[sleepybrett]

... what hope exactly.

The republicans in congress are so lost in the sauce that they won't challenge the great orange hope in the quarter. The soonest I think we can see anyone fighting back, politically, won't happen until the midterms AT BEST.

This is assuming that the republicans/trump don't come up with some issue that they can swing the midterms on and/or don't gut the electoral system to the point that they can't lose.

And even then I'm not sure that congress can actually do anything to fix this issue while trump is still in the white house and impeachment and removal seems unachievable. Say congress reverses it's delegation of tarrif power to the president. What happens if trump just does not obey congress, much like they are not obeying the supreme court. Do the republicans in congress have enough of a spine to actually remove him? How do we assure that removal actually takes place in the event that we can even meet the threshold? The man still, ostensibly, still has control of the military. Perhaps the military, secret service, any other guys with guns just refuses to help him resist congress like they did when he tried to deploy the military after jan 6th.. but they seem to have already cleaned house at the pentagon, with hagseth getting rid of more people who aren't sufficiently loyal enough to do crimes and/or coup the fucking government for trump.

shit is getting scary.

[Animats]

> impeachment and removal seems unachievable.

It takes 20 of 53 Republican senators for impeachment. That's a high bar, but Nixon was close when he resigned.

Useful reading: "How the Good Guys Finally Won" (1975), by Jimmy Breslin. This covers how Nixon and Agnew were ejected. The Internet Archive has full text.[1]

[1] https://archive.org/details/howgoodguysfinal00bres/page/n9/m...

[DrillShopper]

The Republicans are the party of Trump. You're going to get nowhere near 20 out of 53 to convict. They will not let him get thrown out of office.

If they didn't vote for impeachment in the two times he was impeached in his first term, and if they supported him after January 6th then they're not going to vote for impeachment now.

The Republicans under Nixon were the same party in name only, and they did not have the same blind loyalty to Nixon. They had opposing voices. They had separate factions. Now the only faction is Trump-worship.

[fnordpiglet]

The senate is less the party of Trump as they have to win state wide elections and Trump barely beat Harris. They also tend to have longer tenures that spans presidents. While he is ascendant he can command loyalty, but once his ship is sinking the rats will abandon him faster in the senate than the house. The house takes care of itself with its relatively rapid turnover, making incumbents more likely to stick by him. There are a handful of sycophant senators that would have trouble distancing themselves too much, but they are also well known chameleons so I think no one would be surprised when they flip.

The real test will be the summer and fall as natural disasters and the accumulation of cuts and the trade war all converge into a crescendo of negativity.

[anigbrowl]

We went through all this during his previous term. They GOP Senate had the perfect excuse to make a break with the past during the impeachment following January 6, all they had to do was huff and puff a bit and stand on the Constitution, and they could have moved on with their political lives. But they fielded a bunch of BS excuses and stood behind the guy who called a rally that resulted in the Congress being overrun and trashed by a mob. Only a few voted to remove him from office.

It's worth considering the possibility that as a party they're nowadays more into fascism than republicanism. Rome was a republic too, until it wasn't.

[fnordpiglet]

I think of Trump as a Sulla like figure - not the guy who ends the republic but who cracks the republic opening the door to someone more calculating - Julius Caesar.

The difference though is the Roman republic had a constitutional order that was implicit rather than explicit. The American constitution and bill of rights is very difficult to change, and the order is fairly explicit. This was intentional with the assumption that even if a Sulla like figure emerges and consolidates power, it’ll revert over time to a liberal humanist republic. The anti federalists examine this in some depth and the scenario we are in was definitely considered carefully. It’s remarkable it took 249 years - but it was 430 years before Sulla seized the dictatorship by declaring emergency powers and cracked the constitutional order of Rome.

[sleepybrett]

psst, they are already straight ignoring the constitution with their no due process deportations.

[specialist]

Small but important nitpick: Senators first have to win their primaries. That's where they're most vulnerable. Followed by fund raising (access to major donors), probably.

[rasz]

>they have to win state wide elections

With the way current events unfold there might not be any more elections.

[netsharc]

It's a party of spineless hypocrites... given the choice of the embarassment, admitting they were wrong, and coming out somewhat ok vs. the choice of supporting a dictatorship that erodes free and fair elections, my pessimism says most Republicans will vote for the latter. As a bonus, they'll get to have Trump-level immunity. Then it'll be a simple email to the businesspeople of the state asking who wants to be an oligarch, start opening your wallets. And for the weekend fun, line up those girls (and boys!) and get grabbin'!

[Animats]

I'm wondering how this will change if the US goes into a deep recession. Polling at the Business Roundtable indicates that support for Trump takes a dive at the CEO level when the market is down 20%. 30% for the hardcore Trump supporters.