Forum Replies Created
Chris, we’re still more than a year out from the mid-terms. A lot could change. We don’t know who those Democratic senators will run against in those states yet. Could be the Republican challengers will be weak and the Democrats will hang on…and Dems hold the other seats maybe even pick up Nevada and/or Arizona. It’s not impossible. I’m just trying to throw some cold water on the optimists who assume because Trump is doing so poorly now that Democrats are assured of winning Congress in 2018. Doesn’t look close to certain to me – but we’ll see! I’ll gladly be proven wrong.
I don’t know what the Republican senators will do. I think they’ve already shown their independence, at least in the Senate. But as the 2016 election showed, the Republican Party doesn’t have control over the electorate – the tea party and Trump supporters still have a lot of clout in the elections. I don’t think the establishment people can dictate who the nominees are anymore.
North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp could be the most vulnerable. She barely won in 2012 in a close race. Montana’s Jon Tester might be very vulnerable too; in 2012, he beat his Republican opponent by 4%, when a strong Libertarian candidate got 6.6%. To me that means the Republicans had a poor candidate that year. If they come up with a good one in 2018, when Trump is so popular there, Tester might be Toaster.
West Virginia’s Joe Manchin might be OK – he’s an institution in the state, a former governor, and won in 2012 in a landslide, in a year when Obama lost to Romney there by 27%.
The other races may come down to who Republicans get to run in opposition.
But all of the Democrats up in 2018 voted against Obamacare repeal. We can expect Trump to campaign heavily in those states where he’s popular with vulnerable Democrats in 2018.
Looks like pretty bleak news for Democrats for 2018. I see a net loss of Senate seats in that map.
The Democrats have to defend 23 senate seats in 2018. Republicans have to defend only 8. (The two independents are also up; Sanders is likely to win again in Vermont, but Angus King in Maine, who caucuses with the Dems, could be vulnerable.)
Consider these Democratic seats up in 2018:
West Virginia Trump +25
North Dakota Trump +23
Montana Trump +15
Missouri Trump +3
Ohio Trump -1
Indiana Trump -1
Compare that to the two most “underwater” Republican seats:
Nevada Trump -6
Arizona Trump -9
I see a good chance for Republicans to pick up at least three Senate seats from the top group. They might lose Nevada (and possibly Arizona, but I wouldn’t bet on it). Still, it looks like Republicans could easily pick up a net 2-3 Senate seats in 2018.
Dems could pick up a few House seats – but unless they pick up 24, it won’t matter much.
I think Dems need to dig in for 2020. Use 2018 as a stepping stone to 2020. Limit Senate losses. And learn what works and what doesn’t in Congressional races in the Trump era, learn lessons for 2020. Hope the presidential race goes in their favor in 2020 and maybe even pick up Congress that year, too.
But I think Dems have already been set up (or set themselves up) for what looks like a loss in 2018 – because pundits will see 2018 as a big defeat for Dems unless they pick up the Congress. I see it as more of a math problem.
Thanks for the link, Chris. I’ve read a number of other stories like this one about the self-pardon.
One big problem I have with the NPR story is quotes like this: “A majority of those weighing in on presidential pardons have agreed that the president cannot pardon himself.” and “most — but not all — constitutional law experts believe he can’t pardon himself on federal charges either.”
What is the source of information for these assertions? How many “constitutional law experts” did NPR survey to determine that a majority of them believed this way? Sounds like one or two, at most – not particularly convincing.
It would have been more accurate to assert something like “constitutional law experts do not agree on whether the president can pardon himself or not.”
I don’t think the timing matters in the pardons vs. impeachment. I thought the point of excluding impeachment from the pardon in the Constitution was to make it clear that the president can’t overrule his own impeachment (or someone else’s) by pardoning himself (or that other person). If Congress is known to be preparing articles of impeachment for Obstruction of Justice, Trump pardoning himself before or after they pass it won’t come into play – they can still impeach him no matter what. (Would a court later rule that Congress impeaching and removing a president for a specific crime renders a pardon void regarding possible criminal charges? Maybe.)
In any case, all of this could be tested in court, unfortunately. All depends what Trump does. If he pardons himself, most likely that will get a court case and a hearing in the Supreme Court. And then we’ll know whether a president can pardon himself or not. If the Supreme Court ruled that a self-pardon was not unconstitutional? I think it wouldn’t take long for Congress to pass an amendment nor for 3/4 of the states to ratify it.
But if Trump doesn’t try to pardon himself, it’s all moot.
I’ve read a variety of legal opinions about whether or not the president can pardon himself. A few experts say “of course he can” (my opinion too, but I’m no lawyer). Others are less certain. But I haven’t read a single legal opinion that says, “No, a president cannot pardon himself.”
Paul, as I’ve responded a few times: Trump committing “political suicide” by pardoning himself is probably a moot point. What if he pardons himself right before he leaves office? He’d have nothing to lose at that point – no political career to care about. But he might spare himself some legal trouble.
It would be great if some lawyers and constitutional experts would donate some pro-bono time and create an Impeachment template for MS Word and put it online, to save Congress some time in case Trump goes completely off the rails and needs to be impeached relatively quickly. I don’t trust the 25th Amendment as a remedy, because it requires people Trump has given jobs to to turn on him. Congress is a better bet, and their approval is required for the 25th amendment remedy anyway.
Assuming the country can survive the incident itself, could be Trump’s response could be the real catalyst to his removal.
bookemdono, I’ve been having the same fears about a catastrophic event happening on Trump’s watch. Can you imagine a 9/11 or banking crisis? For all of Bush’s faults, at least he had people in place to handle them, even if not perfectly. I fear anything Trump has to deal with could be worse than Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina.
I’d be curious to know why Pribus took this job in the first place. He was clearly doomed from the start. He seemed like one of the few decent people to go work for Trump – very out-of-place.
Let’s not forget the other two Republican Senators, Collins and Murkowski, who voted no.
“WordPress” is both a for-profit website and a non-profit website that distributes a free software package one can use to host a blog or website on a private server. I think Dan uses the latter. Unless he is updating WordPress versions religiously, his site isn’t susceptible to new bugs, but he won’t get old bugs fixed.
I use WordPress software for a few sites but haven’t had any issues like you describe. But, I tend to be conservative in doing updates. (And you guys thought I was a liberal – ha!) It also might depend how well that version of WordPress plays with the MySQL server Dan is using.July 26, 2017 at 9:35 pm in reply to: History is clear: Presidents who lost the popular vote don’t win popular support #30802
Kerry won PA in 2004 by 144,248 votes. Bush won Ohio by 118,775 votes. Both were pretty close, Ohio was a little closer. 60,000 Ohio Bush voters voting Kerry instead of Bush way would have flipped Ohio and the national election for Kerry. 75,000 Kerry voters voting the other way in PA would have flipped it for Bush.
The majority of Americans are pro-choice. 69% of Americans do not want Roe v. Wade overturned:
Sure, abortion rights will never be fully accepted by everyone, just like racial equality will never be fully accepted by everyone. What’s your point?
Anyone who voted for Trump obviously has a mental disorder, so clearly they should not be allowed to serve in the military, either. But transgender Trump voters should be OK to serve (but would be rather confused I’d guess).