Support among House Democrats for impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is skyrocketing, nearly doubling in the last week to 100 co-sponsors.

That’s an unprecedented level of support for an impeachment effort during President Trump’s second term, with lawmakers who have bristled at the topic in the past now warming to the idea.

Kelly is urging Republicans to get on board with her efforts — even as no GOP lawmaker has come close to expressing support for Noem’s impeachment.

“As Secretary Noem continues to lie, obstruct Congress, and violate people’s civil rights, the support for her impeachment only grows,” she said.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I’m saying that if Democrats fight for the people, they will see better voting outcomes.

    I’d prefer they fight for the people either way, but the problem is “fighting for the people” is pretty subjective. Did they or did they not is a subjective opinion about which we only know what is public.

    Democrats didn’t fight for us from 2020-2024, so they lost voters, which is complimentary to my point.

    I’d say that’s a valid opinion, though one I don’t particularly share. They got some Big Shit Done for the gridlock that is Congress, imo.

    Look at the voting record and it echoes my point.

    I see you’re referring to Texas specifically which is fine, I was just confused at first.

    The main problem with saying these numbers validate my opinion is that there’s no way to prove it one way or the other, and so you may be right, I may be crazy but I don’t see the numbers making the point that Democrats (in Texas? For Texas? Of Texas?) did or did not “fight for the people”.

    In 2008, McCain 4.5 million, Obama 3.5 million after Obama ran a campaign about a better future giving us something to vote for

    First off, it’s Texas, but secondly Obama was a superstar candidate with -at the time- limited experience. And he came after eight long terra-terra-terra years of -at the time- The Worst President in History. His getting higher numbers than Kerry (again, in Texas, with the global financial markets hanging by a thread under Bush the Dubz) doesn’t have anything to do with ‘fighting fir the people’.

    I could go on, but I’d have the same arguments about some of the other numbers and you get my point.

    What we don’t have numbers for are the votes that candidates didn’t get after ‘fighting for the people’, which again is a subjective call that could mean a bunch of different things.

    Based strictly on Primaries and the platforms different candidates have, the most ‘fight for the people’ candidates don’t win - sometimes they don’t win a lot. And yes we can talk about how they screwed Bernie but that’s ultimately a side issue; lots of “fight for the people” candidates have lost in the primaries - including non-screwed Bernie.

    It’s (a) subjective and (b) not a sure thing by any stretch. US politics is gnarly, and Jesus Christ by any other name would lose Texas to Romney.