Trump’s Approval Rating Climbs to 47 Percent

[imnotyourbabe10 6,120]

29 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Trump will be re-elected and Democrats and the American people deserve it. 

This country is pathetic. 

Spill the tea! 

There really is a lesson to be learned in polarized times and yet late stage capitalism as well as a variety of phobias (racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, misogyny and so on) are gaining traction and leave the average Amurican...I dunno....

People are complicit and complacent these days.  And I do fear another 4 years of Tr**p's incompetency isn't far off. 

May not get stuff done even if the House and/or Senate is a Democrat stronghold but things will continue to be headlines and shock factor instead of coping with issues facing the general public.

 

[REALITY 80,162]

20 minutes ago, TheQueenLG said:

BS

I agree that impeachment proceedings should start, but you have to think about it realistically. If they start impeachment trials, and Turmp doesn't  get impeached, how foolish is the Democratic party going to look? It's a high risk thing to do. If it fails that practically guarantees a 2020 win for Trump.

[derpmonster 22,412]

1 hour ago, Morphine Prince said:

Trump will be re-elected and Democrats and the American people deserve it. 

This country is pathetic. 

The sad part is the ones affected adversely by it are not the ones who deserve it. 

[zakariah 11,787]

he’s gonna get re-elected, if he won the first time, why wouldn’t he win the second time, especially now that America’s in such a divided state

[RoverLoader 1,254]

10 minutes ago, Aquarius said:

he’s gonna get re-elected, if he won the first time, why wouldn’t he win the second time, especially now that America’s in such a divided state

And imagine what he will be like unleashed? no more raillies or terms to campaign for......

 

You reap what you sow

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

1 hour ago, M Monstre said:

I agree that impeachment proceedings should start, but you have to think about it realistically. If they start impeachment trials, and Turmp doesn't  get impeached, how foolish is the Democratic party going to look? It's a high risk thing to do. If it fails that practically guarantees a 2020 win for Trump.

Realistically, Trump is the only President who welcomed (and benefited from) a foreign adversary's cyber attack on our democracy (our country's core). Moreover, when an investigation was launched into this attack on our country, Trump moved to end the specific component of the investigation designated to investigate the attack. That is treason. Not legally Treason... But in a colloquial sense, this was certainly treasonous conduct. But this conduct was still criminal, legally, in terms of Obstruction of Justice, as illustrated by the consensus of more than 1,000 former prosecutors (the folks qualified to make such an accusation). 

The Democratic party would not look foolish from a failed impeachment trial. The evidence would be laid out, and anyone reasonable in this country would ditch Trump. Forcing Republicans in the Senate to declare, formally, that they do not think federal felony Obstruction of Justice is an impeachable offense would be very beneficial to Democrats. It would show the American people that Republicans will put aside the basic rule of law in favor of their pathetic political whims. 

Also, in addition, a failed impeachment trial in the senate by no means guarantees a 2020 win for Trump. That is just delusional. The impeachment indictment in the House is certain. Just because there would be a tainted politicized jury that would work to acquit this criminal President in the Senate does not mean that all the prior, valiant work in the House would be worthless.

Furthermore, Clinton, a Democrat, was impeached in the House and acquitted in the Senate. Following your logic, Clinton would be guaranteed a win in the 2000 election. But he lost... To the candidate of the opposing party -- the Republicans. Seriously. 

The only acceptable route forward is impeachment, or our country's basic fabric will fundamentally break. Don't let Nancy Pelosi's dunderhead arguments convince you otherwise. She is derelicting her duties in the most disappointing and severe fashion imaginable.

[Batwings 12,957]

For this election, it is more important than ever to get young people to vote and to get minorities to vote. Older white people are the most reliable voting demographic, and they will regularly vote Republican, regardless of who the nominee is. If African-American women can get Alabama a Democratic senator, then if younger folks and minorities work together, we can avoid a second term of Trump.

 

[REALITY 80,162]

8 hours ago, TheQueenLG said:

Realistically, Trump is the only President who welcomed (and benefited from) a foreign adversary's cyber attack on our democracy (our country's core). Moreover, when an investigation was launched into this attack on our country, Trump moved to end the specific component of the investigation designated to investigate the attack. That is treason. Not legally Treason... But in a colloquial sense, this was certainly treasonous conduct. But this conduct was still criminal, legally, in terms of Obstruction of Justice, as illustrated by the consensus of more than 1,000 former prosecutors (the folks qualified to make such an accusation). 

The Democratic party would not look foolish from a failed impeachment trial. The evidence would be laid out, and anyone reasonable in this country would ditch Trump. Forcing Republicans in the Senate to declare, formally, that they do not think federal felony Obstruction of Justice is an impeachable offense would be very beneficial to Democrats. It would show the American people that Republicans will put aside the basic rule of law in favor of their pathetic political whims. 

Also, in addition, a failed impeachment trial in the senate by no means guarantees a 2020 win for Trump. That is just delusional. The impeachment indictment in the House is certain. Just because there would be a tainted politicized jury that would work to acquit this criminal President in the Senate does not mean that all the prior, valiant work in the House would be worthless.

Furthermore, Clinton, a Democrat, was impeached in the House and acquitted in the Senate. Following your logic, Clinton would be guaranteed a win in the 2000 election. But he lost... To the candidate of the opposing party -- the Republicans. Seriously. 

The only acceptable route forward is impeachment, or our country's basic fabric will fundamentally break. Don't let Nancy Pelosi's dunderhead arguments convince you otherwise. She is derelicting her duties in the most disappointing and severe fashion imaginable.

Firstly, like I said, I agree that impeachment proceedings should start. I have no qualms with the evidence provided by Mueller or anything like that.

Also, yes, while any reasonable person would look at the evidence and see that Trump was involved in some obstruction, you also have to remember his base. His base will literally defend him to the ends of the earth. It's ridiculous, but if Trump isn't impeached (and even if all the evidence is laid out), this'll give his base ammunition to be like, "You see! The Democrats wanted to impeach him! Based on what?? NOTHING! He's completely fine!!".

As for Clinton, you have to remember that party polarization has dramatically and significantly increased since then. Right now, you either hate Trump or love him. For the most part you're either liberal or conservative. You're either Republican or Democrat. Party polarization has gone through the roof. If a failed impeachment proceeding happens, it'll only further polarize the parties and result in something like I described in the last paragraph. 

Like I said, I am completely for impeachment, but I also understand where she's coming from. 

[JustinTrudeau 2,419]

Disappointed but not surprised