• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Those Five Republican (?) Senators

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Re-election for Senators who voted to continue trial:
Senator....................................re-election year
Collins.........................................2026
Murkowski..................................2026
Sasse..........................................2026
Romney.......................................2024
Toomey........................................2022
Hmmm - 4 of 5 have at least 4 years left - their jobs are safe.
And that is the reason the House has only 2 year terms - much more
accountability to the voters.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Hmmm - 4 of 5 have at least 4 years left - their jobs are safe.
Isn't that also just about the statistical norm for the Senate?
1/3 of ALL Senators are 2022.
1/3 of ALL Senators are 2024.
1/3 of ALL Senators are 2026.

So ANY 6 Senators chosen at random would have about 2 from each group.
New Senators seem a little less forgiving of being attacked than those needing the TRUMP voting block for re-election in an anti-GOP climate.
I think that I can understand that.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
But 1/2 were just re-elected......

Thus 80% have at least 4 years for voters to forget

Now if at least four were up for election next year......
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Re-election for Senators who voted to continue trial:
Senator....................................re-election year
Collins.........................................2026
Murkowski..................................2026
Sasse..........................................2026
Romney.......................................2024
Toomey........................................2022
Hmmm - 4 of 5 have at least 4 years left - their jobs are safe.
And that is the reason the House has only 2 year terms - much more
accountability to the voters.
all of those are really Dems!
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Now if at least four were up for election next year......
I agree that means that their decision is NOT about political posturing for re-election.
That suggests that they actually believe that the former President did something wrong (or are constitutional scholars voting on the merits of the issue of the ability to impeach a President that has left office).

While I do not support the impeachment (because no positive result can come from it), I think that there is merit to the argument for improper behavior. The GOP screamed "we have evidence of widespread fraud" for MONTHS and ultimately produced no real or substantial evidence. I have seen better evidence for "bigfoot" than widespread fraud of hundreds of thousands of votes. The arguments sounded good in the beginning, but the mythical "proof" never materialized. Just a shadow campaign of smears and innuendo and harsh rhetoric. I think a better case can be made that Donald Trump refused to cooperate with the smooth transfer of power (one of his Presidential duties) than the results of the election were really the result of fraud.

The GOP telling their supporters NOT to mail in their votes was the stupidest idea that I have ever heard in my entire life and that strategy alone cost them the election ... and deservedly so. Who tells supporters not to vote? My wife and I mailed in our votes for Trump. Should we have just stayed home and let Biden win FLORIDA, too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsr

atpollard

Well-Known Member
"Let's be clear: The anger in this state party has never been about me violating principle or abandoning conservative policy -- I'm one of the most conservative voters in the Senate -- the anger's always been simply about me not bending the knee to one guy,"
- Senator Ben Sasse
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Senator Ben Sasse on Abortion (Feb 6, 2021):

“We will continue to advocate for the bipartisan passage of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act in this Congress,” Wussow said. “And as the pandemic continues, we will continue to advocate that the religious freedom rights of churches and ministries be upheld and respected. These policies are as common sense as they are critically needed.”

Sasse’s amendment was based on his Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which he first introduced in 2015. Democratic Sens. Robert Casey of Pennsylvania and Joe Manchin of West Virginia joined all the Republicans in voting for the amendment.

“There’s a lot of complicated debates in this chamber, but this isn’t actually one of them,” Sasse told the Senate before the vote. “Here’s a chance for 100 Senators to come together and support every baby. Every baby deserves a fighting chance.”
 

Baptist Believer

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Re-election for Senators who voted to continue trial:
A better way to put that would be that "they believed it was constitutional to impeach a person no longer in office."

That was the sole topic of the entire proceeding, although Trump's attorneys talked about all kinds of things unrelated to the issue at hand. Everyone thought they did a terrible job, from their client (the former President) to Democrats and Republicans on both sides.

To be fair, they really couldn't make a good argument concerning the issue, but there was an established weak argument to be made that they didn't even attempt.

The former President needs better representation, but he can't get it since he is a terrible client.
 

Baptist Believer

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
all of those are really Dems!
One of the key signs of a cult is that any level of independent thought, questioning, or dissent is forbidden.

If you don't walk lockstep with the Trump cult, you are attacked as being the hated opposition.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
It has been stated - elsewhere that the real reason is the Dems are afraid that Trump would run again in 2024- and if so- they might be afraid that he would win.

That and/or - they just want to add another blow to him.

Either way- I see it as a waste of time

And I would think the same if in two years when the R's get a House majority -
I wouldnt want them to try to impeach Obama or either Clinton - its done and over with.

Let sleeping dogs lie.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Pat Toomey is retiring in 2022, so after decades of fighting for "supply side economics" he appears to be throwing in the towel on the increase spending and protectionism New Republican Party.

Looking up their track records, Collins, Murkowski and Romney all have an axe to grind with Trump and have a steady record of opposing him going back to 2016 (and cast previous votes for his impeachment).

So I think the 6 year Senate terms are working like Madison intended ... these people are not making decisions based on the threats of rapidly changing popular opinions.
 

Baptist Believer

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It has been stated - elsewhere that the real reason is the Dems are afraid that Trump would run again in 2024- and if so- they might be afraid that he would win.
I would think that all patriotic Americans would be concerned about Trump trying to run a shadow Presidency over the next four years and then running again, since he has never accepted the result of any election he has been in. In 2016, he claimed massive fraud (completely unproven, even though he set up a hand-picked commission to find evidence), and in 2020, more of the same, with no real evidence. His attorneys made it a fundamental part of their argument yesterday that Trump lost the election because the majority of voters didn't like his leadership.

Either way- I see it as a waste of time
It is intended to be a consequence of running a campaign to undermine the validity of the election which resulted in an deadly insurgency upon the Capitol, his Vice President, and both houses of Congress. It is a minimal price to pay for the "Stop the Steal" campaign.

And I would think the same if in two years when the R's get a House majority -
I wouldnt want them to try to impeach Obama or either Clinton - its done and over with.
The only reason they are continuing the impeachment process after the former President is out of office is because Mitch McConnell controlled the timing. Republicans have no right to complain about it since it was a Republican decision.

Let sleeping dogs lie.
Only a month after the attack on our Capitol and the Constitutional process that left more people dead than the Benghazi foul-up?

How long did we hear about Benghazi?
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Either way- I see it as a waste of time
I agree.
It is worse than just a "waste of time", it is a TERRIBLE precedent.
When Nixon was facing impeachment, there was no question it was an "action of last resort" for the crime of bugging the headquarters of the opposing party (an action that threatened the very political system).

When Clinton was impeached for Perjuring himself in a court, clearly the crime was real, but the issue was was it POLITICAL to impeach him or was it relevant to the Office of President. That was resolved by raising the bar to say that the crimes of a President must impact his ability to be President. The votes also dangerously politicized what should be a "last resort".

With the Democratic Congress attacking the Trump Administration, we see the constitutional process of "last resort" becoming the "preferred weapon of partisan politics". That is an UGLY precedent because the GOP will sooner or later control the House of Representatives and a Democrat will sit in the White House. Will non-stop impeachments become the new "normal"?
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
And normally the Presidents party looses seats in both Houses in the mid term elections.
 

SGO

Well-Known Member
You would impress more if you would advocate stopping the murder of black babies with half the energy of political posturing about "cults".

And how about all of us, me included, who are more concerned with the current state, rather than dead babies?
Or how about a new slogan, "Dead Babies Don't Matter" or more realistically, "Dead Babies Matter Slightly".

Don't worry we will not hear their screams.
You can rest by calling me a hypocrite if that helps.

R2233e3b7611f52a4eee18f84bf53a657
 
Last edited:

atpollard

Well-Known Member
It is intended to be a consequence of running a campaign to undermine the validity of the election which resulted in an deadly insurgency upon the Capitol
Don't overplay the "deadly" card.

January 6, 2021 Five people died (one officer and 4 civilians):
(2) accidental deaths from natural causes [heart attack and stroke] unrelated to the Capitol Building.
(2) accidental deaths related to the conflict
  • Officer suffered stroke and died the next day after brawling with protesters and returning to his office.
  • Woman was crushed by the crowd charging the Capitol Building.
(1) woman shot climbing through a window in the Capitol Building


Since you mentioned Bengazi, here is what an insurgency looks like:
September 11, 2012 Armed gunmen burned the US Mission killing 2:
  • US Ambassador Christopher Stevens died in fire
  • computer expert Sean Smith died in fire
September 12, 2012 Armed gunmen attack CIA Compound with mortar fire killing 2 armed security guards:
  • former US Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods killed by mortar
  • former US Navy SEAL Glen Doherty killed by mortar
Armed attackers, two building complexes destroyed, four people dead (no accidents) ... that is an insurgency.
 

OnlyaSinner

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The only reason they are continuing the impeachment process after the former President is out of office is because Mitch McConnell controlled the timing. Republicans have no right to complain about it since it was a Republican decision.

And the Ds quickly agreed on the delay, as they're trying to balance two priorities, the desire to convict Trump and the (more important, IMO) wish to allow the Biden administration to concentrate on enacting its agenda. McConnell may have proposed the date but the decision was bipartisan.

all of those are really Dems!

Some irony here related to Susan Collins. Her 2020 challenger's campaign was mostly about her supposed lock-step with Trump/McConnell. That campaign was also gifted about $4 million in anti-Collins pledges, made when she voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to SCOTUS. All the polls had the challenger, Sarah Gideon, ahead by 3-6 points, but Collins won by 9 and had a majority that eliminated the need for ranked-choice, this as Trump lost the state by more than he had in 2016.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
You would impress more if you would advocate stopping the murder of black babies with half the energy of political posturing about "cults".

And how about all of us, me included, who are more concerned with the current state, rather than dead babies?
Or how about a new slogan, "Dead Babies Don't Matter" or more realistically, "Dead Babies Matter Slightly".

Don't worry we will not hear their screams.
You can rest by calling me a hypocrite if that helps.

We need 8 more senators to grow a conscience:

"During the overnight “vote-a-rama,” the Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., that requires a baby that survives an abortion or attempted abortion to receive the same degree of care offered any other child born alive at the same point in gestation. The roll call was 52-48 for Sasse’s amendment, but it required 60 votes." (Feb 6, 2021)
 
Top