(05-16-2017 04:43 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 12:10 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  so, let's say this is everything you claim, and every bit as important as you think, what should we do? Install President Pence?

I'm genuinely and respectfully curious as to why you evidently think this is an unpalatable outcome (I think you posted a few days ago that none of the succession alternatives to Trump such as Pence, Ryan, etc. would be preferable). You literally voted for Trump because he wasn't Hillary, which I think was certainly a defensible rationale and indeed basically why he was elected overall. You explained you would have preferred Kasich, but since he wasn't on the ballot, you went with Trump. Fine. Well, mission accomplished: HRC cannot and will not be president, nor will any other Democrat, for the remainder of his term. Has he not fulfilled the entirety of his usefulness? Why wouldn't you prefer a President Pence? He (a) evidently is trusted by Trump, (b) evidently believed that Trump was qualified to be president, having agreed to serve under him, and © has the political executive experience that you've said you prefer your presidents to have - experience that it's painfully obvious Trump is lacking. Whatever you hope it is, policy-wise, that Trump might accomplish, don't you think the chances of those things happening are greater with someone *other than* Trump in charge of shepherding them to fruition?

It's like you picked somebody out of the stands to pitch and are determined to see if he can finish the game no matter how bad it gets, while you've got far better pitchers in the bullpen who could actually put out the fire and give your team a chance to score some runs.

Your last paragraph makes sense, and if this were a baseball game there's no doubt it would be the sensible thing to do.

I think the issue that some might have with that outcome is that it wouldn't solve the 'problem'. First, it's really hard to tell how really bad any of this is (although it's certainly far from normal or ideal), in that it's been painfully obvious that the other side of the aisle hasn't been willing to give Trump any credit for anything at all, and the worst is assumed of any situation almost immediately. There's obviously a lot of valid criticism (probably a whole lot), but the venomous, unrelenting nature of the criticism that in some cases seems to border on fanaticism makes some people uncomfortable, even if they think Trump was an unqualified candidate and is doing a fairly poor job. There are times when the level of criticism and outcry actually has made a bad situation even worse.

In short, it's hard not to feel like the intent of the Democrats is not to just to 'get a relief pitcher' in to the game, but that they are gleeful in their exuberance and would love to gut the Republicans in the process.

I suppose some of that is inevitable for a variety of reasons, and I know that not all Democrats are playing this to the partisan hilt.

But my nature is not to join lynch mobs, and there's a point where the valid criticisms move from rational arguments to emotional crusades.

If I thought things would return to normal, and governing were to resume as you would think it might after an election that set up Republican majorities in both the Senate and House with a Republican president, and people would work together (i.e. Obamacare might actually get fixed and made more workable instead of what it has become - - and it didn't degenerate into something that will require increased taxation to sustain), I'd be more than happy to let Pence take over.

50,000 fans screaming obscenities and dumping garbage on the pitcher as he walks to the dugout is the picture I'm getting (or frankly worse). And that goes against my nature.

Don't know if that makes sense, but I don't like extremes on either side. It's possible to look to both sides, and not really want to join either one.