English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And wasn't this one of the main reasons why folks voted for the democrats so much in the last election anyway?

This was why I voted for them!

2007-03-09 01:29:56 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

23 answers

I'm sorry that was your impetus for voting him in. I think you have to accept that impeachment is just not going to happen. Why? Because we have a two term limit, we're already gearing up for 2008, and it would take longer to impeach him than to just wait him out.

Also, given the split nature of this country, it would be a hard task to actually win an impeachment process. If the Dems went after him and lost, it would be a very dark cloud hanging over them going into the next election.

By NOT impeaching him, they can take the stand at election time that "we did not want to put the country through that" and win some voters.

Good question.

2007-03-09 01:39:53 · answer #1 · answered by renee_kovach 4 · 1 2

I know a lot of spin and mis-information is going around out there but here is a situational briefing:

It is normally the case that the party in the white house looses seats in congress during the first term. The republicans retained control then proving that the voters liked the direction they were being taken in. The voters then confirmed this by re-electing the president and keeping both houses of congress in republican hands.

This last election is when the party in the white house looses the most seats due to many factors. In this last mid-term election the democrats took both houses but look at the numbers. They only took the Senate by one seat. This with such an upopular president in the white house. The democrats took control of the house of representatives but not by much either. Add to this the fact that many of the newly elected democrats ran as moderates or even conservatives and you can see the weak position this leaves the democrate leadership in.

This is why Pelosi has already stated quite clearly that there will be no impeachment. Begining such proceedures would be suicidal for the democrats who must now attend to consolodating their party. The democratic party is a tenuous grouping that ranges from radical left wing socialists to conservative blue collar Reagan democrats.

Sooner or later, something will fracture the democratic party. It may be from either end of the spectrum but the tension is mounting. Hillary is not helping the situation. She is not like Bill was. You either love her or you hate her. Even the people who opposed Bill Clinton still couldn't help but be charmed by him. No so the more shrill and caustic Hillary.

Obama would be more of a unifying force now because the more moderate democrats do not know how much of a socialist he is. He is in for quite a fight with Hillary. If she begins to think he might beat her, she will pull out all the stops and personally attack and destroy him. That will drive away the black vote and the moderates, too.

In conclusion, failing to impeach the president will not, in itself, fracture the democratic party but it will weaken it. The true hardline Bush haters may well go to a third party or sit it out altogether.

2007-03-09 02:19:39 · answer #2 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 0 0

Well, you may have voted for them, but enough people in other states didn't. It takes a 2/3 majority in the Senate to impeach successfully. The Dems barely have a majority. Without almost absolute proof, no. Republicans will cross the line to allow it to happen. Also it must be a pretty serious crime.

Before you object because of what happened to Bill Clinton, he was not impeached for 2 reasons. #1 was it was a questionable charge. His statement before the court was, "I did not have intercourse with ( Monica Lewinski)". Using the word "sex", which he said outside the court, would be cause for impeachment. "Intercourse", is open to interpretation. #2 Impeachment is the actual removal from office due to the Senate vote, This definition is lost on many people. The House voted an Article of Impeachment, sending the "trial" to the Senate. Until conviction in the Senate, it is still an Article of Impeachment..

On a side note, I have seen many people on many blogs who say perjury is not a "high crime or misdemeanor". Since perjury is a felony, it falls above the definition of a "high misdemeanor".Scooter Libby is facing 5 years each for his conviction for 2 perjuries.

2007-03-09 02:11:06 · answer #3 · answered by bob h 5 · 0 0

That may be why you voted for them but it isn't why they won control of the house and senate. In fact if the Dem's had said before election day that they were going to push for impeachment then they probably wouldn't have won. The political reality is this:
If a house impeachment committee were to recommend articles of impeachment and if the full house were to vote for them, 17 Republicans would have to vote guilty in a senate trial. That's assuming that all members of the democratic caucus voted to remove bush from office. Even if that all happened it would only shorten Bush's tenure by a few months and leave us with President Cheney.

2007-03-09 01:43:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

That's why you voted for them?

LOL...SUCKER!!! I'll bet you're SHOCKED that the Dems didn't keep their word!

If you think that a third party will come along and impeach Bush, you obviously have a bit to learn about how the impeachment process works.

Just know that the Dems are very pleased that they were able to trick you into voting for them, thinking they'll impeach Bush... suckerrrrr!

2007-03-09 02:42:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i imagine a number of you're suitable. The Democrats believe truly some the failings Bush has gotten away with. obviously there are issues that he may be impeached for. case in point, his signing statements the position he ignores aspects of costs that he signs and indications that were approved by technique of congress. Any violations of our structure, alongside with unlawful spying on individuals. His participation contained in the North American Union. no longer preserving our borders. Attacking a u . s . and starting up a conflict and not using a suitable announcement of conflict from congress. i imagine he may be impeached for any of those issues. What say you???

2016-12-05 11:11:29 · answer #6 · answered by brenneman 4 · 0 0

Steve C,

Hagel said Bush should be impeached? Senator Hagel said no such thing. You may want to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

Bob H, your understanding of the impeachment process is incorrect. Clinton WAS impeached. The House voted yes on the articles of impeachment. This means he was impeached. The senate voted not guilty in his impeachment trial. In other words, he was impeached but not convicted.

2007-03-09 01:46:08 · answer #7 · answered by dsl67 4 · 1 1

Wait, failed? No, I think they haven't made an attempt. I didn't vote for Democrats to impeach Bush. I wanted them to clean up Bush's disasterous Presidency. I have said this before and I will say it again...I would love to see him impeached, but this is NOT the time, not while a war is still going on. The end results would only be disasterous and more cleanup to follow.

2007-03-09 01:37:05 · answer #8 · answered by Groovy 6 · 1 2

There has NEVER been any chance of Bush being impeached. That's a last resort which no one is willing to play now. No offense, but you were naive to have THAT as a reason for voting Democratic.

2007-03-09 01:33:53 · answer #9 · answered by Mac the Nice 2 · 6 1

There will never be a third party in the U.S. The communists tried for years and finally had to get the liberal democrats to adopt Communism to be recognized and SO far it is working,

2007-03-09 01:34:16 · answer #10 · answered by Sronce 3 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers