In a nutshell, because he was elected.
The way to combat all those things you describe - which is purely a matter of opinion, even if I share a lot of it - is to win elections. I think some Trump voters see him as a disaster, but ardent Trumpies, maybe as much as 35% of country - think he's the cat's meow.
Mid term elections have frequently been the first step towards marginalizing a president. So the wait is often not three years, which is why a first 100 days is typically such an important measure.
Proving collusion to a point where an election gets overturned is a very, very high bar. It is unlikely to be met. Impeachment is not designed to allow the opposition to "not have to wait 3 years" when it is of the political opinion that the pres it lost to is a total disaster.
Watergate was a crime, and the trail of the investigation, largely due to the efforts of two reporters, led to an impeachable offense. Nobody set out to come up with a way to impeach. Since Clinton, where many dems thought that repubs were just looking for a way to not have to live with a guy that many of them thought was a disaster for the country (and the impeachment had nothing to do with the reason Starr was appointed), the losing side in elections seems to start thinking about how to impeach the moment they lose. Bad policy (in the opinion of some) becomes impeachable. And not surprisingly the country has only become more polarized ever since, now on steroids with social media.
Collusion - an actual arrangement with the Russians with a quid pro quo. If that is found, so be it, you have an impeachable offense. But the real answer to not having to live with a pres many of us thought would inevitably be a disaster is to not anoint a highly flawed candidate; to not assault fence sitters for considering membership in the basket of deplorables; in crafting a positive message - in short, make the case to the American people.
If you fail in that effort, well, try again. Impeachment isn't supposed to be a safety hatch for the losers, which if used recklessly, really begins to look more like disenfranchisement of those who disagree with you.
[Post edited by hoolstoptheheels at 12/04/2017 11:09AM]
|
(
In response to this post by Chuck Taylor)
Posted: 12/04/2017 at 11:07AM