Trump Impeached for Second Time
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
I'd like to see him sacked too, but it seems mathematically impossible at this point.
Edited to correct my confusion of impeachment and conviction!
No, it takes a simple majority in the House. It did happen last time. And it did happen this time.
Conviction after impeachment takes a 2/3 majority in the Senate.
> I'd like to see him sacked too, but it seems mathematically impossible at this point.
It's not mathematically impossible for 2/3 of the Senate to vote to convict. It might be politically impossible, but that's a different thing.
So if 25 republican senators boycott and don’t show up to the vote they can convict along party lines... or if 17 vote to convict, or some sliding scale between those two options
I'll keep my hyperbole on mathematically impossible if that's ok? I like a little exaggeration. :)
Honestly, I feel like the deciding factor may be whether or not on the day of the vote persons with the most influence over the GOP feel the party is better off convicting and blocking Trump from even pretending to run in 2024.
EDIT: Many in the GOP blame Trump for them losing majority of the House, the Senate, and the White House. He was already a proven losing formula before last weeks events. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if they viewed him as a straight up liability for the midterms and in 2024.
Given his die hard popularity with ~40% of the US population still approving [1], and with the republican base 87% approving [2], it would be brave of Mitch to take his first principled stand...
[1] https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/
[2] https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ra...
https://www.businessinsider.com/mcconnell-says-impeachment-t...
Both the flak they will get for jumping ship and the flak they will get knowing it will affect the next vote.
Going against the base in your area is increasingly just asking to get primaried, on both sides of the aisle.
Of course I think he was upset by the initial impeachment. And he probably was under the mistaken conclusion that he needed to rattle Biden to win the debate.
He was like an unbridled bronco when he needed to be more of a showhorse for the undecideds.
That means small mistakes or single bad performances decide elections in a way they couldn't even 10 years ago.
It's interesting, even for outside observers like me (limey brit)
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/12/anti-trump-group-go...
Thanks for the link, I didn't know Republicans against Trump were this well funded.
[1] https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/11/27/the-2020-electi... [1]
With this action by Pelosi, I guarantee Trump will hold office again after the next presidential election.
[0] https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/56838/if-a-pris...
Prison probably complicates a comeback campaign in 2024. (Also, even without that, he would have neither the outsider ambiguity that help him win in 2016 not the power of incumbency that helped him, but not enough to win, in 2020. He might retain enough influence with the Republican base that if he isn't disabled by legal issues he could win a nomination in 2024, but the general election seems more uphill.)
The surprise Walter Reed visit was questionable, and the fact that he was administered a cognitive test only given to those with suspected dementia—then bragged about his results and claimed it was a difficult test—only add fuel to the speculation.
EDIT: Not claiming authority here or that others should conclude what I have, especially since I don’t have the time to reference all the things that convinced me.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person,_woman,_man,_camera,_...