• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Serious 2020 Democratic Primaries

Play nice, girls. Be constructive. That being said, I know how it feels! Nowadays, I find it better to just not respond to someone whose views I am utterly unwilling to entertain, rather than making posts that can be considered personal attacks. Either way, keep calm.
 
EnglishALT said:
Well it actually does matter a quid pro quo can be an actual crime which is why the impeachment proceedings are built around it, if the quid pro quo did not actually exist then there is no reason to convict
Click to expand...
I believe I've mentioned this before, but attempting to commit a crime is still a crime. Ukraine being unaware of something or not agreeing to the deal isn't a necessity.
 
Nah said:
I believe I've mentioned this before, but attempting to commit a crime is still a crime. Ukraine being unaware of something or not agreeing to the deal isn't a necessity.
Click to expand...

That works sometimes, however I am not sure it works with quid pro quo which expressly requires for the second party to be aware of the ramifications of doing what is asked. If Trump asked for Ukraine to do him a favor and the President of Ukraine does it out of the goodness of his heart with out any knowledge of what he is getting in return then it's really impossible to argue a quid pro quo situation.
 
EnglishALT said:
That works sometimes, however I am not sure it works with quid pro quo which expressly requires for the second party to be aware of the ramifications of doing what is asked. If Trump asked for Ukraine to do him a favor and the President of Ukraine does it out of the goodness of his heart with out any knowledge of what he is getting in return then it's really impossible to argue a quid pro quo situation.
Click to expand...

That doesn't change the fact that Trump was still committing a crime by asking though. Even if Trump somehow, after everything that went on regarding Russia, wasn't aware he was committing a crime he can still suffer consequences for it. Ignorance is generally not considered a defence.
 
gimmepie said:
That doesn't change the fact that Trump was still committing a crime by asking though. Even if Trump somehow, after everything that went on regarding Russia, wasn't aware he was committing a crime he can still suffer consequences for it. Ignorance is generally not considered a defence.
Click to expand...

That's the problem though, is asking for an investigation into corruption, even if the corrupted person is the son of a political opponent really a crime? So far to the best of my knowledge, I don't believe those that have testified have even said such a thing is a crime.

Edit: Hell, Marie Yovanovitch admitted she has no evidence of criminal activity and she was one of the star witnesses.
 
Last edited:
EnglishALT said:
That's the problem though, is asking for an investigation into corruption, even if the corrupted person is the son of a political opponent really a crime? So far to the best of my knowledge, I don't believe those that have testified have even said such a thing is a crime.

Edit: Hell, Marie Yovanovitch admitted she has no evidence of criminal activity and she was one of the star witnesses.
Click to expand...

Let's phrase it differently: is it a crime to withhold billions of dollars already greenlit by Congress in military aid to a country, and then call the president of said country and tell him you will give them the money you already promised only if he "does you a favour though" and launches an investigation into the son of one of your main political rivals and parades the announcement on TV? That sounds like extortion for purely political reasons, and that sounds like very much a crime.

The key is Trump's past conversations with Zelenskyy and comments in the issue, making it clear that he didn't give a damn about corruption in Ukraine (didn't he have a former campaign manager who was jailed for corruption in Ukraine, anyway? Paul Manafort?) but he cared deeply about The Bidens. And he didn't necessarily want results but just a big TV ad he could run over and over, kinda like Clinton's Emails.
 
Ivysaur said:
Let's phrase it differently: is it a crime to withhold billions of dollars already greenlit by Congress in military aid to a country, and then call the president of said country and tell him you will give them the money you already promised only if he "does you a favour though" and launches an investigation into the son of one of your main political rivals and parades the announcement on TV? That sounds like extortion for purely political reasons, and that sounds like very much a crime.
Click to expand...

That is, but no where in the conversation does Trump link the money to the favors, nor do the Ukrainians or ambassadors that have testified have said that the money was linked to the favors or that they had knowledge the money was being held up at the time of the call. Thus you cannot claim that the President told him that the money was promised only if he "does you a favour though".

Ivysaur said:
The key is Trump's past conversations with Zelenskyy and comments in the issue, making it clear that he didn't give a damn about corruption in Ukraine (didn't he have a former campaign manager who was jailed for corruption in Ukraine, anyway? Paul Manafort?) but he cared deeply about The Bidens. And he didn't necessarily want results but just a big TV ad he could run over and over, kinda like Clinton's Emails.
Click to expand...

Well to be perfectly clear he cared about the Bidens and he cared about the server that was hacked from 2016 as he asked them to look into that as well.
 
Last edited:
Read this article:

https://www.wweek.com/culture/2019/...as-become-an-actual-republican-talking-point/

It shows just how sad the Republican defense of Trump has become. Using an excuse made famous by a villain in a cartoon.

can we please stop pretending to think that it's not terribly obvious what Trump's intentions are/were
Click to expand...

I have no doubt Trump's base believes he had good intentions, seeing as they believe in stuff like Pizzagate and FEMA camps.

My personal favorite was Q-Anon's claim that Trump planned to use Mr. Bush's funeral as a sting operation to arrest the "Deep State leaders" of the DNC.
 
Last edited:
Nah said:
can we please stop pretending to think that it's not terribly obvious what Trump's intentions are/were
Click to expand...

Trump is a moron who got a ton of power. There are few things more inimical to a functioning, respectable society than that. Any plans he may have were probably developed as he was learning about his presidential powers in whatever crash course someone who actually knows what they're doing had to give him when he took office.
 
There have been a number of comments on the this page and the last about Trump's possible crimes and the ongoing inquiry against him. It's a good time for a quick reminder that Tyler has a thread specifically about the impeachment proceedings that looks like it's in need of a bump about now as the plot thickens.

https://www.pokecommunity.com/threads/425007

There is room for a discussion about impeachment within this thread. After all, there are sitting members of congress and senate in the race right now who are in a position to vote on this very issue, so their statements on impeachment are important for one. One of the democratic candidates Tom Steyer came to public attention as an impeachment activist before his presidential bid, Trump's attempt to weaken the candidacy of Joe Biden, how impeachment inquiries may affect public opinion of democrats overall and Trump's chances for re-election are but a few of many potentially relevant points. At the same time I think we are walking a fine line between the topic of this thread and a DO or DON'T impeach Trump arguement by his supporters vs his opponents, and I want to make sure that we don't lose sight of the main topic-- the 2020 Democratic Primary. I'm encouraging folks to take a look at the impeachment thread, and weigh whether what you would like to share would fit better in this thread or that one, or deserves it's own brand new thread.The 2020 Democratic Primary isn't the only thread with a political theme we can have here in OT after all :)

While I am here I might as well mention that the 5th democratic debate happens to be tonight at 9:00 pm eastern standard time if anyone is interested. The candidates who made the cut for the debate stage are these 10, Joe Biden, Cory Booker,Pete Buttigieg, Tulsi Gabbard, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, Tom Steyer, Elizabeth Warren and Andrew Yang. Regards!
 
Last edited:
idk why he (or anyone really) is bothering to join the race at this point, it seems obvious right now that the only people having a real chance at getting the nomination are Biden/Warren/Sanders

tho I'm sure that the DNC doesn't mind adding him in
 
Nah said:
idk why he (or anyone really) is bothering to join the race at this point, it seems obvious right now that the only people having a real chance at getting the nomination are Biden/Warren/Sanders

tho I'm sure that the DNC doesn't mind adding him in
Click to expand...

My guess is they think Biden or Buttigieg are weak and that the moderate path is still open with Warren and Sanders' eating up the liberal path to the nomination.
 
New poll out today from Quinnipiac:

"Former Vice President Joe Biden has retaken the lead in the Democratic primary race for president as Senator Elizabeth Warren's numbers have plummeted, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll released today. Biden receives 24 percent of the vote among Democratic voters and independent voters who lean Democratic, while South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg gets 16 percent, Warren receives 14 percent, and Sen. Bernie Sanders gets 13 percent.

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who just entered the race, receives 3 percent as do Sen. Kamala Harris and Sen. Amy Klobuchar. Sen. Cory Booker, businessman Andrew Yang, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, and Sen. Michael Bennet each receive 2 percent. No other candidate tops one percent. Eleven percent are undecided."

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3650

Warren's drop to third place, this continues her slide as seen in the RCP polling average that started about a month ago where she was neck and neck with Biden, but is now tied for Sanders for second, or with Quinnipiac, tied for third.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e..._democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Meanwhile it looks like her drop largely coincides with the push for Medicare for All, and the sudden change in all but White College Age Democrats in opposing it. When Quinnipiac asked that question two years ago, the total split was 51/38 in favor. Earlier this year it had slipped to 43/45. Now it's dropped to 36/52.

With out a core base like Bernie, Warren may be slipping out of the election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top