Yeah. Understood and acknowledged. There was HUGE money there for the kids of more than one elite . . . that’s for certain. I mean, it was free money. I like free money a lot, too. However, mine usually comes in in amounts far, far south of millions at a time.
So I take your point. Period.
There is one other aspect, unrelated to your post, which I did not cover above:
Any POTUS, and any candidate for POTUS, luv luv luvs the limelight. It’s part of their personality. By his action Romney now has the spotlight squarely on himself . . . . right where he wants it! You might argue it’s not worth it because of the accompanying hate. But Romney’s animus, even loathing, for Trump easily carries the day. And that spotlight feels SO good and feeds his ego to the max.
It was NOT a bipartisan vote to remove Trump. Romney is a Democrat, right out of the Massachusetts mold from which he emerged several years ago.
I suspect that is correct. But it’s a Romney/Trump thing, not a Republican/Democrat thing. I have no respect for congressmen who tow the party line regardless of their personal opinions and feelings. I want them to act based on what they personally deem to be right - for better or for worse. When it’s for the worse, I’ll call them idiots and blame the voters who elected such morons in the first place, but I respect them (to some extent) for sticking to their own guns.
I’m of the opinion that the entire process of legislating is rather dumb. Legislatures should be isolated from each other, to be presented bills for a vote on their own merit, without knowing how anyone else is voting. Sure, you can’t ban communication between them entirely, but there could be rules to minimize it while decisions are on the table.
This is hilarious. Claiming a prior (recent) person who won the Republican nomination for president is not a Republican.
On the contrary, this is a first with senator(s) of the same party as the president breaking from their “party” and voting for conviction and removal.
The mental gymnastics is funny. IMO
It’s also somewhat silly to hold up that " no Republicans voted for the articles of impeachment in the house", just because the necessity of voting for them led to a member switching to independent only after indicating support of the articles due to the inability to ignore the corrupt conduct. There’s not a stronger conservative than Amash.
As far as impeachment goes, I’m surprised that it’s considered acceptable behaviour to tow the party line. I am certain that some Dems thought him not guilty.
Just like the Clinton impeachment vote, Democrats thought and voted in lock step, despite there being concrete evidence of Clinton’s guilt. Although Republicans appeared to vote their conscience, I suspect it was tinged by political/media fallout. .
It is pivotal to remember that, prior to the 2016 election, nobody but nobody gave Trump any chance whatsoever of actually winning. This is true domestically, but it is equally true in Ukraine. It is instructive to contemplate how different things subsequent would have been had Hillary won, not just here but also in Ukraine. And Hunter, Chris, and whoever Romney’s relative is would quietly have been able to keep their windfalls with nobody being any the wiser.
It is clearly not limited to members of a particular political party. The elites get away with stuff cleanly whereas nobody posting here would have even a faint chance. And most often no one ever finds out. But Trump is not a member of their club and he will not cover for them. It’s just another reason for Romney to detest him.
Trump is a New York Democrat who managed to convince rural America he is one of them.
Much like the president, you are bitterly dividing with your “if you’re not one of us, you’re one of them” rhetoric. Trump stole the Republican Party of yesteryear and pushed it much further to the right.
Spoken like a true Communist. Loyalty to the party above all.
Democrats became far too accustomed to Republican leaders who were squishes politically. Examples include Dole, Bush Jr., McCain, and Romney. These people tried to portray themselves as Conservatives in order to grab our votes. They were insufficiently conservative. I nearly went nuts, for example, when Bush Jr. had the temerity, in 2005, to nominate Harriet Miers, a “former” Democrat, to the Court. This after I had stupidly supported Bush no less than three times with my vote. I was already halfway out of his Republican Party by then. The Miers thing was the final straw.
We agree on this. I know too much about NYC people ever to have been fooled. I did not support Trump during the 2016 primary season. My support went to Ted Cruz . . . but I was wildly outvoted and forced to climb aboard the Trump train. After all what was I to do, vote for Hillary? I’m not that nuts.
Anyway, while Trump started out poorly, he is learning what it means to be hated by liberals. That experience is driving his underlying NYC politics further to the right, something of which I strongly approve.
Trump’s victory this coming fall appeared uncertain even recently. But with the Democrat Party currently engaged in self-immolation, Trump’s electoral success now surely looks all but assured.
I think it’s far too premature to make that statement. Even if everything remains as-is, it may lean in Trump’s favor but still remains well within the margin of error.
I have been waiting since Tuesday evening for Democrats to blame Trump for their Iowa debacle. This even though I was unable to conjure a way for them to accomplish such blame placement. Oh how shortsighted on my part! Democrats are wonderfully creative people. They have done it, it’s clearly Trump’s fault, and that is that!:
Mr. Perez, DNC chair, just announced a RE-CANVAS of the ENTIRE Iowa Democrat caucus vote.
Folks, we are back to square one in Iowa!!
My opinion:
More and more I now believe we might be experiencing a 2016 redux. Back then there was huge fear of a Bernie general election candidacy. Now, again, Bernie is looking like a possible winner. This is something I’m now thinking certain Democrat elites believe they simply cannot allow and must thwart . . . . . by any means necessary!!
Remember, this whole thing only became a thing because Sanders secretly sent people to caucus sites to tabulate the results separate from the official results, and those people found discrepancies between the two results. I cant imagine they’d draw attention by trying to use a recanvas to manipulate results, but it does seem like there may have still been indications of funny business after they did tabulate the totals the first time.
Something is going on. This entire thing “don’t smell right”.
The key benefit both Bernie and Mayor Pete would take out of Iowa, with a fair process. is “the big mo” . . . momentum! There are people in the party who want to deny both individuals that hard-earned reward.
With Biden currently grasping wildly for fourth place, Democrat elite king makers are probably struggling hard just to hang onto their sanity.
"President Bush did the same thing starting in 2001 when he took over following Clinton (remember all the “W"s having been removed from the White House typewriters?)”
I’ll take things that didn’t actually happen for a million, Bob.
It happened. Albeit not to typewriters, but to computer keyboards.
“Damage, theft, vandalism, and pranks did occur in the White House during transition from Clinton to Bush. The cost: $913,000 to $1,114,000, including $54,850 to replace computer keyboards, many with damaged or missing “W” keys.”
“…a formal review by the General Accounting Office, Congress’ investigative agency, “had found no damage to the offices of the White House’s East or West Wings or EOB” and that Bush’s own representatives had reported “there is no record of damage that may have been deliberately caused by the employees of the Clinton administration.””
President Trump’s approval rating, among likely voters, jumped yesterday to 50%. 49% of likely voters disapprove of the President.
Today’s January employment report, just released, should not damage Trump’s rating. It’s pretty good and is much stronger than predictions. Revisions of the November and December employment numbers were also positive.
