The only valid reason not to pursue the 25th Amendment end of this nightmare is ...

[RockyRoadTravel]

J.D. Vance

[Suckrates]

15 minutes ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

J.D. Vance

 

So its a choice between Cancer and a terminal brain tumor ?    🤔

[RockyRoadTravel]

The inevitable discussion of the 25th Amendment is resurfacing again.  How could it not? 

Question for the constitutional lawyers on here:  Is insanity a legitimate defense to an impeachment trial in the Senate? 

[RockyRoadTravel]

The calls are now coming from inside the House about the 25th Amendment.  His former lawyer Ty Cobb today describe The Great Incompetent as "insane". 

[stevenkesslar]

2 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

The calls are now coming from inside the House about the 25th Amendment.  His former lawyer Ty Cobb today describe The Great Incompetent as "insane". 

We need someone with clout to push this over the edge.   Someone who can unite all Americans, red and blue, around the obvious fact that Trump is insane.

I think there's only man up for the job.

 

 

[RockyRoadTravel]

15 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

We need someone with clout to push this over the edge.   Someone who can unite all Americans, red and blue, around the obvious fact that Trump is insane.

I think there's only man up for the job.

 

 

Brought to you by the Lincoln Project.  

[stevenkesslar]

6 minutes ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

Brought to you by the Lincoln Project.  

Here's something to scare you.

 

 

Rick Wilson says he has a deep understanding of Trump.  I agree.

If you watch the video, he's not arguing Trump will win.  He is arguing Trump will run, and cause chaos.  Any sentence that strings "Trump" and "chaos" together always seems possible.

Anyways, Trump can't be demented or dead in 2029, as well as POTUS.  Or could he be?

[RockyRoadTravel]

45 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

Here's something to scare you.

 

 

Rick Wilson says he has a deep understanding of Trump.  I agree.

If you watch the video, he's not arguing Trump will win.  He is arguing Trump will run, and cause chaos.  Any sentence that strings "Trump" and "chaos" together always seems possible.

Anyways, Trump can't be demented or dead in 2029, as well as POTUS.  Or could he be?

Any sentence that strings "Trump" and "chaos" together seems inevitable, and by design. It's The Great Incompetent's shtick. Chaos is the means of avoiding taking any responsibility for his actions. 

The Democrats need to flip five Senate seats in November or they'll potentially have Fetterman as the new Sinema/Machin. Those two knee capped Biden with their obstructionism for the first two years of his term. 

[stevenkesslar]

35 minutes ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

The Democrats need to flip five Senate seats in November or they'll potentially have Fetterman as the new Sinema/Machin. Those two knee capped Biden with their obstructionism for the first two years of his term. 

I may be giving too much credit to Fetterman here.  But I see his thing as different than Sinema/Manchin.

With Sinema/Manchin I would say 100 % of it pointed to them being money whores,  Sinema in particular.  Manchin can say he is not and never was  in no way, shape, or form a liberal.  😱  But Sinema was.  😍  They both can say we just want to be centrists and meet in the middle.  And there is truth to that.  But the middle also happened to be where there was tremendous amounts of special interest and corporate money waiting for them.  

I was a small money Sinema donor when she first ran.  For months I sent her borderline sexist emails complaining she was a money whore and "pocket sucker" who just lunged at the money of special interest lobbyists with money in their pockets.  I bet she got enormous amounts of nasty emails from donors and Arizona voters complaining she was a gutless wonder.  She got the memo.  And now we have a fighter in Gallego.  Hope he doesn't turn out to be the next Eric Swalwell.  But I digress.

As you said, Manchin and Sinema knee capped Biden on higher taxes on the rich and things like the expanded child tax credit.

I don't see Fetterman as a sell out money whore.    Nor does he.

Quote

“I’d be a terrible Republican who still votes overwhelmingly with Democrats,” he wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post in May.

Quote

Fetterman’s approval rating, at 48 percent, was above water in Quinnipiac University data. But 52 percent of respondents said they’d like to see him depart the party amid speculation that Republicans have been wooing the famously centrist Democrat. 

Quote

The share of voters who want him to switch sides includes 57 percent of Democrats, 55 percent of Republicans and 46 percent of independents.

 

Now THAT is Democrats being irrational.  We desperately want a Democratic Senate.  And yet we want Fetterman to leave?  Huh?

It confirms what seems to be part of Fetterman's bitch.  Which is that the Democratic Party has too many purity tests.  And fundamentally does not want to be a big tent party.  By all accounts, Jon Tester feels the same way.  But he didn't whine about it publicly.  Tester said some Democratic Party positions made it too toxic for a Democrat to win in Montana.  

My standard is very simple.  And I think indisputably mathematically correct on this.  If we want a 60 seat filibuster proof Senate majority we have to win in Iowa, and Montana, and Indiana, and North Dakota.  And certainly Pennsylvania.  Those are the last Senate seats Democrats had in what could be called "Trump" states that we lost.  A Heitkamp or a McCaskill would have been much more loyal than a Manchin and a Sinema.  That's the difference between money whore and not money whore to me.  But we can't have a McCaskill and Heitkamp and Tester if we want purity tests.

Fetterman says the right needs to stop bullying trans kids.  So, again, I may be wrong.  But he seems like a decent, if weird, guy.  I had the same feeling when he spoke at the Fauci Lynching Trial.  He talked about being Lt. Guv while there is chaos and death due to COVID.  And how he wonders in retrospect what he could have done differently, and better.  If the hearing had been about THAT, it might have been a good bipartisan hearing.

Some of this is he feels Democrats want to be the "anti-Israel" Party.  For reasons I spelled out at length, I disagree.  I would argue the Genocide Jew is "anti-Israel" and I am "anti-genocide."  And I have the polls on my side.  But Fetterman is not a big AIPAC money whore - yet.  If he is smart, he won't take a penny from AIPAC if he runs again.  He'll just say, "Sorry.  I am with Israel.  I see Hamas as a bully.  I feel the same way about Republican attacks on trans kids.  Period."  

Bottom line:  I like to win.  So does Chuck Schumer.  I'm betting Chuck Schumer is trying to figure out how to work with him.  Not to get rid of him.

I've read that Fetterman may be more likely to just not run again.  He is a small donor guy.  And he still has a decent approval rating in his state.  His problem is probably more a Democratic primary than a general election.  If he just steps aside and lets someone else run and win, I will respect his decision.  If he runs and wins the primary, I am with him 100 %.  I hope he means what he says and is with us 100 %.