IMPEACHMENT WATCH 2019-2020 - flow of data

If there are 35 GOP Senators who see Trump as Blotus then I suppose the Aye's will have it. Probably unlikely.

 

I am guessing many do not even know just what impeachment means. (A large number of Americans probably confuse it with actual removal from office.)

And the poll asks only about an impeachment "nquiry."

At any rate, Democrats and Democratic-leaning "independents" are likely to jump on the impeachment bandwagon, now that it is no longer politically incorrect to do so...

 

538 is tracking both questions, but you are right that there is probably more than one person who does not understand impeachment.

As for the Democrat and independent note, yes, the data reflects that independents have seen the biggest jump in support, followed closely by Democrats.

But an interesting point to note is that Republicans have seen the most acceleration in their support over the last week.

 

I am thinking to myself that when this all began, pollsters were not considering that it would get this far and so many of them were squarely behind the 8-ball (or in front of it, depending on your point of view) when they began formulating questions. Most pollsters are moving to more refined questions, I see, because guaranteed, this issue is going to get polled a huge amount over the time-span of the official inquiry itself.

So, putting the sudden desire for political correctness (LOL, LOL, LOL) on the part of extreme rightists, who, upon seeing that this whole thing is about to bite the 45th POTUS squarely in the ass, aside, it should be apparent that a YES for an inquiry is not necessarily a YES vote when it comes to a vote on the Articles of Impeachment, though it is a more than safe bet that more than 95% of all DEMS who have signed onto an inquiry are planning to vote YES for the Articles of Impeachment, since they (and we) were able to quite literally watch the 45th President, live on TV, commit yet another impeachable offense.

These DEMS are also smart enough to know that a 'quid pro quo' (a legal term from the sub-rubrik of bribery) is not necessary for a criminal act to occur or to charge someone with criminal conduct. It would not have mattered whether or not Trump deliberately (and without informing Congress) withheld funds for Ukraine in order to bend Zelensky to his will; the moment he asked for Zelenski to come up with dirt on Biden, mentioning "Joe Biden" by name, that moment alone is eminently impeachable. It is a clear violation of election laws, it is a clear-cut case of Conspiracy against the United States of America and an even clearer dereliction of duty - and therefore a violation of his oath of office - on the part of the President. The fact that he indeed had a quid pro quo simply makes it a double criminal act which then snowballed into a multiple-criminal act, as often happens with mobsters and other such hardened criminals. Then, Trump said it again, live on TV- that the Ukraine should look for dirt on Joe Biden - and included China in the mix. That makes it, right then and there, a ,multiple- crime.

So, just from the telephone call on July 25th (of which 20 minutes are evidently missing in the transcript) FIVE crimes are immediately evident:

Extortion and Bribery (withholding of funds already allocated for Ukraine, releasing them as soon as Ukraine acceded to investigating Biden)
Breach of election law (taking a thing of value from a foreign power in order to influence a coming election)
Consipiracy against the USA (failure to report the criminal activity with a foreign power to the FBI immediately after the fact)
Cover-up (moving the data to a secured server with multiple-passwords so that the public would never know about the conversation).

And these five, easy to see with the naked-eye, without the need for a law degree, crimes are JUST FROM ONE 30-minute telephone call.

And then there is issue of Trump's taxes.
And then there is the issue of emoluments.
And then, and this is paramount, there is the issue of TEN acribically documented cases of deliberate Obstruction of Justice during the Mueller Probe.
And then there is the issue of multiple examples of Obstruction of Justice going on right here and right now.

This is the reason why Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi has farmed the impeachment-inquiry work out to 6 committees, because there are so many crimes to investigate, one committee alone will not suffice. Also, the multiple crimes and raw abuses of power often overlap the work between those committees. And, unlike the Republicans, who simply picked whomever has a pulse and can bray loudly, to sit on committees, the DEMS have selected people with certain areas of expertise to sit on those committees.

Hope that helped.

 

Indeed.

30% among self-identified Conservatives, 18% among self-identified Republicans. Those are hardly numbers that a sitting Republican President, under fire for suspected (and in 5 cases, easy to see) criminal activities had boast about. Not to mention the fact that if you watch the partisan IDs in poll after poll after poll, Trump's so-called "base" is shrinking.

95% approval among only 24% of voters is a far cry from 94% approval from 34% or voters, for instance.

 

I saw a comment from 538 that noted, for the purposes of their tracker, that when a pollster asks both questions, they decided to average the responses before adding to the tracker.

The polls that I have seen tend to show a fairly small (5-7%) difference between support for the inquiry and support for the impeachment and removal.

 

In the OP, I wrote the following:

So, putting Justin Amash aside, and then Mark Amodei (NV), there is not John Shimkus (IL-15), who is retiring:

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/10/john-shimkus-support-trump-syria-044006

Why is this important?

First, see the quoted content from my OP. Shimkus won re-election in IL-15 in 2018 by +41.86% (+42), and that in the middle of a large D-wave, so it's fair to say that his seat is a safe seat. He won re-election to his seat in 2016 by +49.85% (+49). Interestingly enough, only 4 people (2D, 2R) have entered the primary race for 2020.



Second, Shimkus was one of Trump's staunchest supporters early on. His turnaround is big stuff. He has not declared for impeachment proceedings, but alone the withdrawal of his support is a strong enough sign that real cracks are appearing in the GOP.

Lynn Cheney (R-WY-AL), the daughter of former VP Dick Cheney, came out swinging against Trump on twitter, but because Trump has always dissed the Bush 43 / Cheney administration, I doubt that this bothers the BLOTUS very much.

-Stat

 

NY Rep Nita Lowey announced that she is not going to run again given that this is the first time she has faced a Dem Primary challenger. While she did end up on the impeachment inquiry bandwagon she only did so AFTER the Dem primary challenge came up. It is still a safe Dem seat in the House so it won't change the overall total it will probably end up strengthening the Progressive wing while weakening the Establishment wing.

 

I was going to write about her later. She is 82 going on 83 and there were signs already last year that her health is not good. So, the fact that she is retiring doesn't surprise me at all. Regardless of their party, when people have served this long and gotten this old and make the decision that it's time to go---- I can respect this.

Currently, there are 20 members of congress who will have served 30 years or longer come January 2021. Add the year 1992 to that and the total number jumps to 33:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Max3IUjzYnh1WufWPfeE4utJdcAC3mUU/view?usp=sharing



Assuming a candidate was elected at an age not younger than 30 and maybe not older than 40, then we are looking at a sage group of people between 60-90 years of age. I expect more retirements from people of both parties from the classes of 1992 back to the class of 1973, regardless of the ongoing chaos and turmoil over Trump. We are a nation of 300 million people, there are plenty of people who can ably do the job of representing their fellow Americans.

 

I did not know about her health so I assumed it was because of the primary challenge. Presumably not all of those House seats are Dems and presumably not all of them are going to be retiring but it does show that there are many "career" politicians.

Yes, there are plenty of people capable of doing the job and having fresh ideas helps to eliminate the stagnation that comes with believing that everything always stays the same when it doesn't.

Back in the early 2000's the Dems believed that they needed to move to the right in order to win elections. That fallacy was exposed in 2018 and moving back to the left is what We the People want and need. However the old guard Establishment is still stuck on the fallacy that they need to appeal to disaffected Republicans instead of representing Dems on the left.

Hopefully 2020 will move the party further to the left and we can get away from the odious "golden rule" where "whomever has the gold makes the rules".

 

I believe this is a true mistake on Nate Silver's part. I have no idea why the hell he is doing that, but it makes no sense.
An impeachment process is a three pronged process up to the removal (or acquittal) of a public official:

-Inquiry
-Vote to impeach in the HOR
-Trial in the Senate

It is eminently justifiable that pollsters are now asking multiple questions. In fact, if they don't want to get caught behind the 8-ball once again, they should already be asking this third and critical question:

"Should the House of Representatives vote to impeach President Trump, do you believe that that US-Senate, upon conclusion of it's constitutionally mandated trial, should find him guilty and remove him from office, or acquit him?"

 

Here we do not agree completely with each other, which is a beautiful thing.

I firmly believe that every party needs a certain percentage of moderates (feel free to read that as: Centrists), who hold the party to a stable footing.

We are already seeing that the GOP has careened completely off the cliff and part of the reason for that is that almost total lack of any moderates at all within their once-great party.

We cannot allow this to also happen to the Democratic Party.

Unlike the Trumpsuckers of the world who worship their man-god, the BLOTUS, I feel no compunction to blindly follow any one certain Democrat. This is what makes the Democratic Party the far better party: the fact that inner disputes can be discussed rationally and in the open, unlike the Republican pols, who act like little ******* and run and hide.

I am still very dismayed at Ilhan Omar (D-MN-05), who is doubtless an anti-semite, and I personally would prefer to see someone else representing her District. Just because she is young, attractive and has a compelling story as a Somalian refugee does not excuse many of the things she has said. Unlike OAC (NY-14), who has criticized Israel in a factual way without being anti-semitic, some of the things that Omar has said really are truly ugly and just because the GOP has a good number of assholians and anti-semites and fascists and people who exhibit nasty tribal, racist/bigoted tendencies (see: Steve King, IA-04) doesn't meant that we should give anyone on the Democratic Party a free pass just because the Republicans are far worse in this respect. I would very much like to see Omar get primaried, lose the primary and be replaced by a strong Democrat who is not hateful as she is.

So, no, I don't agree with you that the Democratic Party must become even more Progressive. In fact, I think that the balance at current is pretty good. Even Collin Peterson, arguably the most Centrist Democrat in the Party at current, even though he does not support impeachment, also has a right to be there because his district is cut more this way to begin with and what is representation "bitte schön" if we are not actually representing what people (meaning, the majority of people in each CD) think, believe and want?

But, your point makes an even stronger and eminently reasonable argument that the House should be expanded from 435 to at least 1,000 seats. This is a point that Larry Sabato made in his 2007 book about the Constitution, a book I have on my nightstand.

It was great to hear from you, as always.

 

I have no problem at all with your disagreeing with me because I am not a Dem but an Independent.

Yes, there are certainly some Dem representatives that are less worthy than others but it is inevitable that during any transition period like now there are going to be outliers who get into office and who say stupid things. I have lost count of them in the GOP but for every Omar there are at least 10 on the right who are just as bad or worse. That does not excuse her nor justify her comments it is just a problem that comes with transitioning.

The GOP turned HARD RIGHT and then ACCELERATED to the EXTREME right much to the detriment of the party and the nation as a whole. In the process it abandoned a great many previously loyal MODERATE members of the party who now call themselves Independents. They still vote for the GOP but do not support the party by being counted as members. It gives them the breathing space they need to make legitimate criticisms although it is hard to hear them since they are usually drowned out by the noise from the BLOTUS supporters. FTR some of these former GOP members can be found on this forum with insightful comments.

Needless to say this process of the GOP shedding moderates and the DP shifting to the right to appeal to former GOP moderates has resulted in the DP becoming ensnared in the same Wall Street Casino Bosses nefarious fiscal malfeasance agenda. This is what is now known as the Dem Establishment and they are doing the bidding of their Wall Street Casino Lords and Masters to the detriment of We the People.

This is UNACCEPTABLE and the DP must CEASE and DESIST from doing their bidding. On this point I will not move because it is the root of all that is evil in our political system. Bernie and I see eye to eye on this point and he is absolutely correct.

So the Dems are now at a crossroads where the Establishment is afraid of losing their grip on power and the Progressives are highly motivated to get the party back on the left where it belongs. Needless to say this causes conflict WITHIN the party since these agendas do not mix well and the Wall Street Casino Bosses are NOT happy about what is happening since they are smart enough to know that GOP is heading for an implosion which will derail their agenda in that party too.

We are going to see this strife and turmoil within the Dems continuing for the next couple of election cycles as the Establishment ages out and the Progressives learn how to seize and wield the reins of power for themselves. Yes, they will make mistakes but that it par for the course and we have survived the majority of the mistakes made by the GOP.

By the time this all shakes out we will have a different America and if Bernie is right it will be more aligned with We the People and less aligned with the Wall Street Casino Bosses.

How long it will take remains to be seen but this change is inevitable and if it is prevented from happening at the ballot box that will incur far more dire consequences. My faith in We the People to make these changes peacefully remains strong and I would prefer that they happen sooner rather than later but they will happen.

Good to have you back in the saddle.

 

There are a couple of competing issues here. The first is that pollsters are asking the questions in alot of non uniformed manners. The second is that the process is more complex than many Americans know, so there will be some noise inherent to the confusion. And then against both of those points, 538 still wants to create a fairly clean and easy to follow graph.

 

True, but sometimes, life is imo more than just one graph.

 

I've created a completely separate thread about 25 categories of polling sub-data on impeachment (and/or removal), here:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...r-acquittal-polling-polling-internals.562870/

Will be updating very often.

 

People are so gullible. There isn't an impeachment ANYTHING going on. Nobody can even come up with "an impeachable offense." This is a dressed-up, hyped-up fake investigation of another nothingburger timed to save face after the Mueller debacle.

 

What is "HARD RIGHT" and "EXTREME right"? This is nonsense.

 

Yeah, you nailed it. There is no impeachment. This whole thing is a hoax and a partisan hack job. It's an act of desperation by the left because they know they have no candidate who can compete with Trump in 2020. The whistleblower lawyer is nothing but a democratic activist and the second whistleblower has known connections with Joe Biden. Who, as we know by now, is corrupt to the core. People like shifty Schiff and Nancy Pelosi HATE this nation they HATE our religious history and they HATE America. These are the real people who should be impeached. There is no way this is going to work out in the democrats favor. No way possible, it will only serve to expose them for the frauds that they are.

 

Just so we are absolutely clear here, the content that you wrote is not the purpose of the thread.

Whether or not you think it is a "sham" or not is completely irrelevant.

First of all, your feeling that it is a "sham" is not an argument.

Second, the impeachment process IS happening and vast amounts of polling data from multiple, independent-from-each-other sources is showing quite clearly that most Americans, the vast majority, do not see this as a "sham".

Third, calling Adam Shiff "shifty Schiff" is of course an anti-semitic perjorative.

Fourth, claiming that people hate America is not an argument. It's just someone who is angry, suddenly ranting from his computer.

Better luck to you next time.

 

They're trying to crowd out any good news about the economy with sex scandals and impeachment rumors based on second- and third-hand hearsay, and of course, the media are going along. They're making up anything they can think of just to dominate the airwaves with anti-Trump garbage. Unfortunately, crap like this works.

 

I'm wondering why you haven't yet taken a lesson on the validity of polling data. An "impeachment inquiry" is an inquiry. Period. Impeachment was supposed to come when "Mueller got Trump" and "took him away in cuffs" and stuff. You must be really desperate there in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean swimming among the debris of the wreck of the USS Mueller to grab onto this piece of "impeachment inquiry" trash and think it'll get you to port.

So in other words, if someone is Jewish, they're exempt from being called shifty regardless of their behavior? No race cards here and no invoking ethnicity to exempt one's political allies from criticism. This is race baiting.

 

It's hilarious that Joe Biden as VP bragged on video about EXTORTING the Ukrainian government into firing a prosecutor he didn't like by withholding $1 billion in aid and somehow that's not an impeachable offense but Trump ASKING for an investigation is?

The lack of self-awareness here is astounding.

 

This thread is not about me. Learn from this moment.
And no, what I wrote is not race-baiting, but the argument you laid out is one that is very popular in white-nationalistic and nazi circles, to be sure.

 

I for one stand with President Trump. We both think this is BS.

Forgive the long winded approach. Need to get a lot of facts on the table before we can dig into this. I thought this following quote (which I will link below) was very fitting for a time such as this and basically frames the rest of what I am going to say:

Notice how the liberals always play the racism card with conservatives? Like clockwork. Someone who tells lies for a living could be considered "shifty" especially if said person then avoids the press. Get it? Now humor me and explain why that comment is anti-sematic?

I've got news for you. This has everything to do with the subject at hand because it addresses the "why" component. The impeachment is not grounded in fact, its grounded in fiction (lies). The information I provided earlier falls under the purview of the threads theme. Keep in mind, I am referencing damning information that well over half the country embrace as truth, so you shouldn't minimize what I am saying so quickly. And you should absolutely give it a voice to be heard, at least if you are a fair and balanced man. There is a large contingent of the population that called this a hoax from day one. American's are growing wise to the liberal media. The liberal media, in conjunction with corrupt democratic politicians have hatched this diabolical plan to remove Trump from office by any means necessary. First it was Russian collusion, which is now a proven falsehood and now we have impeachment shortly before a key election. The second whistleblower has known associations with Joe Biden for crying out loud! The so called "whistleblower" lawyer is nothing more than a die hard democratic activist. The collusion you are so fervently seeking is actually closer to home than you might think. Because Trump released the transcript of the call, the impeachment is now sunk. There is no effective defense (for the left) from that situation because Adam Schiff (shifty) already lied about the conversation the day before. So they had no choice but to proceed down that road. And if we want to talk inquiry lets talk inquiry! What hasn't Nancy Pelosi proceeded with a full House vote on approving a formal inquiry? Because until that time comes, this issue can ONLY be considered a partisan witch hunt. She cant afford Trump the same rights as Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon? Such hypocrisy. Its innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent!

And you are absolutely right, this is a thread that belongs in elections and campaigns subsection. Because the democrats set it up to directly influence voters away from Trump, and shift them closer to left wing radicals. Make no mistake, this is a hail mary attempt from the democrats and a brilliant example of some illegal and unethical tactics already in play to influence the election results of 2020. Democrats and liberals already influencing the 2020 election? Sounds like 2016 all over again!

The reason I brought up hate is to deliver the a pure motive behind this so called "Impeachment" inquiry. The motivations of these people is much darker than you could ever imagine. These corrupt democrats at the top ( soon to be at the bottom) are driven by hate. And besides, the American people deserve to know what makes our political engine tick. Again, just more examples of hypocrisy by the left. They hang Trump out to dry and PROTECT Joe Biden despite clear evidence of corruption on video!? This is called a double standard and it is sort of what you are doing here in this thread. You are taking the context away from the situation at hand and minimizing the alternative point of view. You should WANT context to further understand this Impeachment inquiry and its radical origins.