In the “WTF?” file:
According to Newsweek 5% Of Republicans think impeaching Bush should be a high priority for the Dems when they take over. 15% of Republicans think it should be a lower priority.
That is 20% of REPUBLICANS that think it should be a priority for the Dems when they take over the House Nov. 7th. (With numbers like that, maybe the Senate as well?)
Other parts of a potential Democratic agenda receive less support, especially calls to impeach Bush: 47 percent of Democrats say that should be a “top priority,” but only 28 percent of all Americans say it should be, 23 percent say it should be a lower priority and nearly half, 44 percent, say it should not be done. (Five percent of Republicans say it should be a top priority and 15 percent of Republicans say it should be a lower priority; 78 percent oppose impeachment.)
— Newsweek
The other BIG number that might jump out at you up there?
51% of Americans think that impeaching Bush should be a priority.
Numbers like these spell doom for all Republican candidates across the nation.
If 20% of Republicans think impeaching Bush should be a Dem priority when they take the House… Who do you think they will be voting for this election?
I’ve supported impeaching the shrub long before it was the fashionable thing to do, as have many BooTribbers! (evidenced by the many Pondhoppers I see participating in “impeach bush” mail lists, or writing diaries on the subject, etc.)
These are some serious numbers to ponder given the upcoming vote, and worthy of a little pre-election celebration IMHO!
There are two very good reasons for an incoming Democrat congress NOT to impeach Bush. The first is the lesson of Watergate – you get rid of Sprio Agnew (Cheney) before you go after Tricky Dickie (Bush)
The second is a practical political one. Any incoming President would have the benefit of incumbancy. That would particularly be the case if the candidate were a popular vice-President in the event of a President Cheney or the replacement President like say McCain. They would still be in a 15-18 month honeymoon period and would not have the baggage to stop them withdrawing from Iraq well before the election. Not only that, the Constitution allows them to serve two full terms if they take office with less than 2 years to go. Yes, they would have the benefit of incumbancy at two elections.
One other point, I wonder how many responses were due to an inability to distinguish between “should” and “would”? I suspect quite a few Republicans partially deafened by NASCAR would think they were being asked if they thought the Democrats WOULD impeach rathe than if the SHOULD impeach.
If bush is impeached… cheney would be impeacheable for many of the same offenses (Perhaps even more offenses?). They would likely both get nailed at the same time. It is obvious that they are connected at the hip on their impeacheable offenses.
That would leave Democrat House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi next in line to become the President of the USA. She would have to be the House leader for any impeachment hearings to proceed.
What were you saying about Pelosi’s future incumbancy?
lol
As for my personal take:
Impeachment is just another useful tool to discredit the administration further. If the reality of how many Americans think impeaching bush should be made a priority can make one more voter jump off of the bush bandwagon, well, that is more person on their way to recovery as a full fledged member of “Humanity”. lol
As deserving as bush and cheney would be of this action, actual impeachment would just be the icing on the cake… If it ever really happens.