The Impeachment Vote Could Be Anonymous...

1. 76

   Valeantposted 4 years ago

   
   With anonymity, those GOP Senators looking to vote their conscience would have protection from the threat of violent repercussion that they have already witnessed on January 6th.  The base would never be sure who sided with democracy.  Schumer should look to go this route with the rules, if only to protect the GOP in the Senate from their own violent base.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      tsmogposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      In this case in particular I think there is the issue of the accountability to the constituents that arises. They will want to know how their senator voted whether extremist or not. And, remembering the constituents are both democrat and republicans.
      
      From the big picture perspective I agree a secret ballot there may be more of an inclination to vote conscience rather than party line.

      replyreport
      1. 83

         Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Did we vote them in to vote their conscience or ours? Just a thought

         replyreport
   2. 69

      IslandBitesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      If that were the case, I think a couple of right leaning Dems could throw Trump a towel. Not that it should matter to decide in favor of annonimity.
      
      In any case, I would prefer not. If they have a conscience, they (GOP) should make a stand. It's way passed due.

      replyreport
   3. 83

      Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps you might consider why we have a Congress, and who decides who those persons will be to fill those jobs.
      
      Why do citizens elect members of Congress?
      United States Congress and citizens describes the relation between the public and lawmakers. Essentially, American citizens elect members of Congress every two years who have the duty to represent their interests in the national legislature of the United States. They are not elected to represent their conscience, but ours. The citizens that voted them into Congress. This is democracy... 
      
      Otherwise, we may not as well vote... You speak of a violent base,  did you consider these are American's that have become so dissatisfied they are willing to become violent? 
      
      Where do we go from here?  You say let Schumer just change the rules, let the voting representatives vote a private vote. If this occurred I would consider it moving away from transparency which is a huge part of democracy. We have always been offered the knowledge of how our representatives vote, one way or the other.
      
      You're proposing we as citizens guess how our representatives vote on a given matter. We the people that voted them in, need to have the right to know if the person we sent to Washington is supporting us, ad they promised to do.
      
      It would seem you suggest if our former rules don't work for you, and we just change them as needed. Maybe next time you will desire transparency --- just change them back.  This stamps on democracy, honesty is the only way democracy can survive.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Wait, are you saying that Senators believe they are more accountable to voters than those that fund their campaigns?  That's arguable.
         
         And changing the rules that don't work seems like a time honored Republican tradition after firstly denying witnesses for the first time in history during Trump's first impeachment, as well as denying Merrick Garland in Obama's final year and then pushing through Amy Coney Barrett in a nearly identical situation, except they wanted to go back and change history about why they made their decisions back in 2016.
         
         You often talk about hypocrisy.  Your final paragraph really seems to be one of those statements.

         replyreport
         1. 83

            Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            In a good world, in a true democracy Senators should be accountable to the voters, the people. It has become arguable, more so than ever.  In regards to hypocrisy --- I made no mention of either party. I spoke about OUR representatives, OUR Congress. It is you that clearly hoped to point a finger at one party for their misdemeanors.  I spoke of the importance of preserving democracy, and the dangers of "stamping" on our democracy.
            
            What I got from both your comments is you hoped to change a long time rue to suit Senators, to provide them anonymity, and to denies us transparency.
            
            You quickly muddle the simple conversation with they did this, they did that. Not addressing the subject of your thread --- should we offer our representatives voting anonymity.
            
            All your above-mentioned smoke has merit, there is no denying that. But, mine also has merit in regards to your subject. I choose not to destroy democracy in any way shape or form. One crime against democracy should not be put above another in weight. So, in this case, I do not feel I am showing any form of hypocrisy.
            
            So, as you point out misdemeanors are committed frequently, when do we hold the line or do we just opt to rid ourselves of our Constitution, just make rules as we need them, change them frequently as needed?   Would this not offer chaos, somewhat like countries that strive to keep a dictator or one party? Do you see my point?

            replyreport
            1. 76

               Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, you said:
               It would seem you suggest if our former rules don't work for you, and we just change them as needed.
               
               And I just felt the need to point out that such action has already been happening regarding major events within our country by the GOP.  Thinking I am the only one that would suggest such a thing is the hypocrisy part when leaders of the party you have been supporting are guilty of such blatant examples.
               
               Which also speaks to the point of the thread.  You argue that changing the rules to fit an agenda, in this case protecting GOP Senators from violence, is something new.  I just pointed out that it's far from it and should be a consideration.

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Not Congress, but what did you think about changing the rules on mail in ballots, sometimes in direct violation of state law?  Was that the GOP as well?

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     Why, yes, it did include many GOP states as well.
                     
                     Using this search criteria, look at the ballotpedia link:  states that made changes to mail-in ballots
                     
                     Example:  Arkansas
                     Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) and Secretary of State John Thurston (R) announced that voters in the November 3, 2020, general election would be allowed to cite concerns over COVID-19 as a valid excuse for voting absentee. Hutchinson subsequently issued an executive order formalizing this policy change.
                     
                     This seems to go directly against the claim that changes were not done by state legislatures in following the Constitution.
                     
                     Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Tennessee all made changes.
                     
                     I guess they decided that they could set aside their election laws to protect their constituents.

                     replyreport
               2. 83

                  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  "It would seem you suggest if our former rules don't work for you, and we just change them as needed."  I did certainly address you with that statement. I naturally was replying to your thread, your subject.
                  
                  When I comment I offer thoughts on a given subject. I slam actions, words, anything that I feel is objectable to me. I am a Republican, however, I am just as apt to slam them when I feel they have done something objectable. As I said in my last comment both parties have bent rules to suit their agendas. I asked when do we draw the line?
                  
                  Yes, the need to protect the Capitol and Senator's is new. That should concern all American's. However, have you heard much about what I see as a big problem --- how did we come to this point, where we now must protect our Congress? This is third world stuff, yet not much concern. More concern over an impeachment. Where do we go from there? Do you think this horrible anger some American's feel with disappearing due to an impeachment?
                  
                  We have American's that at this point are willing to fight to overthrow the present government.  Maybe it's time we ask for accountability of our Government.  Changing rules will only serve to add fuel to the fire. I want democracy to survive, it has worked until this last decade. 
                  
                  I intend to stay in the middle, and just hope for more to drift back. There is no mending the great divide, just because someone says we have to. That will take give and take, and time.

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     'Yes, the need to protect the Capitol and Senator's is new. That should concern all American's. However, have you heard much about what I see as a big problem --- how did we come to this point, where we now must protect our Congress?'
                     
                     How did we get here?  Simple - Donald J. Trump's lies.  He lied in 2016 about election fraud, proven by his own commission on election fraud that found no systemic fraud to validate his claims.  Republicans learned nothing from that and doubled down on the same false claims during the 2020 election.  And when Trump organized a rally on January 6th (his first tweet organizing it was on December 19, claiming that rally was going to be 'wild'), he had been constantly lying to his supporters for nearly 77 days.
                     
                     The lawyer for the QAnon Shaman had this to say pertaining to his client:
                     "For people like Jake, for millions of Americans, they truly did hang on every word of their president, our president, the person that we permitted day-in, day-out to speak to us in ways and in fashions that simply weren't true," Watkins told the media.
                     
                     Watkins went on to describe the "process of unwinding" that his client had to go through while he was in police custody - which he likened to being deprogrammed from a cult.
                     
                     That's how we got to where Congress needs protection from the cult of Trump.

                     replyreport
2. 82

   emgeposted 4 years ago

   This impeachment vote is a farce. I feel very sad that this is taking place because it points to only one thing and that is, America is going to crack just as a mirror cracks and the crack remains. It also heralds the fact that one tycoon sits and decides the fate of the country by banning a former president from social media. This is intolerance in the extreme and signals the end of the American domination of the world. Sadly many writers on this site also are jumping on the bandwagon against the previous president and talk and talking of the Russian influence and all that bullshit. They forget that the biggest destabilizer in the world was the United States itself right from the time in the early 50s when the CIA carried out the coup in Iran to the assassination of Allende In Chile. The USA destabilized the subcontinent by arming Pakistan against India. History has its own way of dealing with countries like the USA and that is they implode from inside and that is what is happening now.   A Mirror is required to see how you look and sitting outside America I am holding the mirror for people who are in America and I hope they can see it.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I would argue that when someone incites their supporters to storm the Capitol and those supporters articulate an intent of assassinating our elected officials, that was the moment America cracked.  Not when a private company, well within their rights, bans the person whose propaganda and words led to that domestic terrorism.
      
      Someone getting banned from Facebook and Twitter is not the end of the world.  And denying Russia's interference, as well as the Campaign Chairman of the Trump Campaign assisting that interference, in 2016 is a choice to live in denial.
      
      No denying US foreign policy has destabilized parts of the world though.  On that, we can be in agreement.

      replyreport
   2. 71

      Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Well I agree about the first sentence for sure, the impeachment is where they are focusing the American people... while the changes are being made with fast and furious frenzy to the Nation.
      
      Biden is fast at work, reversing all Trump did, such as Trump's EO Blocking Chinese Propaganda And Infiltration, Trump's rule blocking foreign adversaries from our electrical grid. While creating a new policy that allows for Chinese propaganda in the US.
      
      The country won't know what hit it, but there will be plenty believing it was the fault of the pandemic and Trump, because their "news" is going to tell them just that, over, and over, and over again.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Valeantposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Fact Check...
         
         Biden did revoke a Trump-era policy regarding Chinese-sponsored education programs, but it only required K-12 schools and universities to disclose their ties to such institutions. There never was a ban on "Chinese Communist propaganda" in schools.
         
         https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did … ls-1568043
         
         https://campusreform.org/?id=16784
         
         And if Trump had such concerns, why the heck did he wait until the final days of his presidency to enact it?  It's not like these CI's didn't exist during all four years of that moron's term.  And this is the stuff you have outrage about?  Seriously?
         
         As for the foreign adversaries electrical grid claim...that too was false.  He didn't reverse it, he put a 90-day pause on it to evaluate it.  Executive Order 13920 of May 1, 2020 (Securing the United States Bulk-Power System), is “effectively suspended for 90 days,” says one of the many executive orders issued on Wednesday.  “The Secretary of Energy and the Director of [Office of Management and Budget] shall jointly consider whether to recommend that a replacement order be issued.”

         replyreport
3. 75

   wildernessposted 4 years ago

   A nice thought, but there are a couple of major problems.  First, it isn't (or shouldn't be) about conscience; votes should be about carefully considered facts rather the feelings of the one voting.  Second, our system doesn't allow personal consideration; votes are required to be along party lines.  And finally, how our legislators vote must be public in order that their constituents know what is being done in their name.

   replyreport
4. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago

   I think all votes should be transparent, including this one. I'm sorry that GOP senators are being threatened by extremist Trump supporters, and I can understand fear, but at the same time, they signed on to this. Making tough decisions is part of their public service responsibilities and they owe it to their country to do the right thing, even if it is difficult.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      If only it were a matter of "doing the right thing"...even if the "right thing" was plain and apparent to all.
      
      But it isn't; it is mostly about playing the political game and doing whatever will keep them in their job.
      
      Nevertheless, I agree; it must be open and transparent.  We already have far too much going on behind closed doors, where the people haven't a clue what is being done.

      replyreport