Trump Is Just 6 Votes Away From Impeachment

[Minister of Truth]

You are confusing the House and the Senate. The OP is about the Senate. It's the House that initiates impeachment. That's pretty much certain to pass, if it ever comes to a vote.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

The OP specifically mentions impeachment, so, it must be about the House. If it were talking about the Senate, it would have said six votes short of conviction.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Is that what you said about the Mueller investigation?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

that's what she said!

[rjhenn]

The OP specifically mentions impeachment, so, it must be about the House. If it were talking about the Senate, it would have said six votes short of conviction.

You obviously only read the thread title. The actual OP is quite specific.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[PoliTalker]

Hello Althea,

It all depends on polling. Right now, Romney is the only one who could get away with it. Ninety something percent of Republican voters don't want to see trump impeached. We'll see what happens midway through next year.

The polling was worse for Republicans at this point in the process when they impeached Nixon.

[Althea]

Hello Althea,



The polling was worse for Republicans at this point in the process when they impeached Nixon.

That was a very different time.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Threedee,

The OP specifically mentions impeachment, so, it must be about the House. If it were talking about the Senate, it would have said six votes short of conviction.

There's a bit of ambiguity surrounding the word 'impeachment.' The general sense of the word is that it is a way to remove a sitting President. Specifically, you are correct, of course. Impeachment occurs in the House, but the president is not removed from office unless the Senate convicts. If you reread the OP, you will find that the thread title comes from the linked article, which is 2 years old and was speaking in the hypothetical about the House. I used it as a hook-title to draw attention to the thread so it would have some staying power. It is sad that an important discussion has to play a popularity game with the trash-thread dumps of trolls, but I can't change that. Continue reading in the OP and I discuss the intent of the thread, which is to surmise at the prospects of who among the 53 Republican Senators might vote which way on conviction.

After the exercise of examining the politics of each of the 53 has been completed we stand at an estimation that Trump is just 7 votes away from conviction in the Senate. But obviously I couldn't have known that or how to more precisely name the thread until the thread evolved and the input was received to try to make an approximation about each of the 53.

That being said, if you have any disagreement about specific Senators and feel they have been incorrectly placed in one of the columns please divulge. If it sounds astute, I'll adjust accordingly.

Right now it stands at

13 Y , 7 more needed to convict.

13 N , 21 more needed to acquit.

27 M , left to decide, could go either way.

Give us a quote or a story from one of the M's (or others) and maybe we can whittle this down some more. Let's use our collective understanding to form the most accurate prediction we can with what we know now. Naturally, this is completely hypothetical and probably will not reflect the actual vote. But I'm just curious enough to try this (hopefully once in a very blue moon) exercise to see how close we can get, or if our efforts are totally off base.

I had wished to see some professional political pundits trying to do this, and was dismayed that none would attempt it. I found nothing. So we just had to do it ourselves right here at JPP!

Now I have to wonder if Vegas is beginning to take odds on it.

[PoliTalker]

Hello rjhenn,

You obviously only read the thread title. The actual OP is quite specific.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I once made a thread which generated a spirited discussion, during which I wanted to refer back to an article I had linked in the OP. That was when I discovered the link was broken. It took you nowhere. That prompted a bit of searching to try to find the article again and repair the link. That was when I was dismayed to realize nobody had even bothered to read the linked article.

I often spent inordinate amounts of time researching the subjects being discussed prior to making my own posts. My visits here are VERY informative because my goal is to learn about the topics under discussion and become better politically informed. That, apparently, places me in a very small minority, one I am glad to inhabit. When I talk to people with opposing views and they post things I know to be false, it is more than a feeling. And that makes me all the more certain that my views are more accurate than theirs. Liberals generally are right, and conservatives generally are indeed wrong about much of what they post. I remain convinced that being liberal is far better for the USA than being conservative. If it were not for liberals this country would have self-destructed a LONG time ago. But still, we do need conservatives. We need to hear their views to balance our own, and to make sure that we do not become complacent. This nation is designed to function on the basis of all views, and that's a beautiful thing. Our freedom of expression is to be cherished. That's why my User Title is: "Diversity Makes Greatness." I remain strongly convinced of that after all I have learned. If I had the characters, I would have made it: "Diversity Makes America Great."

[PoliTalker]

Hello Althea,

That was a very different time.

Yes, but it demonstrates that partisanship is not everything.

[Port Tack]

Trump never admitted anything of the sort you lying hack. You have brain damage don't you?


The ANONYMOUS FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER'S account was proven false by the actual transcript shit-for-brains. How stupid are you leftists?

Sorry shit for brains, the phone text proves the shithead asked a foreign power to help him in his election by opening a fake investigation into Biden. Don't even need the whistleblower even if it did match that phone text.

Lawmakers Debate Credibility Of Details In Whistleblower's Complaint
President Trump pressured his Ukrainian counterpart in a phone call to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, Biden's son. And what the whistleblower says in the complaint essentially matches what we saw in the account of the phone call that the White House released this week.

[Port Tack]

Once again; you're delusional outbursts are not connected to reality. The Republican Party, other than a few loons who will lose their elections, will not stand by and allow the Fascists in the Party of the Jackass to usurp the will of the voters because Democrats are mad they lost in 2016.

They will not allow impeachment to go through based on innuendo, hyperbole and the lunatic rantings of morons like Nadler and Schiff.

They will not allow impeachment to go through based on hearsay and a lie filled ANONYMOUS FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER'S claims.

Just watch.

[Truth Detector]

Sorry shit for brains, the phone text proves the shithead asked a foreign power to help him in his election by opening a fake investigation into Biden. Don't even need the whistleblower even if it did match that phone text.

Sorry shit for brains; but the phone call does not indicate anything of the sort you whiny, pathetic, brain dead fucked up loser.

[Truth Detector]

Just watch.

I am; I have been watching morons like you look like dumbasses for decades. I save your stupid predictions and shove them back into your smug faces. But it doesn't seem to affect your stupidity because you morons just come back for more.

The Mueller HOAX was a massive embarrassment for the Party of the Jackass and the PHONY media. Now we are getting a replay just months after that massive HOAX was exposed as a fraud.

You morons on the left have the lowest IQ on the planet thinking that you can keep playing from the same lie filled playbook over and over again.

I have a bet thread asshole; take the fucking bet if you think you are so damned smart! https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...to-participate

[Minister of Truth]

Hello Threedee,



There's a bit of ambiguity surrounding the word 'impeachment.' The general sense of the word is that it is a way to remove a sitting President. Specifically, you are correct, of course. Impeachment occurs in the House, but the president is not removed from office unless the Senate convicts. If you reread the OP, you will find that the thread title comes from the linked article, which is 2 years old and was speaking in the hypothetical about the House. I used it as a hook-title to draw attention to the thread so it would have some staying power. It is sad that an important discussion has to play a popularity game with the trash-thread dumps of trolls, but I can't change that. Continue reading in the OP and I discuss the intent of the thread, which is to surmise at the prospects of who among the 53 Republican Senators might vote which way on conviction.

After the exercise of examining the politics of each of the 53 has been completed we stand at an estimation that Trump is just 7 votes away from conviction in the Senate. But obviously I couldn't have known that or how to more precisely name the thread until the thread evolved and the input was received to try to make an approximation about each of the 53.

That being said, if you have any disagreement about specific Senators and feel they have been incorrectly placed in one of the columns please divulge. If it sounds astute, I'll adjust accordingly.

Right now it stands at

13 Y , 7 more needed to convict.

13 N , 21 more needed to acquit.

27 M , left to decide, could go either way.

Give us a quote or a story from one of the M's (or others) and maybe we can whittle this down some more. Let's use our collective understanding to form the most accurate prediction we can with what we know now. Naturally, this is completely hypothetical and probably will not reflect the actual vote. But I'm just curious enough to try this (hopefully once in a very blue moon) exercise to see how close we can get, or if our efforts are totally off base.

I had wished to see some professional political pundits trying to do this, and was dismayed that none would attempt it. I found nothing. So we just had to do it ourselves right here at JPP!

Now I have to wonder if Vegas is beginning to take odds on it.

Vegas won't give odds where it can only stand to lose money.

[rjhenn]

that's what she said!

Your usual nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[rjhenn]

Sorry shit for brains, the phone text proves the shithead asked a foreign power to help him in his election by opening a fake investigation into Biden. Don't even need the whistleblower even if it did match that phone text.

Truth Deflector, like all Trumpanzees, lives in a world of his own, based on the delusion that Trump is sent by God and can do no wrong.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk