Should Democrats pass a "resolution of disapproval" against Trump's "national emergency"?

[kentuck]

How soon should they take a vote?

In my opinion, it it a very important and historic vote. In substance, it is a vote for democracy or for an imperial presidency? What do the Republicans want? Do they even know what they want?

Will there ever be a good time to take this vote?

If it is possible for Republicans to self-reflect, now is the time. They need to understand the gravity of the situation they have embraced.

Are they for our country or are they for their Party? More specifically, are they for our country or are they for an incompetent and dangerous leader with deep autocratic tendencies?

The time is nigh.

[2naSalit]

1. Absolutely, they should and will.

This is of great import and will be dealt with as soon as the House is assembled after this holiday week. Several had to got to Brussels to reassure our allies that we are not leaving them, we just need to have a little regime change before we can act like we should. Nothing can really for forth as much is in litigation, or will be when courts are open today, idiot is still on vacation and the delegation that went to Europe will be back in a day or so.

It will be brought to the floor for a vote early next week. What will be hard for Rs is when it hits the Senate. Mcturlte can't avoid bring it up for a vote, it's mandatory. Then the incumbents will be forced to make their affiliations known by how they vote. And that's why this will be brought forth real soon..

[kentuck]

2. You are correct.

Republican Senators will be forced to take a stand. Do they stand behind Donald Trump or do they stand for our country and our Constitution? They cannot hide.

Republicans are usually very politically astute, when it comes to making "politically" wise decisions, in my opinion. Twenty-two Senators are up for re-election in 2020. Democrats only need to change four of those seats. Democrats have twelve Senate seats up.

Republicans should vote wisely on the resolution.

The "wise" vote would be to vote with a more than veto-proof majority, to send the tyrant in the White House a very simple message: if he chooses to veto, he could face an over-whelming political embarrassment.

As we have learned about Donald Trump, we know that he does not like to gamble with anything that might cause him personal embarrassment. He would not challenge the Senate, but would probably take his case to the Courts?

[watoos]

3. Just a question.

I was gung ho for this vote, now I'm not so sure. So, if the vote passes Trump says he will veto it, then the odds are slim that Congress will override his veto.

Will the SC then say that it does not want to get involved because Congress has made the decision?

[2naSalit]

4. That is a possibility

but so is a veto override. Too much is at stake for R Senators and they will have to face reality. I suspect many will be wearing orange jumpsuits before they can sit for another term, so there's that. It would be suicide not to vote to override should that event take place. SCOTUS can also accept a lower court ruling and refuse to hear it.

[kentuck]

5. They shouldn't mess around with a second vote.

Next week, it they get the opportunity, they should vote with a over-whelming veto-proof majority and Trump would not challenge them. That would end the debate. The Senate could reclaim its rightful claim as an equal branch of the Legislature, and the Congress as a Whole, could reclaim its part as an equal branch of Government.

[CrossingTheRubicon]

6. It is essential to the preservation of our Republic.