Here’s a fascinating roll call.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
7 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
Interesting, only 3 R Nays, but 20 D Nays.
So,
a) avoid taking an unnecessary stand on our foreign entanglements,
b) not appear to agree to a precedent of a R Senate poking its nose into the business of the President’s foreign policy.
c) to act as a block so that this doesn’t become a chink that R’s use to pry the D candidates apart WRT DT
What’s most significant to me about this vote is those 20 Republican Senators who broke with President Trump. It’s good for them to begin getting used to voting against Trump. 20 Senators from the Republican Caucus would be more than enough to defeat Trump in an impeachment trial.
There are definitely not a sufficient number of GOP Senators to impeach Trump now, but if the House gets to a place where they have received and revealed enough information about Trump’s wrongdoings to successfully move an impeachment, then there will be a lot more for those Senators to chew on.
What the…?!
19 Dems, including most of the most liberal ones, just voted to support Trump’s position on a resolution? Along with Ted Cruz and Mike Lee??
While most of the rest of the GOP, and the remaining (largely more moderate) Dems, voted against Trump’s position??
Martin, if you wrote a piece on this vote, I’d welcome it. I can’t figure out WTF this roll call means.
Despite the fact that Trump’s withdrawal plans are cack-handed and done in the worst possible manner, the Dems likely to run for president or position themselves to the left of the party median don’t want to be on record supporting our current military commitments abroad. And of course you could make the argument that even a terribly executed, stupid withdrawal is still a withdrawal which all else being equal is preferable to an open-ended commitment.
In some ways it’s sort of a mirror-image version of the Dems who supported the resolution to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq, only the cynical political calculation is reversed.
All the most probably 2020 nominees votes Nay, right? When I first clicked the link, I thought the vote was going to show 68 senators voting against Trump, Republican divided in such a way as to make impeachment a possibility.
Instead, it’s Dems In Disarray!
I suspect that this vote was seen as ‘are you in favorite of the forever war and permanent occupation,’ no?
OT, but have you seen this? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/01/sacramento-rally-fbi-kkk-domestic-terrorism-californ
ia?CMP
The FBI still belongs to J Edgar Hoover. That’s the swamp in which Comey–and Mueller, too, for that matter–thrived. I’m worried.
. . . to split the Dem caucus (and more specifically, mostly split off announced and potential Dem preznential candidates from the rest) . . .
. . . this was pretty successful?