5 ms·

His argument that Donald Trump would be a better choice for President than Hillary Clinton because the former would be easier to remove from office than the lat

His argument that Donald Trump would be a better choice for President than Hillary Clinton because the former would be easier to remove from office than the latter, arguing specifically that "congressional Republicans would [not] automatically spring to his defense, if he overstepped the line". Doesn't seem like a great example of keen political judgment in hindsight.

haolez 6y ago
That's probably true, since Hilary's campaign cost 3 times more than Trump's campaign. In the end, both sides are there to defend their interests, and not yours.
- djsumdog 6y ago
  I made this back in 2016, about voting and that famous paper that talks about how the opinions of voters are really only expressed for the top 10% of income earners in the US: https://battlepenguin.video/videos/watch/99a2d4b3-cfe6-4a77-9695-c70c64e4a163 https://battlepenguin.video/videos/watch/99a2d4b3-cfe6-4a77-... and few months later I followed it up about the outrage and anger that was being poured out: https://battlepenguin.com/politics/the-fallout-of-american-anger/ https://battlepenguin.com/politics/the-fallout-of-american-a... We're still in the shadow of that outrage, and it's directed at the puppets and not the Fortune 500 execs that are pulling the strings.
derision 6y ago
I've seen numerous examples of congressional Republicans not automatically springing to his defense
- Eleopteryx 6y ago
  "Numerous examples" is fantastic but what he said was a generalization and as a generalization it holds up. What % of congressional Republicans would you estimate "did not automatically spring to his defense"?
- MisterBastahrd 6y ago
  Meanwhile Senate Republicans wouldn't even vote to see evidence in his impeachment trial.
googthrowaway42 6y ago
That's a pretty uninformed reading of the situation as it happened. If you followed conservative media throughout the process it wasn't at all obvious that establishment Republicans were going to actually mount a defense of the President. There was a lot of wavering back and forth as the narrative evolved and was fought over. It was not automatic at all.
- Eleopteryx 6y ago
  Your reading of the situation seems predicated on a conveniently pedantic definition of "automatic" from my perspective. I watched the entirety proceedings as they transpired and don't recall witnessing much hesitation from Republicans, but it's definitely possible that by not "following conservative media" I overlooked the actually agonizing deliberation that transpired behind the scenes. I would love to educate myself more on this topic, can you link to any examples of what you're talking about?
  - keiferski 6y ago
    Most of the conservative establishment was against Trump at the beginning. Especially Fox News, the primary mouthpiece of the then-traditional Republican Party. Remember that Trump was/is quite critical of the Bushes and other neocons. Watch one of those "Trump won't be president" highlight reels on YouTube and you'll see plenty of Republicans included. Even today, you have a fair amount of Republicans who criticize Trump for various reasons, including Mitt Romney, the 2012 nominee, and John Kasich. Additionally the new "Lincoln Project" is funded and run by anti-Trump Republicans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project
    - MisterBastahrd 6y ago
      The Lincoln Project is mostly a group of ad guys who would normally get paid at this time of year but have made themselves anathema for the time being from their traditional customers. They've just pivoted because the smart money is on getting funding from Trump oppo groups.
  - 6y ago
justaman 6y ago
Depends on when this was said. 2015, there was a long list of republicans who didn't like Trump.
- Eleopteryx 6y ago
  It actually doesn't depend on when it was said. It was wrong. But, for the record, he said it in October 2016.
  - dnh44 6y ago
    According to the OP he said Trump would be easier to remove than Clinton. The fact that Trump was not removed from office does not make the statement wrong.
    - csallen 6y ago
      He also said, "congressional Republicans would [not] automatically spring to [Trump's] defense, if he overstepped the line," which was clearly wrong.
      - dnh44 6y ago
        I don’t think they automatically sprung to his defense though. It seems to me that the Republican establishment didn’t support Trump but that he was able to rally his base in order force their support begrudgingly. I believe the term that Trump’s base used for those Republicans was RINO, Republicans In Name Only. So the fact that this vocabulary existed among Trump’s base to me indicates that their support for Trump was not automatic.
mrkstu 6y ago
Mitt Romney was the first Senator, of any party, to cross party lines to vote for an impeachment of a President of their own party. Many Republican legislators immediately and publicly renounced Trump's comments[0] regarding delaying the election. The [R]'s can read the wind and since their base is tied to the hip to Trump at the moment they'll play ball on day to day things and have his back on most things, but they are all quite aware he is a temporary force that will be spent eventually and the last thing they want to do is give him the permanent keys to the kingdom. [0]:https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/politics/trump-election-tweet-republican-reaction/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/politics/trump-election-tweet...
raxxorrax 6y ago
I think there is merit to that, although I wouldn't care as much about republicans holding him to account. It would be nice but unrealistic from observations (not based in US). I would argue that you should vote someone the press is actually critical of. Now, the press was very critical of H. Clinton too, but that was ignored because people made fun of Trump.

haolez 6y ago

That's probably true, since Hilary's campaign cost 3 times more than Trump's campaign. In the end, both sides are there to defend their interests, and not yours.

djsumdog 6y ago
I made this back in 2016, about voting and that famous paper that talks about how the opinions of voters are really only expressed for the top 10% of income earners in the US: https://battlepenguin.video/videos/watch/99a2d4b3-cfe6-4a77-9695-c70c64e4a163 https://battlepenguin.video/videos/watch/99a2d4b3-cfe6-4a77-... and few months later I followed it up about the outrage and anger that was being poured out: https://battlepenguin.com/politics/the-fallout-of-american-anger/ https://battlepenguin.com/politics/the-fallout-of-american-a... We're still in the shadow of that outrage, and it's directed at the puppets and not the Fortune 500 execs that are pulling the strings.

derision 6y ago

I've seen numerous examples of congressional Republicans not automatically springing to his defense

Eleopteryx 6y ago
"Numerous examples" is fantastic but what he said was a generalization and as a generalization it holds up. What % of congressional Republicans would you estimate "did not automatically spring to his defense"?
MisterBastahrd 6y ago
Meanwhile Senate Republicans wouldn't even vote to see evidence in his impeachment trial.

googthrowaway42 6y ago

That's a pretty uninformed reading of the situation as it happened. If you followed conservative media throughout the process it wasn't at all obvious that establishment Republicans were going to actually mount a defense of the President. There was a lot of wavering back and forth as the narrative evolved and was fought over. It was not automatic at all.

Eleopteryx 6y ago
Your reading of the situation seems predicated on a conveniently pedantic definition of "automatic" from my perspective. I watched the entirety proceedings as they transpired and don't recall witnessing much hesitation from Republicans, but it's definitely possible that by not "following conservative media" I overlooked the actually agonizing deliberation that transpired behind the scenes. I would love to educate myself more on this topic, can you link to any examples of what you're talking about?
- keiferski 6y ago
  Most of the conservative establishment was against Trump at the beginning. Especially Fox News, the primary mouthpiece of the then-traditional Republican Party. Remember that Trump was/is quite critical of the Bushes and other neocons. Watch one of those "Trump won't be president" highlight reels on YouTube and you'll see plenty of Republicans included. Even today, you have a fair amount of Republicans who criticize Trump for various reasons, including Mitt Romney, the 2012 nominee, and John Kasich. Additionally the new "Lincoln Project" is funded and run by anti-Trump Republicans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project
  - MisterBastahrd 6y ago
    The Lincoln Project is mostly a group of ad guys who would normally get paid at this time of year but have made themselves anathema for the time being from their traditional customers. They've just pivoted because the smart money is on getting funding from Trump oppo groups.
- 6y ago

justaman 6y ago

Depends on when this was said. 2015, there was a long list of republicans who didn't like Trump.

Eleopteryx 6y ago
It actually doesn't depend on when it was said. It was wrong. But, for the record, he said it in October 2016.
- dnh44 6y ago
  According to the OP he said Trump would be easier to remove than Clinton. The fact that Trump was not removed from office does not make the statement wrong.
  - csallen 6y ago
    He also said, "congressional Republicans would [not] automatically spring to [Trump's] defense, if he overstepped the line," which was clearly wrong.
    - dnh44 6y ago
      I don’t think they automatically sprung to his defense though. It seems to me that the Republican establishment didn’t support Trump but that he was able to rally his base in order force their support begrudgingly. I believe the term that Trump’s base used for those Republicans was RINO, Republicans In Name Only. So the fact that this vocabulary existed among Trump’s base to me indicates that their support for Trump was not automatic.

mrkstu 6y ago

Mitt Romney was the first Senator, of any party, to cross party lines to vote for an impeachment of a President of their own party. Many Republican legislators immediately and publicly renounced Trump's comments[0] regarding delaying the election. The [R]'s can read the wind and since their base is tied to the hip to Trump at the moment they'll play ball on day to day things and have his back on most things, but they are all quite aware he is a temporary force that will be spent eventually and the last thing they want to do is give him the permanent keys to the kingdom. [0]:https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/politics/trump-election-tweet-republican-reaction/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/politics/trump-election-tweet...

raxxorrax 6y ago

I think there is merit to that, although I wouldn't care as much about republicans holding him to account. It would be nice but unrealistic from observations (not based in US). I would argue that you should vote someone the press is actually critical of. Now, the press was very critical of H. Clinton too, but that was ignored because people made fun of Trump.