HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Sounds like the Dems migh...

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 10:57 PM

 

Sounds like the Dems might be Weak on Impeachment?

18 replies, 1923 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sounds like the Dems might be Weak on Impeachment? (Original post)
tomhagen Dec 2017 OP
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2017 #1
George II Dec 2017 #2
Snoopy 7 Dec 2017 #7
George II Dec 2017 #8
KPN Dec 2017 #11
lapucelle Dec 2017 #13
KPN Dec 2017 #15
lapucelle Dec 2017 #12
KPN Dec 2017 #16
NNadir Dec 2017 #3
Cicada Dec 2017 #4
Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2017 #5
lapucelle Dec 2017 #14
Post removed Dec 2017 #6
jimlup Dec 2017 #9
RussBLib Dec 2017 #10
rwsanders Dec 2017 #17
mcar Dec 2017 #18

Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 11:00 PM

1. Timing is everything.

It makes sense to wait until Mueller's investigation totally has the goods on him. That's how they got Nixon - they issued articles of impeachment based on the crimes uncovered by the special counsel investigation -
so they didn't even have to impeach him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 11:13 PM

2. Gosh, Cenk bashing Democrats. What a surprise!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 08:16 AM

7. Jenc is right

For proof letís look at what the new dnc/dcc rules for 2018, and future, if you need their financial help.

1- you canít criticize your democratic opposition, blue dog democrats, and if you do they will pull your financial backing. But, the blue dog democrats can criticize their democratic opponents all they want since they already have money and donít need dnc/dcc money

2- dnc/dcc also stipulates that 75% of what they give you has to be spent on TV, even though social media is much cheaper and a lot more effective, therefore the corporate media gets the money instead of the more progressive social media.

The dnc/dcc has decided, like the republicans, they want mana over party so they are going to play ball with the fatcats that will make them rich. People use to say they got into politics to help the people. Now they spend millions to get into an office that pays thousands. Because they know once the fatcats get you in you will get paid to do their bidding.
Donít get me wrong there are great dems in office itís just that they are few and donít have power in the democratic party. Those who hold the reign right now are the corporate blue dogs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snoopy 7 (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 08:54 AM

8. Where are these "new rules" you're talking about?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 12:21 PM

11. Here. This doesn't prove anything definitively but does give the DCCC

wiggle room to withhold funding based on "shared values", focusing on "holding Republicans accountable", and not engaging "in tactics that do harm to our chances of winning a General
Election".

Given the stuff that has been perceived to occur in the past, I can see how this agreement template might cause some concerns regarding things like discouraging debate within the party re: values, giving candidates who have and take super PAC backing an edge over grassroot campaigns via the "no "tactics that do harm" clause, etc.; super-PACS can engage in those tactics directly while candidates can't.

Again, nothing definitive, but cause for concern among progressives who eschew corporate and Wall Street campaign contributions. Question is: are the concerns legitimate? I'm inclined to say let's not over-react to this stuff, but the party needs to be aware of the potential concern.

[link:https://mic.com/articles/186648/is-the-democratic-congressional-campaign-committee-stifling-dissent-within-the-party#.Rm29QX3jO|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 06:06 PM

13. I think it's good policy to withhold funding

from candidates who won't "agree not to engage in tactics that do harm to our chances of winning a General
Election."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 08:27 PM

15. Well, yeah. But the question is really

WHAT causes harm to our chances of winning the GE, and WHO decides that.

There's a lot of gray area.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snoopy 7 (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 06:00 PM

12. I can't find the part

where the DCCC "stipulates that 75% of what they give you has to be spent on TV"

Here's what the document actually says:

The Candidate agrees to have a campaign budget completed six months prior to their primary
and to focus on preserving at least 75% of funds raised for paid communications.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #12)


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 12:53 AM

3. I'm sure when Jill Stein and her running mate Susan Sarandon are elected...

...they'll get it done.

Why doesn't this asshole Cenk stick to being a member of the Matt Lauer misogyny club?

What an ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 02:23 AM

4. President Trump drives Dems to polls, Pence less so

Of course Trump May start wwiii. Or jail the Pope or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 05:10 AM

5. If this is Cenk, please DO NOT DIVIDE Democrats with his garbage.

He did it during the election too.

I'm not watching this because another post title mentioned this is by Cenk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 06:24 PM

14. He claims to have a source who leaked the document to him.

I wonder who that could be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 10:17 AM

9. Well he's right

but the case may at some point soon become overwhelming

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 12:06 PM

10. Dems made a huge mistake by not attempting to impeach Bush II

How many times have I heard from the Dems: "We want to look forward and not backward."

And then the GOP gets back into office and misbehaves even worse than before.

Oops, I said something not totally flattering to the Dems. Does this mean that my post will be removed and I could be banned from the site?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RussBLib (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 27, 2017, 09:37 PM

17. Even if it had to be done after he was out of office

People forget that there was a democratic majority for the first 2 years of Obamas presidency and they sat on their hands because there wasn't a republican majority in the house or senate to blame for getting nothing done.
So I'll go with you I guess. Especially if a certain someone or 2 finds our posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomhagen (Original post)

Thu Dec 28, 2017, 09:19 AM

18. I need to get this straight

There was a thread yesterday saying Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein were not in favor of impeachment at this time. They primarily got praise in the thread for being smart and strategic.

A few days earlier,and now here, are threads roundly criticizing Dems for the same stance.

Can you explain? Seems like quite a double standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread