magellan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-30-07 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 8. Oh yeah, they lost big |
|
A grand total of 11 seats over two election cycles -- supposedly as punishment for impeaching Clinton. Compared to the 36 seats they lost just last November, I'd hardly call that off-putting.
|
| -Impeach to Win. Refuse, You Lose. |
pat_k |
May-30-07 11:10 AM |
#0 |
 -
impeach and acquit -- you lose |
onenote |
May-30-07 11:11 AM |
#1 |
 -
Just like the Republicans did. Oh, wait, they didn't lose. n/t |
sfexpat2000 |
May-30-07 11:17 AM |
#3 |
| -
oh, wait, they did lose |
onenote |
May-30-07 11:28 AM |
#4 |
| -
Oh yeah, they lost big |
magellan |
May-30-07 11:47 AM |
#8 |
 -
how many Senate seats can Democrats afford to lose in 2008? |
onenote |
May-30-07 11:51 AM |
#11 |
| -
And perhaps you're wrong |
magellan |
May-30-07 12:26 PM |
#13 |
| -
LOL!!! |
onenote |
May-30-07 12:45 PM |
#15 |
| -
Tell me, what was the bumper crop in '76 |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-30-07 12:47 PM |
#16 |
| -
The premise of this subthread is the consequence of impeachment and acquittal |
onenote |
May-30-07 01:08 PM |
#19 |
| -
I will correct your history here |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-30-07 01:22 PM |
#20 |
| -
I stand corrected, although it doesn't change my point |
onenote |
May-30-07 01:50 PM |
#25 |
| -
this is where it is more like '74 |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-30-07 01:53 PM |
#26 |
| -
I understand your point, but still think the big difference is bipartisanship |
onenote |
May-30-07 02:45 PM |
#31 |
| -
I do believe that the bipartisanship |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-30-07 03:32 PM |
#35 |
| -
ROFL!! |
magellan |
May-30-07 01:01 PM |
#17 |
| -
Sorry, But That Is Pure Non Sequitur |
Senator |
May-30-07 02:29 PM |
#30 |
| -
You're right!!! For God's sake DON'T DO ANYTHING!!! |
jgraz |
May-30-07 01:41 PM |
#24 |
| -
Don't even |
H2O Man |
May-30-07 03:35 PM |
#36 |
| -
Which is hte point I made with my senator today |
nadinbrzezinski |
May-30-07 07:44 PM |
#47 |
| -
That's true. They had to rig 2000. Point taken. n/t |
sfexpat2000 |
May-30-07 02:02 PM |
#28 |
| -
The impeachment of Bill Clinton was a huge asset to the Repukes |
truedelphi |
May-30-07 02:59 PM |
#32 |
| -
= the opposite of reality. |
pat_k |
May-30-07 11:33 AM |
#5 |
| -
"No hearing or investigation will ever get the level of coverage" |
onenote |
May-30-07 11:38 AM |
#7 |
| -
There is no "cover up" to uncover. |
pat_k |
May-30-07 12:41 PM |
#14 |
| -
Well said. |
Kurovski |
May-30-07 01:05 PM |
#18 |
| -
That's the most beautiful piece of writing I've seen on this subject |
magellan |
May-30-07 01:31 PM |
#21 |
| -
excellent reply -- please consider pulling all these responses together |
jgraz |
May-30-07 01:59 PM |
#27 |
| -
getting articles of impeachment to the Senate by July 4 is not an achievable goal |
onenote |
May-30-07 04:25 PM |
#40 |
| -
Of course it is. The only thing stopping them is their irrational. . . |
pat_k |
May-31-07 01:06 PM |
#55 |
| -
BTW, already dealt with "Republicans won't support it". . . |
pat_k |
May-31-07 04:55 PM |
#60 |
| -
A-fuckin'-men. |
porphyrian |
May-30-07 01:34 PM |
#22 |
| -
Confront them with their own words -- |
pat_k |
May-30-07 07:17 PM |
#44 |
| -
No, that's exactly the kind of answer I'm looking for - something to DO. |
porphyrian |
May-30-07 08:43 PM |
#49 |
| -
Yes. And YES. And YES!!!!! |
calimary |
May-30-07 07:27 PM |
#46 |
| -
IB/C!!!!! IB/C!!!!! IB/C!!!!! IB/C!!!!! IB/C!!!!! IB/C!!!!! |
Norquist Nemesis |
May-30-07 11:13 AM |
#2 |
| -
Soooooo many problems with impeachment |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 11:37 AM |
#6 |
| -
Sooooooo many more problems with failure to impeach |
Senator |
May-30-07 11:49 AM |
#9 |
| -
Impeachment with no conviction, with a year and a half left in his second term? |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 11:50 AM |
#10 |
| -
Would be a great start. Are you suggesting there's some downside to this? |
Senator |
May-30-07 02:06 PM |
#29 |
| -
So during the next few months we are going to: |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 03:26 PM |
#34 |
| -
Impeachment, even with removal, should take weeks, not months |
Senator |
May-30-07 03:37 PM |
#37 |
| -
what I am saying is there are lot of people here who don't have a clue about political processes |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 03:40 PM |
#38 |
| -
Well, that's not quite so |
Senator |
May-30-07 04:24 PM |
#39 |
| -
I can't even begin to tell you how many "I am no longer a Dem" posts I've seen |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 04:29 PM |
#41 |
| -
Perhaps you should begin to compare the number you've seen... |
Senator |
May-30-07 09:05 PM |
#50 |
| -
maybe Cindy Sheehan should have done the same, eh? |
ComerPerro |
May-30-07 09:29 PM |
#51 |
| -
the idea that impeachment and removal could be accomplished in weeks is laughable |
onenote |
May-30-07 05:10 PM |
#43 |
| -
<deleted> |
pat_k |
May-30-07 10:31 PM |
#52 |
| -
Another evasion of logic and reality. |
Senator |
May-31-07 02:26 AM |
#53 |
| -
Strong and Right leads to IMPEACHMENT every time too |
ThomWV |
May-30-07 11:53 AM |
#12 |
| -
Simple enough even for "strategists" to understand. K & R nt |
glitch |
May-30-07 01:34 PM |
#23 |
| -
Nominated. |
H2O Man |
May-30-07 03:00 PM |
#33 |
| -
impeach for peace |
thegreatcause2 |
May-30-07 04:38 PM |
#42 |
| -
It worked so well for Gingrich and co., didn't it? |
jpgray |
May-30-07 07:18 PM |
#45 |
| -
What happened to George McGovern in '72 then? |
yurbud |
May-30-07 08:19 PM |
#48 |
| -
"dirty tricks not ever seen before in the American democracy" |
pat_k |
May-31-07 01:05 PM |
#54 |
| -
the one percent doctrine is propaganda not an actual strategic doctrine |
yurbud |
May-31-07 01:35 PM |
#56 |
| -
Since it is impossible to apply it generally in any sense. |
pat_k |
May-31-07 02:44 PM |
#57 |
| -
it is only a doctrine in that it can be applied the way cops use the seat belt law |
yurbud |
May-31-07 03:07 PM |
#58 |
| -
Yep. Although. . . |
pat_k |
May-31-07 03:33 PM |
#59 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread