My state used to caucus and I was always really good at making my point and flipping votes, last one I did was for Sanders v Clinton and I’m sad I won’t get to convince my neighbors not to vote for this dumpster fire of a woman, like girl read the room ffs
I wish she would shut up and go away.
Telling us not to push back against this ghoul and the rest of the Epstein class is fucking insane.
Moderates gonna moderate.
Fuck her man! Give me a break. More of this, we don’t want to be like them, need to concentrate on other things bullshit. Like we can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. This administration is THE biggest thing in US history. It needs to be addressed.
She’s the reason we will continue to spiral into fascism and someone will eventually show up to throw me in prison for this comment.
Why? The first two didn’t do a whole lot anyway.
Please, for the love of democracy, read the fucking article and not just the headline. Learn how impeachment works and why it will not work to remove Trump. Learn what politicians can ACTUALLY accomplish and set your fucking expectations accordingly.
Wanting things does not make them happen. I want a pony and a sports car. It doesn’t matter how strongly I want those things, wanting doesn’t do shit. If I’m a kid, wanting those things doesn’t enable my parents to be able to obtain them.
The main problem I have with people not fucking learning this stuff is that it leads to becoming suscepitble to fascist propaganda. “Both sides” because it seems like nobody can fix the problem. Vote third party because you don’t like a few things some of the Democrats are doing. Don’t bother to vote at all because who cares. All of that only serves to strengthen the fascist hold on this country.
Tired of the Democrats? Well, what are you doing about it? Are you just voting in the general election and bitching that your choices aren’t better? Try supporting better candidates in the primaries. Try to help educate people about what’s actually going on where you can do so. Or, if that doesn’t work, we need everyone to get out there and… force a change. Which will suck in its own way, and is more work than just “throw them all out!” because you ahve to have people and policies and systems set up to replace them if that’s how things go.
The laziest fucking thing is to just browse the headline and griping about things you don’t even understand.
I DID read it and her reasoning is shit.
Here’s her first statement: "Just because we have limited resources, and I think the energy and the resources need to be put into accountability, need to be put into investigations.”
Here’s her second point: “I think after the election, we all have to just also agree that our attitude has to be to get stuff done.”
Not good enough for me.
And precisely what do you think a third impeachment without a removal will do, exactly?
Effectively nothing, but not a whole lot can be done regardless unless the Senate is taken as well. Point is the goal is waste the administrations time and energy and block them from having a rubber stamp.
Girl shut UP and go bbq with the Cheneys you loser
“Just because we have limited resources, and I think the energy and the resources need to be put into accountability, need to be put into investigations.”
Limited resources? They don’t have limited resources for fucking ICE.
Harris, along with every other past President and Vice President need to shut the fuck up.
I’m enjoying Obama’s standup routine.
“don’t hold him accountable, we need to conserve resources for accountability.”
Every minute they spend doing their jobs is a minute they aren’t soliciting donations. What they mean is they don’t have the resources to beg for money, pass legislation, AND prosecute Trump at the same time. I know which of those things I don’t consider a priority, but they feel otherwise.
Harris, along with every other past President and Vice President need to shut the fuck up.
HA HA BOTH SIDES
Impeach Trump for the high crimes and misdemeanors of raping children. Make him defend that shit in a public trial. Make John Roberts watch that. Make the senators vote to acquit on that shit.
Ain’t no statute of limitations on impeachment.
And I reckon if there’s a dem majority they can vote to hear witnesses on the floor of the senate.
Make him defend that shit in a public trial.
That is not what impeachment will get you.
If the law doesn’t apply to everyone, it applies to no one
Not investigating and prosecuting Trump and his criminal appointees is not acceptable. Only prosecuting Trump and his criminal employees and ignoring everyday crises like healthcare and cost of living and wage disparity is also not acceptable.
This is the problem with old-school Democrats like Harris. They don’t understand that we expect them to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.
They are adults, ostensibly smart, and there will be roughly 300 of them in both houses of Congress if the polls pan out. The only successful path is to organize themselves and get it all done. It’s a false dichotomy to say you can only do one or the other.
Your job, Dems, is to repair the dam that has multiple huge leaks. If you seal one hole and the other is left open, the town below still floods. You fix them all or the dam breaks. Yes, it’s unfair. No, there is no other option.
But think of all the missed fundraising opportunities if they have to spend time doing their jobs!!!
Not investigating and prosecuting Trump and his criminal appointees is not acceptable.
Oh, so you DO support what Harris said:
“I think that going in the direction of impeachment is not a good idea, just to be honest with you,” Harris told MeidasTouch’s Aaron Parnas in an interview. “Just because we have limited resources, and I think the energy and the resources need to be put into accountability, need to be put into investigations.”
“And that’s where the time should be spent,” she added.
I wish people would read and reply to the article rather than the headline only.
“Investigate” is a necessary first step to gather evidence, even if it is obvious. But no, I did read the article and I do stand by what I said, because it’s right there in the quote you used:
“I think that going in the direction of impeachment is not a good idea, just to be honest with you,”
She is suggesting doing what every politic-playing traditional democrat or republican does when they want to appear to take action without taking action: Start an investigation. The next step? “Nothing.”
I don’t need to guess this. Because the quote, again, has Kamala expressly saying that investigation “shouldn’t go in the direction of” impeachment. Where then? She says two paragraphs later: “…maintain accountability when it comes to cuts to healthcare and oversight on the Iran war.” These are totally consistent with not pursuing impeachment, if it’s holding a bunch of showy hearings where they drag Pete Hegseth to answer for the Iran war, and Russel Vought for his Project 2025 stuff.
Which, to be clear, should happen. But Kamala’s quotes make clear, she thinks that is an excuse not to pursue impeachment. My point, which I already made above, is that it is a false dichotomy. They should do both.
That’s how I read [past tense] the article.
What exactly do you think impeachment - which will not lead to removal - will accomplish? A third impeachment accomplishing something that the first two didn’t manage to do?
I’m still grumbling because I disagree, but I’m glad you did read the article, sorry for the accusation.
Ah, so you’re in the “we don’t have enough votes so why try” camp?
Again, what exactly will impeachment accomplish that makes you think it’s worth doing? What will a third one add?
I also don’t go around trying to lift skyscrapers off their foundations because it’s a fucking waste of energy better spent elsewhere.
Politics is inherently about convincing people to move to your position. Another reference point is the difference between “strategy” and “tactics.”
Democrats are both extremely confident in the power of strategy and extremely inept in the concept of tactics. Strategy tells them that they should not take the first step until they have a path charted for the journey. Tactics tells them that they can take the best available first step and use new information gained from that step to plot the second step, and so on.
Your casual disregard for impeachment, likening it to “lifting skyscrapers off their foundation,” reveals that you cannot imagine a tactical approach, which epitomizes the problem with traditional democratic thinking. You think because two impeachments failed, it’s moronic to try a third without some incredible game-changing development.
Instead of that, I’d invite you to think about impeachment as a first step that we should take because it’s morally required, and because not doing so makes impeachment dead letter under the Constitution. An impeachment hearing reminds the public what standards are, what standards they should be following, and is an opportunity to sway the public to themselves pressure their senators to convict.
Putin understands tactics, and it’s why he now has control of Crimea (and arguably the United States). He has no master plan. But making the best available move to inch toward a target means often you get there, even if unexpectedly.
I’d recommend: Don’t be resigned and defeatist, and certainly don’t spread defeatism to others who may do what you have decided you can’t.
Defeatism barks up the wrong tree here. A lot of your assumptions do, but I respect the reply even while I disagree with much of it, so while I’m not energized to respond to every single point, one of the things that Lemmy does make difficult is foundational context - who I am, who you are. What I believe that didn’t get expressed in a particular comment.
I do believe impeachment is a waste of time. I do not think it will energize the voters. If anything, a third impeachment that also doesn’t result in removal continues those who complain that democrats are doing nothing.
Ultimately, the most important thing we need is to support truly progressive candidates, and help those that are getting the message out better. And in places like NYC where a real difference can be shown - because our current federal government is set up to allow obstruction far more than action - Congress can’t get shit done even with a majority, but it’s worse because there are so many estqablishment Dems, who are better than Oops All Fascists! but not great.
Eh. I hope that makes a bit of sense, I’m not taking the time to flesh it all out well.
I can respect that you have thoughtful opinion. We strongly disagree, which is a bummer, but at least you obviously care. I do, too.
I still rail against so many who really do NOT have a plan and just want to gripe about “somebody needs to do something” which is useless - I mean the people complaining who may or may not even bother to vote in the general election, much less do anything else.
It isn’t a fucking game. After all the corruption and lawless fuckery, impeachment is a moral imperative.
Giving big “Nothing will fundamentally change” energy….
Agree.
Just fucking shoot him.
If there’s any hope of reforming the presidency in a meaningful way post-Trump, it’ll be necessary to show how the intended methods failed. Not using them out of expediency will just maintain the illusion that they could have been an effective solution.
