The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! Trump supporters: What are you going to do if/when Trump is impeached?in Politics

excon

Hello Trump supporter:

Clearly, you BELIEVE the Mueller investigation IS a witch hunt that's NOT getting better..  If Trump is REMOVED from office, WILL you accept it, or WILL you make WAR?

IF you make war, is THIS the incident that will cause the military and the police forces to align themselves with Trump?

excon

yolostide

Trump will most likely not be impeached due to him not committing any crimes. 

BaconToes

I don't think that police & military would create a civil war. If patriotism fails, allies of the U.S. would probably intervene

Sonofason

@exconexcon said:

Hello Trump supporter:

Clearly, you BELIEVE the Mueller investigation IS a witch hunt that's NOT getting better..  If Trump is REMOVED from office, WILL you accept it, or WILL you make WAR?

IF you make war, is THIS the incident that will cause the military and the police forces to align themselves with Trump?

excon

I believe that if Trump is removed from office as a result of this current investigation, the deserved response would be war.  Whether it comes to that I don't know.  

BaconToes

Sonofason said:

@exconexcon said:
I believe that if Trump is removed from office as a result of this current investigation, the deserved response would be war.  Whether it comes to that I don't know.  

What? Who deserves a war?

Sonofason

BaconToes said:

Sonofason said:

@exconexcon said:
I believe that if Trump is removed from office as a result of this current investigation, the deserved response would be war.  Whether it comes to that I don't know.  

What? Who deserves a war?

I would say anyone who is attempting to depose Trump from office.  Maybe it's just a handful of people, and if so...it would be over quick.

BaconToes

Sonofason said:

I would say anyone who is attempting to depose Trump from office.  Maybe it's just a handful of people, and if so...it would be over quick.

Why do they deserve to die in a war? If Trump gets impeached lawfully and constitutionally, why would there be a war?

WokeWhale

@BaconToes I agree that there is no legitimate reason for war. If Trump was disposed of via perhaps assassin, hitman, mercenary, or another illegal means, and there was a solid case that it was the doing of another political group, then perhaps, maybe there would be a civil war or something of the like. Even so, that is an extremely unlikely situation and the likeliest future outcome will be one of two outcomes; Trump is elected for another term, or he isn't. I honestly don't believe that he will be impeached anytime soon, although he is receiving a significant amount of criticism and backlash from the left, notably feminist and pro poc groups. 

sadolite

Nothing will change for me as a taxpayer. I don't rely on govt for anything. I will just hate govt even more and wish everyone involved in said impeachment dies of aids or ebola. Won't affect me at all. I will still have to get up and go to work, pay bills and do what I always do. I will just figure out new ways to undermine and hide from govt. The only thing govt has ever done that has affected me personally is confiscate my wealth and devalue the dollars I have left. Fck the federal  govt, it's a worthless usless pile of sht to me. Doesn't matter who is President it's all the unelcted aholes that run all the federal agencies that screw me.

Sonofason

BaconToes said:

Sonofason said:

I would say anyone who is attempting to depose Trump from office.  Maybe it's just a handful of people, and if so...it would be over quick.

Why do they deserve to die in a war? If Trump gets impeached lawfully and constitutionally, why would there be a war?

Trump cannot be impeached lawfully and constitutionally.  
"A sword is upon the liars; and they shall dote: a sword is upon her mighty men; and they shall be dismayed."
(Jeremiah 50:36)

CYDdharta

It would depend on the reason for the impeachment.  So far, there is no cause for it whatsoever, and such an action doesn't have nearly the support it would need in congress.  Beyond that, would impeachment really matter?  When Bill Clinton was impeached, it didn't make a whole lot of difference to his presidency.

I think a more important question would be, would you vote for Trump again if he was impeached.  I think at this point, the overwhelming majority of his supporters would say yes.

BaconToes

Sonofason said:

Trump cannot be impeached lawfully and constitutionally.  
"A sword is upon the liars; and they shall dote: a sword is upon her mighty men; and they shall be dismayed."
(Jeremiah 50:36)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-succession-factbox/factbox-steps-for-removing-a-u-s-president-from-office-idUSKCN1AX2L7
Every president can be impeached lawfully and constitutionally because the people elected these representative in the House and the Senate. Therefore, it is lawful and constitutional

And that Bible verse is unnecessary and irrelevant.

CYDdharta

BaconToes said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-succession-factbox/factbox-steps-for-removing-a-u-s-president-from-office-idUSKCN1AX2L7
Every president can be impeached lawfully and constitutionally because the people elected these representative in the House and the Senate. Therefore, it is lawful and constitutional

And that Bible verse is unnecessary and irrelevant.

Except that;

1) the House Judiciary Committee is a lot more concerned with, even suspicious of, Mueller's investigation than anything Trump is guilty of, and rightly so.
2) the House majority leader is on good terms with Trump
3) there is no way 2/3rds of the Senate would currently vote to remove Trump from office

MayCaesar

I am not a Trump supporter, but I have an interesting position to express.

In general, I prefer the president to be from the opposite party than the one dominating the Congress. I believe that for the checks and balances to work as intended, the executive and the legislative (let us forget about the judicial one, as it is a different story entirely) branches should be controlled by political rivals. If this is not the case (as it is now, when Republicans control both branches), checks and balances are essentially obsolete, since the single force controls the entire political landscape and can self-coordinate to push through proposals that in a proper republic would not be able to go through.

Now, as long as Republicans dominate the Congress, Trump is not going to be impeached. If Trump is to be impeached, then Democrats have to win the elections this fall. If they do and initiate Trump's impeachment, then the end result of this process is likely to be a democratic president taking Trump's place (I know, by default, Mike Pence would take over - however, if Trump is impeached as a result of the investigation, then his entire team will be compromised as well. 

So what we end up with as a result is Democrats controlling both executive and legislative branch. Which leads us to the same situation as the one we are in right now: checks and balances not working. I do not see it as an improvement, and I do not think Democrats are any less prone to corruption than Republicans.

---

As such, I think the best possible outcome is for Democrats to win the election-2018 with a marginal advantage and to let Trump hold his office until 2020. Then, in 2020, we can elect a conventional Republican, someone like Kasich, Rubio or Bush, returning to the good old times, when populism was where it should belong: at the backyard.

sadolite

"his entire team will be compromised as well." Not true. You can't convict an entire group of people on the same charge. You have to prove guilt of every individual separately. You have to prove everyone was knowingly complicit. You are suggesting guilt by association. If so than anyone you know that has ever committed a crime also makes you guilty of that crime.

brontoraptor

@excon

Why make war? We'll just watch Pence run the country, then vote in Ted Cruz for 8 years. 

BaconToes

brontoraptor said:

@excon

Why make war? We'll just watch Pence run the country, then vote in Ted Cruz for 8 years. 

Ah, Ted Cruz. The man that promotes racism, thinks Washington D.C. isn't in America, thinks climate change is fake(even after decades of scientific research), wants to make same-sex marriage legal(why is this still a debate) and like Trump, brings Obama in every conversation. 

TL;DR: He's like Trump.

MayCaesar

sadolite said:

"his entire team will be compromised as well." Not true. You can't convict an entire group of people on the same charge. You have to prove guilt of every individual separately. You have to prove everyone was knowingly complicit. You are suggesting guilt by association. If so than anyone you know that has ever committed a crime also makes you guilty of that crime.

In legal terms, correct. However, in practical terms, this investigation is not just about the behavior of the individuals - it is about the events that led to the current White House composition. If it is found that those events were staged by a foreign government, then the legitimacy of the entire current executive branch collective will be compromised. Regardless of whether every individual was knowingly complicit or not, they received their office as a result of a foreign intervention and, hence, their right to hold this office will be under serious scrutiny.

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

As such, I think the best possible outcome is for Democrats to win the election-2018 with a marginal advantage and to let Trump hold his office until 2020. Then, in 2020, we can elect a conventional Republican, someone like Kasich, Rubio or Bush, returning to the good old times, when populism was where it should belong: at the backyard.

Trump isn't really a populist, but why do you see the establishment as being better than populism. 

brontoraptor

@BaconToes

You're probably not interested in my argument about the left fawning over an antisemetic religion and having ties to Farrakhan galore, the very Farrakhan who said "Hitler is a good man". Or do you want that argument? That's just my game.

MayCaesar

CYDdharta said:

MayCaesar said:

As such, I think the best possible outcome is for Democrats to win the election-2018 with a marginal advantage and to let Trump hold his office until 2020. Then, in 2020, we can elect a conventional Republican, someone like Kasich, Rubio or Bush, returning to the good old times, when populism was where it should belong: at the backyard.

Trump isn't really a populist, but why do you see the establishment as being better than populism. 

The establishment consists of professional, experienced politicians, while outsider populists like Trump have no real experience or knowledge on politics and have little to offer in terms of substantial policies.

I prefer professional politicians to outsiders for the same reason why I have my teeth fixed at a professional dentistry, rather than asking my neighbor to do it: reliability.

BaconToes

brontoraptor said:

@BaconToes

You're probably not interested in my argument about the left fawning over an antisemetic religion and having ties to Farrakhan galore, the very Farrakhan who said "Hitler is a good man". Or do you want that argument? That's just my game.

Sure, I'll hear your argument.
And just one question, why do people think the "left" is just one entity, there are different moderations of being "left"

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

The establishment consists of professional, experienced politicians, while outsider populists like Trump have no real experience or knowledge on politics and have little to offer in terms of substantial policies.

I prefer professional politicians to outsiders for the same reason why I have my teeth fixed at a professional dentistry, rather than asking my neighbor to do it: reliability.

Establishment professionals live in a bubble with no real world experience.  They are unabashedly globalists who put the desires of other countries ahead of the needs, and to the detriment, of their own country.  Their "substantial policies" have been the reason for the decline of Western civilization.  I'll take the outsider with real world experience who knows how to make things work over the "experts" who know neither.

If your dentist who has a Harvard DMD, but gets things wrong as often as he gets it right, why would you keep going back to him?  Does that piece of paper really mean that much to you?

brontoraptor

BaconToes said:

brontoraptor said:

@BaconToes

You're probably not interested in my argument about the left fawning over an antisemetic religion and having ties to Farrakhan galore, the very Farrakhan who said "Hitler is a good man". Or do you want that argument? That's just my game.

Sure, I'll hear your argument.
And just one question, why do people think the "left" is just one entity, there are different moderations of being "left"

My mistake. You are correct. There are not multiple sides to conservatism...