So what would qualify as grounds for impeachment for you?
Significant abuses of presidential authority. Based on the standards of many who supported the Clinton impeachment or Bush impeachment, half of American presidents should have been impeached.
This dickhead will be out of office in a few months. Rather than focusing on impeaching him, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on not electing another dickhead?
No matter how you conduct the poll, you'll get a sample of your voters. If I poll only black people on the question "Are you a white person?", I'll get "a sample out of those [who did get the chance to vote]". That, however, doesn't mean that white people don't exist.
Online polls skew the sample to online users. Furthermore, on news stories, they then further skew the sample to online users interested in your story. In this case, those actively interested in impeaching the president would be far more likely to read and share that story as would those who either don't care or would be more negative to impeachment.
Again, look no further than online polls that showed Ron Paul dominating the Republican primary. There you can see the significant risk to polls done in an unscientific manner.
I never claimed it meant that other opinions didn't exist. I claimed that out of these 600,000 voters 89% want Bush impeached.
So why wouldn't people who don't want Bush impeached want to pass this poll along and to people who agree with them to get better results for their stance?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Lies that lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people I would say are a bit more impeachable...
George Bush's "lies" (which haven't even been demostrated to be more than exaggerations and stupid assumptions) weren't the only thing that "lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people". George Bush could have run around telling all the lies he wanted to and no one would have died. It took much more than lying to lead to this mess.
Significant abuses of presidential authority. Based on the standards of many who supported the Clinton impeachment or Bush impeachment, half of American presidents should have been impeached.
This dickhead will be out of office in a few months. Rather than focusing on impeaching him, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on not electing another dickhead?
Well, if you had said lies and possible broken laws, I'd have agreed with you. But you seemed to be giving carte blanche to the president to break laws willy-nilly without batting an eyelid.
I do think Bush should be impeached, but like you say, it's hard to pin any specific charge on him. The slimy bastard.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Significant abuses of presidential authority. Based on the standards of many who supported the Clinton impeachment or Bush impeachment, half of American presidents should have been impeached.
Maybe they would be less apt to abuse their power if the people actually started holding them accountable. What a concept!
This dickhead will be out of office in a few months. Rather than focusing on impeaching him, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on not electing another dickhead?
I can do both.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I never claimed it meant that other opinions didn't exist. I claimed that out of these 600,000 voters 89% want Bush impeached.
And that would be correct. However, these 600,000 voters are 0.2% of the American population and, unless this is the most miraculous online poll in history, do not represent the American population.
So why wouldn't people who don't want Bush impeached want to pass this poll along and to people who agree with them to get better results for their stance?
Because the psychology is very different. People who are for impeachment are much more passionate than people against it. Furthermore, once one side is visibly winning a poll, those on the other side are less likely to share it as they have to show their opinion is a minority opinion.
There's a reason that this thread wasn't started by someone else and wasn't titled "Msnbc poll is currently showing 11% don't want Bush impeached".
George Bush's "lies" (which haven't even been demostrated to be more than exaggerations and stupid assumptions) weren't the only thing that "lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people". George Bush could have run around telling all the lies he wanted to and no one would have died. It took much more than lying to lead to this mess.
But he gave the orders, no? Was it not his decision?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
And that would be correct. However, these 600,000 voters are 0.2% of the American population and, unless this is the most miraculous online poll in history, do not represent the American population.
So you don't take stock in any polls then? Since every poll is only a sample of the population...
Because the psychology is very different. People who are for impeachment are much more passionate than people against it. Furthermore, once one side is visibly winning a poll, those on the other side are less likely to share it as they have to show their opinion is a minority opinion.
I don't understand that. I fight for issues in which I'm in the minority all the time.
And I remember the people that support Bush as being pretty passionate about it. Remember the Dixie Chicks?
Well, if you had said lies and possible broken laws, I'd have agreed with you. But you seemed to be giving carte blanche to the president to break laws willy-nilly without batting an eyelid.
If the president runs a stop sign, I don't think we should impeach him. If he lies under oath during a witchhunt, I don't think we should impeach him. If he exaggerates a bunch of "evidence" that he probably believes and Congress gives him authority to launch a foolish and disastrous war, I don't think we should impeach him.
If the president seriously oversteps his bounds and violates core Constitutional principles or commits high crimes, then I absolutely would support impeachment.
If that's giving the president "carte blanche", so be it.
Presidential impeachment is a safety valve against dangerous official abuse, not a tool for political commentary. Impeaching George Bush, particularly at this point, does nothing to make this country more safe from abuse.
I do think Bush should be impeached, but like you say, it's hard to pin any specific charge on him. The slimy bastard.
That's the thing -- the Clinton impeachment was more fact-based than would be the Bush impeachment, even if it was more frivilous and pointless. The problems associated with George Bush are much larger than George Bush. Impeachment is nothing more than a vidictive waste of time.
If the president runs a stop sign, I don't think we should impeach him. If he lies under oath during a witchhunt, I don't think we should impeach him. If he exaggerates a bunch of "evidence" that he probably believes and Congress gives him authority to launch a foolish and disastrous war, I don't think we should impeach him.
If the president seriously oversteps his bounds and violates core Constitutional principles or commits high crimes, then I absolutely would support impeachment.
If that's giving the president "carte blanche", so be it.
Presidential impeachment is a safety valve against dangerous official abuse, not a tool for political commentary. Impeaching George Bush, particularly at this point, does nothing to make this country more safe from abuse.
That's the thing -- the Clinton impeachment was more fact-based than would be the Bush impeachment, even if it was more frivilous and pointless. The problems associated with George Bush are much larger than George Bush. Impeachment is nothing more than a vidictive waste of time.
According to Ron Paul, Bush has broke core Constitutional principles...such as warrentless wiretapping and spying.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
if bush is impeached we end up w/cheney. not saying i'm against impeachment, but if we are going to impeach, lets get the whole lot of them the fuck outta there.
If the president runs a stop sign, I don't think we should impeach him. If he lies under oath during a witchhunt, I don't think we should impeach him. If he exaggerates a bunch of "evidence" that he probably believes and Congress gives him authority to launch a foolish and disastrous war, I don't think we should impeach him.
If the president seriously oversteps his bounds and violates core Constitutional principles or commits high crimes, then I absolutely would support impeachment.
If that's giving the president "carte blanche", so be it.
Presidential impeachment is a safety valve against dangerous official abuse, not a tool for political commentary. Impeaching George Bush, particularly at this point, does nothing to make this country more safe from abuse.
I agree about the stop sign, but I do think lying under oath should be grounds for impeachment - surely we can afford to hold our public officials to such basic standards? That's not political commentary, that's upholding the law. The tricky part about impeaching Bush based on the Iraq war is that the lies and bullshit were so widespread across the entire administration that pinning it on any one man is hard.
That's the thing -- the Clinton impeachment was more fact-based than would be the Bush impeachment, even if it was more frivilous and pointless. The problems associated with George Bush are much larger than George Bush. Impeachment is nothing more than a vidictive waste of time.
The sad part is, a Bush impeachment would be, morally, very justified. It's too bad there's no way of impeaching a whole administration in one fell swoop.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
LOL...according to Ron Paul, every president and Congress in the last hundred years has broken core Constitutional principles.
Get a Supreme Court to agree with that, and at that point I'd certainly agree with impeachment.
So when are we going to actually start supporting a better way? Holding officials accountable is a big step towards that. I believe that if you're going to complain about problems you need to actually start being a part of the solution. We can't simply keep shrugging and saying 'Well, this is how it's always been. Why start changing it now?" What a defeatist attitude. Now is always the perfect time to reverse the wrong course we're on.
I agree about the stop sign, but I do think lying under oath should be grounds for impeachment - surely we can afford to hold our public officials to such basic standards? That's not political commentary, that's upholding the law. The tricky part about impeaching Bush based on the Iraq war is that the lies and bullshit were so widespread across the entire administration that pinning it on any one man is hard.
I'm not sure it's "upholding the law" when it's being done for political reasons. I agree with your sentiments here. However, the political game that is now impeachment really drives me crazy.
The sad part is, a Bush impeachment would be, morally, very justified. It's too bad there's no way of impeaching a whole administration in one fell swoop.
That's called revolution. And that comes with it's own moral problems
Good polls use accurate (or near-accurate) samples. Online polls do not.
Sampling a population can give you results very close to the entire population, assuming your sample is representative.
So online polls like this one where you can only vote once are inaccurate based on which groups decide to share the poll? How can we be sure other polls aren't skewed by the opinions of those conducting the poll then? How can we be sure of equal representation in any poll?
Yeah, I remember the Dixie Chicks. Try having the same situation today and see what happens when supporting Bush is a minority opinion.
You mean today, as in how today people are fed up with Bush's shit? That points to more support for holding Bush accountable since people have finally came to their senses.
Now we're talking! However, that's what the electoral process is for. Let's use that correctly.
Bingo. I've supported and practiced a policy to never vote for an incumbent. If we cycled a fresh House and 1/3 of a Senate every 2 years, we'd break out of this "Washington Insider" racket that is going on. The congress is completely complicit with this administration - both the Dems and Reps. It is time to "impeach" congress by sending them home. Anyone who votes for an incumbent is just as complicit. Congress continues to abdicate its duties and cede power to the executive branch and all of you who vote for incumbents are ultimately to blame. Quit doing it.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I'm not sure it's "upholding the law" when it's being done for political reasons. I agree with your sentiments here. However, the political game that is now impeachment really drives me crazy.
The fact that the last two American presidents have been subject to impeachment, or significant calls for impeachment, says a lot about the standards people have when it comes to election time. But I don't think you can just write it off as political games when there has been so much wrong with Bush's time in office.
Bingo. I've supported and practiced a policy to never vote for an incumbent. If we cycled a fresh House and 1/3 of a Senate every 2 years, we'd break out of this "Washington Insider" racket that is going on. The congress is completely complicit with this administration - both the Dems and Reps. It is time to "impeach" congress by sending them home. Anyone who votes for an incumbent is just as complicit. Congress continues to abdicate its duties and cede power to the executive branch and all of you who vote for incumbents are ultimately to blame. Quit doing it.
I agree. It's time we started letting them know just how dissatisfied we are with the job they have been doing.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
The fact that the last two American presidents have been subject to impeachment, or significant calls for impeachment, says a lot about the standards people have when it comes to election time. But I don't think you can just write it off as political games when there has been so much wrong with Bush's time in office.
So what would qualify as grounds for impeachment for you?
It doesn't matter what would qualify as grounds to me or to you. Read the Constitution. It's all completely spelled out there.
You can't impeach someone just because you think he's an asswipe, or you wish he wasn't president anymore. That's what most people don't seem to understand.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
It doesn't matter what would qualify as grounds to me or to you. Read the Constitution. It's all completely spelled out there.
You can't impeach someone just because you think he's an asswipe, or you wish he wasn't president anymore. That's what most people don't seem to understand.
I think it goes back to the "illegal war" thing... If people believe that the war is an illegal one, then they believe that the President is guilty of high crimes.
The congress authorized this president to go to war, I just can't see them then claiming that the war was illegal...
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Comments
Significant abuses of presidential authority. Based on the standards of many who supported the Clinton impeachment or Bush impeachment, half of American presidents should have been impeached.
This dickhead will be out of office in a few months. Rather than focusing on impeaching him, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on not electing another dickhead?
I never claimed it meant that other opinions didn't exist. I claimed that out of these 600,000 voters 89% want Bush impeached.
So why wouldn't people who don't want Bush impeached want to pass this poll along and to people who agree with them to get better results for their stance?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
George Bush's "lies" (which haven't even been demostrated to be more than exaggerations and stupid assumptions) weren't the only thing that "lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people". George Bush could have run around telling all the lies he wanted to and no one would have died. It took much more than lying to lead to this mess.
Well, if you had said lies and possible broken laws, I'd have agreed with you. But you seemed to be giving carte blanche to the president to break laws willy-nilly without batting an eyelid.
I do think Bush should be impeached, but like you say, it's hard to pin any specific charge on him. The slimy bastard.
Maybe they would be less apt to abuse their power if the people actually started holding them accountable. What a concept!
I can do both.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
And that would be correct. However, these 600,000 voters are 0.2% of the American population and, unless this is the most miraculous online poll in history, do not represent the American population.
Because the psychology is very different. People who are for impeachment are much more passionate than people against it. Furthermore, once one side is visibly winning a poll, those on the other side are less likely to share it as they have to show their opinion is a minority opinion.
There's a reason that this thread wasn't started by someone else and wasn't titled "Msnbc poll is currently showing 11% don't want Bush impeached".
But he gave the orders, no? Was it not his decision?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
So you don't take stock in any polls then? Since every poll is only a sample of the population...
I don't understand that. I fight for issues in which I'm in the minority all the time.
And I remember the people that support Bush as being pretty passionate about it. Remember the Dixie Chicks?
Might have something to do with not having any Bush supporters here, also.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
If the president runs a stop sign, I don't think we should impeach him. If he lies under oath during a witchhunt, I don't think we should impeach him. If he exaggerates a bunch of "evidence" that he probably believes and Congress gives him authority to launch a foolish and disastrous war, I don't think we should impeach him.
If the president seriously oversteps his bounds and violates core Constitutional principles or commits high crimes, then I absolutely would support impeachment.
If that's giving the president "carte blanche", so be it.
Presidential impeachment is a safety valve against dangerous official abuse, not a tool for political commentary. Impeaching George Bush, particularly at this point, does nothing to make this country more safe from abuse.
That's the thing -- the Clinton impeachment was more fact-based than would be the Bush impeachment, even if it was more frivilous and pointless. The problems associated with George Bush are much larger than George Bush. Impeachment is nothing more than a vidictive waste of time.
According to Ron Paul, Bush has broke core Constitutional principles...such as warrentless wiretapping and spying.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Good polls use accurate (or near-accurate) samples. Online polls do not.
Sampling a population can give you results very close to the entire population, assuming your sample is representative.
Fair enough -- you're not everyone though. Most people eschew those situations.
Yeah, I remember the Dixie Chicks. Try having the same situation today and see what happens when supporting Bush is a minority opinion.
Certainly!
If you want to read more about sample polling, here's a good place to start:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll
Bingo. Right now it would be worthless. If there is any sense of justice, they will be brought to it eventually.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
LOL...according to Ron Paul, every president and Congress in the last hundred years has broken core Constitutional principles.
Get a Supreme Court to agree with that, and at that point I'd certainly agree with impeachment.
Absolutely. However, that decision was well within his authority, thanks to Congress.
I agree about the stop sign, but I do think lying under oath should be grounds for impeachment - surely we can afford to hold our public officials to such basic standards? That's not political commentary, that's upholding the law. The tricky part about impeaching Bush based on the Iraq war is that the lies and bullshit were so widespread across the entire administration that pinning it on any one man is hard.
The sad part is, a Bush impeachment would be, morally, very justified. It's too bad there's no way of impeaching a whole administration in one fell swoop.
So when are we going to actually start supporting a better way? Holding officials accountable is a big step towards that. I believe that if you're going to complain about problems you need to actually start being a part of the solution. We can't simply keep shrugging and saying 'Well, this is how it's always been. Why start changing it now?" What a defeatist attitude. Now is always the perfect time to reverse the wrong course we're on.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5rWLUodIzxA
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Those fuckers can go, too.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'm not sure it's "upholding the law" when it's being done for political reasons. I agree with your sentiments here. However, the political game that is now impeachment really drives me crazy.
That's called revolution. And that comes with it's own moral problems
Now we're talking! However, that's what the electoral process is for. Let's use that correctly.
So online polls like this one where you can only vote once are inaccurate based on which groups decide to share the poll? How can we be sure other polls aren't skewed by the opinions of those conducting the poll then? How can we be sure of equal representation in any poll?
You mean today, as in how today people are fed up with Bush's shit? That points to more support for holding Bush accountable since people have finally came to their senses.
Thanks
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Bingo. I've supported and practiced a policy to never vote for an incumbent. If we cycled a fresh House and 1/3 of a Senate every 2 years, we'd break out of this "Washington Insider" racket that is going on. The congress is completely complicit with this administration - both the Dems and Reps. It is time to "impeach" congress by sending them home. Anyone who votes for an incumbent is just as complicit. Congress continues to abdicate its duties and cede power to the executive branch and all of you who vote for incumbents are ultimately to blame. Quit doing it.
The fact that the last two American presidents have been subject to impeachment, or significant calls for impeachment, says a lot about the standards people have when it comes to election time. But I don't think you can just write it off as political games when there has been so much wrong with Bush's time in office.
As in "Is it immoral to shoot Dick Cheney in the face?"
And we can't even trust the results of that.
"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes." Josef Stalin
Just like with polling, how can we trust the results?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I agree. It's time we started letting them know just how dissatisfied we are with the job they have been doing.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Well said.
naděje umírá poslední
It doesn't matter what would qualify as grounds to me or to you. Read the Constitution. It's all completely spelled out there.
You can't impeach someone just because you think he's an asswipe, or you wish he wasn't president anymore. That's what most people don't seem to understand.
for the least they could possibly do
Not unless you can prove they came from the President's mouth under oath. You have to be able to prove he broke federal law in order to impeach.
for the least they could possibly do
I think it goes back to the "illegal war" thing... If people believe that the war is an illegal one, then they believe that the President is guilty of high crimes.
The congress authorized this president to go to war, I just can't see them then claiming that the war was illegal...
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
naděje umírá poslední