate if the Republicans were able get them out to vote once they have been propagandized.


https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/09/17/more-americans-regularly-get-news-on-tiktok-especially-young-adults/

[angrychair]

50. They arent "opposing voices"

They are propaganda. That is the actual problem. We are spineless and dont just say it like it is.
I don't have a difference of opinion with them. They are straight up lying. They are unabashed voices for the Mango Mussolini administration.
HF actually wrote Project 2025 which is the literal blueprint being implemented as we speak.
People may not like some of the things said on MSNBC but they are not an overt propaganda machine for the DNC like fox is for Republicans.

Lastly I have no interest in being a Republican-lite political party so I could cater to the whims of racists and xenophobes.
You are saying a lot without any specifics. What specifically should we be doing in your opinion?

[Bettie]

62. THANK YOU

You were able to say what I wanted to say, but in a MUCH nicer and less likely to be hidden way

I too object to be shoved toward MY party being "Republican Lite".

[BlueKota]

74. I will say this!

We need more Jasmine Crockets, Tim Walzs, Mark Kellys, Eric Swallwells, Bernies and AOCs. People who are willing to verbally re-educate the American Public. Anyone who actually still believes that there are more than 2 or 3, Repulicons currently in office who care about upholding the Constitution or their constituents, or who have a conscience, or even a place to put one, is severly lacking in knowledge. That's magical, unrealistic thinking.

Like the old Cheech and Chong bit used to say, "if it looks like shit, if it smells like shit, if it tastes like shit, it is shit." More Democrats in leadership need to be willing to define the Republicans as the sack of shits they are, and quit believing that if you give them some consideration and benefit of the doubt, they will do the same. Anyone who still believes that, might as well invest all their money in a Trump enterprise, because they're just begging to be conned.

I want people who know how to expose a con in leadership. Not ones who just shrug and concede everything to the con artists.

[Conjuay]

76. WHAT WE ARE NOT OFFERING THE MAJORITY

IS FORTY YEARS OF LIES AND MISINFORMATION.

[vanessa_ca]

3. Shameful. I'm more firmly than ever with David Hogg now.

I just clicked on your link. The very next post made me ill

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Yup. This is going to further divide the party.

[FirstLight]

15. disgusting...

fuck this.

I guess it's a given that the BBB is gonna pass too now...thought we were peeling off rethugs, but no.

LIVID

[bdamomma]

25. What

the hell????? what the hell is wrong with Hakeem????

Not good. What is his reasoning????

[fujiyamasan]

71. Jeffries knows it would fail

Impeaching Trump , even on a partisan basis requires a majority. Democrats are simply not going to get any republicans to cross over to impeach. Even after January 6th, very few republicans crossed over in either the house or the senate.

Focus on 2026 and regaining the House. That’s what Jeffries is likely focused on. That’s probably also why he’s not interested in these kinds of distractions. He seems to have a single minded focus and that’s a good thing.

Besides Trump has the distinction of already being impeached TWICE. And he still won the last election.

[MayReasonRule]

84. Love Your Avator Picture! Tom Is Near And Dear To My Heart!

Now that I noticed your avatar I think I'm gonna' take a break, break a bud, crack a Juicifer IPA, take down my Ovation off the wall and belt out Fumblin' With The Blues!

Tom soothes my soul...

[vanessa_ca]

85. I love your handle, your spirit,, but more than that

Last edited Thu Jun 26, 2025, 12:41 PM - Edit history (1)

I love that you love Tom!

Tom soothes mine too. I think I'll take a break from all the madness tonight and spend some time with Tom too.

“There is no such thing as nonfiction. There is no such thing as truth. People who really know what happened aren't talking. And the people who don't have a clue, you can't shut them up.”
― Tom Waits


And I want to know
The same thing
Everyone wants to know
How's it going to end?
Drag your wagon and your plow
Over the bones of the dead
Out among the roses and the weeds
You can never go back
And the answer is no
And wishing for it only
Makes it bleed

[MayReasonRule]

86. Cheers!

[vanessa_ca]

5. 128 Dems voted against the unconstitutionality of bombing Iran without congress' authorization !

‪Andy Craig‬
‪@andycraig.bsky.social‬
· 11m

Al Green's impeachment resolution that 128 Dems voted against was a very straightforward, brief one about the unconstitutionality of bombing Iran without congressional authorization. Not all the umpteen dozen other things or debatable policy issues. Just that. That's what they sided with Trump on.



David Hogg is right. They need to be primaried.

[Mountainguy]

21. What was unconstitutional about it?

The AUMF gives President nearly unlimited power to use military force unilaterally.

And even without it, President can take military actions for 60 days without needing for congressional action.

[bdamomma]

27. But

Iran did not do anything to us??? This was all Netanyahu baiting the Felon thug. And the Felon took the bait!!!

[Mountainguy]

38. They've done plenty

To satisfy the AUMF.

Arming Houthis
Attacks in strait of Hormuz
Arming Iraqi rebels

Just to name a few.

[Ping Tung]

8. "Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson

[Nanjeanne]

9. 79 Democrats with guts to stand up for democracy. Shame on the 128. Symbolic or not it's a symbol

that our laws matter, that Congress matters and our Reps should be willing to show that courage.

[Initech]

42. But then what? It fails in the Senate?

Yes, Trump needs to be removed for this, and so do his goons. We apparently cannot trust the law to do the right thing. Something has to give.

[Nanjeanne]

63. Yes it fails in the Senate. So we should only stand up for our beliefs if we are sure it will pass the Senate? I prefe

Democrats having guts and courage to make a stand even if it fails. If every Dem had voted to impeach - it would be news - and people would see that - and that encourages people and makes them feel empowered. I absolutely hate the Democratic idea that standing up for what is right should only be done "if it matters". I think standing up for democracy in potent and even symbolic ways matters.

[Initech]

67. True, I want to see Democrats united in stopping this madness.

This vote today doesn't send that message. In fact, I bet Fox will have a field day with this. Once again, the orange fuckhead gets unlimited get out of jail free cards.

[Nanjeanne]

73. Well let's agree to disagree. And I don't give a shit what Fox says ever.

[cadoman]

66. there is perhaps some concern that when the impeachment siren is ringing 24x7...

...that the concept of impeachment becomes meaningless, and the public becomes inured to it.

[FBaggins]

69. That's certainly part of it - but the substance of the resolution is pretty nutty on its own

There are tons of valid reasons why Democrats should want to remove Trump. But this one? He bombed another country without Congress declaring war? Does he think that voters can't remember the scores of times that happened in recent decades without anyone bringing up impeachment?

[cadoman]

70. agree and also we'd be going up against AIPAC on this one

It'd be like running a marathon in snow shoes. Like you say, the inconsistent historic precedent would boomerang so fast it'd knock us out.

This is the awful consequence of Congress steadily offloading their war powers to the executive for decades.

[Silent Type]

10. Glad to see. trump is a yuge POS and worse, but these kind of resolutions don't help. I do like Green though.

[SSJVegeta]

11. Well hey: 79 is a good start.

[indusurb]

12. And Democrats are wondering why people are abandoning the party

The party isn't even putting up a pretense of resistance, opposition or fighting back. Yes, this was never going to pass, but it would have at least shown that the fighting spirit wasn't dead, and put Trump on notice about the 2026 elections.

Amazing how when the 'Pugs are in the minority they can still get shit done and put up a stiff resistance that gums up the works. When Dems are in the minority it seems they just roll over and let the nightmare continue.

[stillcool]

16. could someone explain ?

Rep. Al Green invoked Rule IX to force every single Representative to vote.

House leadership opted to vote not on the articles themselves, but on a motion to table the Resolution, which further delays impeachment proceedings.

Tabling this means that no impeachment will happen right now.

What does this mean? Congressional leadership has immediately moved to obstruct impeachment proceedings, but Congress isn’t following in lock step.

The motion to table impeachment passed with 344 yea votes.

But 79 members of Congress voted no! Those 79 votes want the Articles to be discussed.

[Wiz Imp]

46. It means that the characterizations of the bill/vote here are misleading.

Nobody voted against impeachment because the impeachment resolution never got a vote. The vote was to "table" the motion which effectively means to block it from being debated and voted on at the present time. Most Democrats probably voted to table because they know it is currently a waste of time. Notice, even Republican Thomas Massie who has explicitly called Trump's actions illegal voted to table also. Even if all Democrats had voted against tabling, the resolution would have still been tabled. So what is the point. Almost All Republicans are already on record (except Massie) as approving anything Trump wants to do, so getting them to vote "on the record" accomplishes nothing. I believe they will concentrate on trying to pass the Massie-Khanna bill. A dozen House Democrats, who are also veterans, announced support Monday for that war powers resolution that would bar the U.S. from intervening in the Middle East conflict any further.

[stillcool]

49. ah! Thank you so much

knew there was more to it than 'spineless' Democrats in need of being primaried.

[Kaleva]

32. Why aren't you leaving over this?

As far as I know, not a single DUer has declared they are leaving because of this or even contemplating leaving the Party.

[indusurb]

40. Never was a member of the party

I'm a liberal, progressive, left winger, whatever you want to call it. I can't leave something that I never joined.

I vote for, and support the party in most things, but this is because they are the most viable group in politics that support my political philosophy. But I don't always agree with them or their actions, and I feel that they could be so much more if they would just listen to, and fight for the people of this country,

[Kaleva]

53. Ok. Thanks for your articulate response!

There’s nothing you said that I could argue with.

[SSJVegeta]

13. If all Dems and NVs voted yes, it wouldve been tied

...as if that matters

[Celerity]

17. You mean voted Nay, not Yea. It was a motion to table.

Nay was the anti-Trump stance.

[SSJVegeta]

19. Ah. Thank you!!

Yeah thats what I meant. Sorry Im tired 😴

[Celerity]

20. All good

[dweller]

18. ah c'mon

The Pisswig would have yelled at them and called them ugly names on Troot soshul … dodged that rubber bullet




✌🏻

[WarGamer]

22. Purely performative legislation...

No different than the GOP House voting to defund the ACA 141 times.

[Oopsie Daisy]

23. This was not a serious effort. It was performative and grandstanding and would GO NOWHERE.

It was little more than giving Trump the middle finger in a public way. Satisfying for some, but ultimately it makes no difference one way or the other. --- Except for the fact that people like Hogg and his admirers will use this as a way to be even more divisive and to raise money for his PAC and his paycheck. Nice work if you can get it, eh?

[TacosUberAlles]

30. If that's the case

then why did so many vote against it? I mean if it won't go anywhere then wtf why not vote for it? Seems logical.

[MayReasonRule]

31. I Agree

[Kaleva]

34. Either action would be a logical one to take.

[Oopsie Daisy]

43. To demonstrate that they live in the real world and that they do not support grandstanding performances *

* and I think that's a pretty good reason. This actually seems more "logical" than encouraging or endorsing things like this.

[TacosUberAlles]

48. Hmmmm I understand your point

I guess I just see it as the opposite.
One of the biggest problems according to people is that Democrats have no clear messaging. I'd like to think that something like this send the opposite sort of message that needs to be sent. What good comes out of 129 people doing this?

[Oopsie Daisy]

56. Which people? Who is saying this? What are they expecting? Daily rants that go nowhere?

Photo ops and crying and finger wagging that make Democrats look weak, helpless and disorganized? It's a lie to say that the Democrats have "no clear message"... People who say such things are actually saying "Democrats won't follow me into this rabbit hole of magic where if we just wish hard enough, it will happen. Instead, I hope that people just listen to what Democrats ARE saying, and stop IGNORING the message because it's different from the impossible fantasy message that some folks believe to be the only acceptable message.

It's all find and good for our Representatives to say "We're mad as hell and we're not gonna take it anymore!" but then the follow up question from the public is "Great! So what are you going to DO about it?" --- And "why aren't you doing anything?" Well, one just needs to look at the fact that the Republicans have the majority in both houses of congress and the Democrats have NO POWER.

But these types of theatrics do nothing to show that Democrats actually understand how government works. The "good that comes of it" is that they help to show that most Democrats are reasonable and that they know we're not the majority and they know we're not in charge. The good that comes of it is that hopefully it will put an END to this type of useless performative theatrics. Unless and until we gain the majority, these votes mean NOTHING except to remind everyone how desperate and powerless we are. That's not a good look.

True leadership transcends those types of theatrics. Authentic leadership is demonstrated through composure, reason, and a steadfast commitment to progress. The substance of one's actions speaks volumes louder than any theatrical displays. Let's raise the bar and focus on what truly moves us forward. Let's put our efforts toward what's actually possible... rather than investing time and money and political capital in following some fantasy that will never happen.

[TacosUberAlles]

81. Ya, we are definitely opposite on this

Good morning :waves:
Thank you very much for the well thought out response. Great reply! 😃

I understand your frustration with what you see as performative theatrics, & I agree that substance & effective action are crucial. However, I don't think we should underestimate the importance of how our party communicates their message & engage with the public. There's been numerous polls conducted that say the messaging of our party is not as good as it could be & needs to be better. I agree with that, it needs to be. We can't afford to be quiet on things because that comes across as apathy. We need more Jasmine Crockett's & AOC's who go for the jugular & are loud.

I fail to see or understand how what I'm saying is a "bad" thing. Visibility is good is it not?

While I agree that simply "crying and finger-wagging" is ineffective, I disagree that being loud and visible is inherently a waste of time. In fact, it's essential for several reasons beginning with setting the narrative itself; silence allows for fascists to set the narrative & also control that very narrative. We need to be actively & vocally presenting a vision to voters. Please understand I'm not saying we aren't but a whole lot of people definitely believe that's a thing. I do believe that needs to be better without any question because otherwise it allows Republican trash people to frame our party in a bad negative light. Being visible, even when not in power, ensures that Democratic ideas are part of the conversation.

Another positive aspect of this is allows us to gain new voters.
Case in point - Bernie Sanders.
Now I know there's people who dislike Bernie for whatever reasons but we need to put that aside & look at things through a lens of clarity without bias. When Bernie entered the race in 2015 to face the most famous woman in the world, Hillary Clinton, he had less than 2% name recognition. Nobody knew who he was at all except a few folks who were very involved in politics & were hardcore. 98% of voters had no idea about him. His strategy of being loud, in front of everything & anywhere, boisterous, & talking policy which really helps people gained him a near literal army of supporters including a massive amount of young voters, the people who carried Mumdani to victory in NYC last night in the primary.

Effective messaging though isn't just about conveying policy details; it's about inspiring & mobilizing voters. People need to feel a sense of urgency, hope, and connection to the values of our party.

I hope this helps to understand my position & thoughts on things better XD

[kerry-is-my-prez]

33. Yes. Our money, time, an energy could be better spent elsewhere.

You can’t impeach him when the house and the senate are Republican.

[Silver Gaia]

37. I agree that it would've been a waste of time.

Been there, done that. Symbolic only. And even if successful, it would not actually help in the ways we need help.. Would we really be any better off with Vance in charge? Same ideology but younger and ever so slightly smarter... how is that better? So impeach him and who do we get? Preacher Johnson? None of that truly helps us, as I see it. Our efforts need to be focused elsewhere.

[ecstatic]

54. we want performances! Is that so bad?

We want to feel as though someone is at least trying. trump is fighting with everything he has to overturn our country and breaking the law left and right to do so--I can't help but wonder--if even a fraction of the same effort took place on our end back when Roe was overturned and back when they were going back and forth on whether or not to prosecute trump---where would we be right now?

[Oopsie Daisy]

57. Yes.

True leadership transcends those types of theatrics. Authentic leadership is demonstrated through composure, reason, and a steadfast commitment to progress. The substance of one's actions speaks volumes louder than any theatrical displays. Let's raise the bar and focus on what truly moves us forward. Let's focus on what we CAN do and what we CAN accomplish rather than wasting time, money and political capital on things like this.

[ecstatic]

58. I respectfully disagree. The key to success will be: great leadership, great communication, and yes, great theatrics.

Unfortunately, they're failing at all 3.

[Oopsie Daisy]

61. I prefer great accomplishments rather than dramatic nothings.

I guess I just have higher standards.

[orangecrush]

29. What are their names?

[betsuni]

44. As always, knee-jerk assumption of bad intentions and never ever ever giving Democrats the benefit of the doubt.

Later find out what really happened, erase knee-jerk bashing from memory until five minutes later when a new opportunity to get worked up and angry at Democrats for nothing presents itself.

[purple_haze]

47. Every single vote in Congress starts with the question

"What's in it for me?"

[Lovie777]

51. It's not dividing the Democrats................

it's bringing us together. It's gonna a fight, but done right, maybe Democracy will remain.

[everyonematters]

52. People don't care about the House impeaching Trump. They want to be able to afford their groceries.

[ecstatic]

55. the base cares

Do we not matter?

[Bettie]

64. No, I don't think we do

we're here to vote for them in elections, give money, and never, ever expect results. Sound great, doesn't it?

And the consultants get tons of cash and say "see, you need to move toward the right, be MAGAt-lite, it'll be great".

[DFW]

59. When there is a ghost of a chance of conviction in the Senate and removal from office

THEN people will care a lot. Until then, everyone knows that the reasons are other than a serious effort at removal from office. The last time that THAT was remotely possible was in the summer of 1974. It was, in fact, so likely then, that the sitting president (Nixon) resigned because the Senate Republicans told him he would not survive the vote to convict and remove.

[NJCher]

60. OP, per your post

in which you say, "This is accurate???", I think you should change your subject line. You suspected when you wrote the post that there's more to it than what meet the eye, and through some discussion and explanation, we see that is the case.

I think possibly a good discussion thread could be held on this topic, if anyone cares to assess the situation and phrase it on a different angle.

[FBaggins]

65. They didn't really vote against impeaching Trump

They voted to not even allow the resolution to be debated, voted on, or even refered to a committee for consideration.

We don't know if even the 79 nays would have actually voted for the resolution... all they said was that they were willing for it to come to a vote.

[NJCher]

72. How did your rep vote?

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025175

[BlueKota]

75. The thing who represents the area I live

is a trump ass 💋repug, so I don't even need to look at the roll call to know how she voted.

I refuse to call her my representative. The only thing she represents in my opinion is everything I loathe, and consider a cause of embarrassment to not only my area, the state, and the country, but the entire human race.

[NJCher]

80. I live in a blue area

but what you say is what I say about this USA government in general, with the exception of people like Bernie, AOC, etc. I wonder if I will ever find representation in my lifetime.

[kentuck]

83. Many Democrats do not play "politics" well..

They substitute emotions.