Collins will vote to acquit but she’ll furrow her brows. Much furrowing. Maybe a sigh.
That’s unacceptable. That’s what a PC is for!
I voted number one because there seems to be new rules every week about protocol or process or whatever. Number two is more probable. It gives GOPers the chance to show their weird solidarity to their party.
A whole heaping pile of Number Two is probable.
It’s possible the Republicans will first try to call people like Pelosi, Hunter Biden, etc. to the witness stand. But if, after a few such testimonies, the GOP isn’t getting the desired effect, it may then swiftly cut proceedings short and go to vote time.
dbl
Now ten posters voted for #3, none of whom have posted comments. Odd.
It’s common in threads (especially IMHO) for polls to turn out this way. People will vote for some option but not want to support it publicly because they think they might get dogpiled. I think we’ve even had poll threads where some poll option was the majority, and yet just about no one would voice their support for that option out loud.
The Republicans have already said out loud that they are not impartial, that there will be no trial. They have pre-determined the outcome, and have blatantly said that they are not planning to have any kind of process.
They’ve said this. Why would anybody expect different from them?
Essentially, they have said “we are in the majority, and we have determined that Trump is a King. Fuck you.”
I don’t see her voting guilty. The people who would hate her for voting not guilty already hate her for Kavanaugh, and she doesn’t need to add to that by pissing off the MAGA crowd.
She also has a card that most Republican senators don’t, which is that she voted to acquit Bill Clinton on both counts in 1999. So she can furrow her brow and talk about how terrible it is that there have been two improper partisan impeachments during her tenure.
That’s right. And this is leading more public figures to say ‘vote on Impeachment and then delay sending the Articles to the Senate until McConnell commits to a fair (and real) trial’:
I’m not sure Abramson is right about Van Hollen–or at least if he did say that on MSNBC today, it’s not yet visible online. Here’s Laurence Tribe, though:
The Salon article is lengthy and worth a read.
Don’t look at me. I join several others who applaud you for your accurate estimates in #1.
Since we know the acquittal is certain, the more interesting question is will any Republican vote to convict. Incidentally, I predict that Susan Collins’s reelection chances are very low, no matter how she votes. If she votes to convict, she will be primaried. If sho votes to acquit, she will lose the general election. I voted for #2 incidentally.
This with the addendum that I’m nearly always wrong about things like this, so I’m actually hoping for 3 or 4.
Thank you.
I’m boycotting the poll on account of my choice isn’t presented. Mitch allows a long trial, AND it focuses inappropriately on Biden and Clinton, AND it will be long, AND it will end in acquittal, AND there will be nothing real OR fair about it.
As long as you’re dreaming, why not dream for 50 of them to do that?
IT COULD HAPPEN!
Scenario 2.5. Senate drags out/delays trial until SCOTUS rules on challenged subpoenas. If SCOTUS votes to quash those subpoenas then Trump takes a victory lap and Senate votes to table the articles of impeachment and takes no final vote. McConnell makes speech about how Senate will not consider holding a trial for conduct the SCOTUS declared was lawful.
If SCOTUS upholds subpoenas then Senate meekly votes to acquit on party line vote.
That is choice 2. 
My hope is that the House refuses to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate unless Moscow Mitch agrees to an honest trial.