Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Democratic Primaries

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

louis c

(8,652 posts)
Sat Apr 20, 2019, 05:11 PM Apr 2019

A Question for Elizabeth Warren... [View all]

...since we all know that Impeachment in the House and Conviction in the Senate is more of a political action than a judicial one. And, knowing that we need only a majority in the House, but two thirds in the Senate. And since Senator Warren resides in the Senate, I wonder if the good Senator can list how many Republican Senators she has to sign on to Conviction, knowing what we know now.

As Sen. Warren knows, we need 67 Senators. Asuming (and let me tell you that that's a shaky assumption) that every Democratic Senator votes for Conviction, we need 20 Republicans.

There is a built in excuse for Republican Senators to vote to acquit. That excuse is the proximity to the General Election. By the time we reach the Senate we will have needed months and months of court wrangling over subpoenas. We will need weeks and weeks of hearings in the House. So, when the Senate is ready to vote I anticipate that will be sometime in October or November of this year. We would have already had 3 or 4 Democratic debates and the Iowa Caucuses will by just a few months away. The Republican cry will be "let the people decide." We will certainly not get to 67 votes and the people will be tired of the impeachment spectacle. This issue of presidential corruption, which is a winner for Democrats, will be have outlived its political shelf life.

Instead, let's have oversight hearings. Let's pass legislation in the House to establish our issues for 2020. I like a government option for health care, so you can keep your current insurance or buy into a Medicare like government plan. Let's vote on keeping guns away from people on a terrorist watch list. Let the Republicans in the Senate kill those bills, so we can make vorting Democratic in the election a major issue.

We can still call in Barr, Mueller, McGann, Donnie Jr. (let him take the 5th). But let's not call it Impeachment, just oversight.

So, to my original question, Senator Warren, how many Republican Senators will support Conviction and will every Democratic Senator vote that way?

If you can't name at least 5 Republican Senators for Conviction, than your call for Impeachment, which is a political solution, is just so much grandstanding for the Democratic base that does not, yet, reflect the majority of Americans: let alone two thirds of the public, which is what it took in public polling to convince Republican Senators to support Conviction and Nixon to resign in 1974.

There may or may not be an Impeachment vote. But, rest assured, there will be an election in November 2020.

Every Democrat wants to remove Trump from office. We all can agree on that. So, let's look at the options. Is it more likely that we can obtain 270 electoral votes for the Democratic nominee in November 2020, or garnering 67 Senators for Trump's conviction in November 2019?

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
57 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Or, let's force a vote and see where your Senator running for re-election stands on the rule of law PeeJ52 Apr 2019 #1
There are no more than 2 or 3 Republicans at risk louis c Apr 2019 #2
Don't you think there would be more Republicans at risk if people saw their Senator would not... PeeJ52 Apr 2019 #4
Not in the states I listed here and where the Senator is in his term of office. louis c Apr 2019 #6
there are more than that, especially if certain people run Celerity Apr 2019 #29
there best shot at losing those seats is to vote for conviction louis c Apr 2019 #33
Its the right thing to do JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #3
Tell'em Elizabeth! PeeJ52 Apr 2019 #5
How many virtuos arguments have been made at the Supreme Court in the past 4 years... louis c Apr 2019 #7
True JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #10
Please click on this link and tell me who the 67 votes are louis c Apr 2019 #11
I dont care JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #12
Well, that's where we differ. I do care. louis c Apr 2019 #14
Im also JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #16
Trying and failing certainly doesn't strengthen our hand louis c Apr 2019 #18
None taken JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #20
Just a little background, then, on me... louis c Apr 2019 #25
Joe Biden JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #27
Until you address Russia, you will not weaken the enemy. delisen Apr 2019 #54
Count Votes and Win Elections louis c Apr 2019 #8
I agree with you. The House has a constitutional duty to impeach. Demit Apr 2019 #9
Very good point! Wish I had made it... CTyankee Apr 2019 #41
No, it doesn't. LongtimeAZDem Apr 2019 #46
I took an oath JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #13
God Bless You. louis c Apr 2019 #15
We wonder where we get a artislife Apr 2019 #17
Let's try to win an election, rather than to make a point. louis c Apr 2019 #19
Using this justification JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #22
or, you can get the votes from somwhere else and not be held hostage. louis c Apr 2019 #26
No to the "secondary to your cause" question artislife Apr 2019 #24
Good. Go out and get me 67 Senators who agree with you... louis c Apr 2019 #34
Somehow I am the lynchpin to this mess artislife Apr 2019 #36
You are wrong... louis c Apr 2019 #42
+∞ LongtimeAZDem Apr 2019 #43
What does +00 mean? louis c Apr 2019 #44
That's "plus infinity" LongtimeAZDem Apr 2019 #45
OK. Thanks. louis c Apr 2019 #47
I agree with you 100%, and I'll be quoting your "three word summary" in the future LongtimeAZDem Apr 2019 #48
Congress is not obligated in any way; it is solely the discretion of the House LongtimeAZDem Apr 2019 #21
This is not Bill Clinton JennyMominFL Apr 2019 #23
I remember watching the watergate hearings against Nixon, I also remember the damage it did to him & yaesu Apr 2019 #28
You can have the hearings without calling it impeachment. louis c Apr 2019 #31
the powers of oversight are very limited yaesu Apr 2019 #49
There are not even... Mike Nelson Apr 2019 #30
I think it's a bit early to start counting votes Bradshaw3 Apr 2019 #32
we can walk and chew gum at the same time shanny Apr 2019 #35
As long as we stay focused on getting Trump out of office... louis c Apr 2019 #37
This isn't a criminal case, and tRump isn't the only problem. shanny Apr 2019 #38
We can do that with impeachment. Oversight accomplishes that... louis c Apr 2019 #39
Also, what put these people in a "position to do it" was losing an election louis c Apr 2019 #40
Not "an" election. Many elections. And why is that, exactly? shanny Apr 2019 #50
Are you sure that Mueller will back us up if and when he testifies? louis c Apr 2019 #55
who the eff cares about what Mueller says, personally? shanny Apr 2019 #56
Try moving forward with affirmative public opinion and 67 Senators without Mueller. louis c Apr 2019 #57
I tend to agree with you. David__77 Apr 2019 #51
It's a political decision either way SHRED Apr 2019 #52
good points-but Russia is still corrupting our vote delisen Apr 2019 #53
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»A Question for Elizabeth ...»Reply #0