Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ON THE DAY and hour Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2017, speculation raged as to whether he would become the third President of the United States to be impeached.
Well, the many people I’ve spoken to who put their money where their mouths were and placed bets that the New York billionaire would suffer this fate received a nice Christmas bonus.
On a near party line vote in the House of Representatives, that body’s membership voted to impeach President Trump on two narrowly drawn counts relating to his conversation with the president of Ukraine.
The strong implication is that the delivery of foreign aid to Ukraine was conditional upon an announcement of an investigation into Joe Biden and his son Hunter’s prior business activities in the country.
Pelosi under pressure
This is not a course of action that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wished to pursue.
One of the wiliest political operators in the business, she has long recognised not only the reality that 2/3 of the Senate would not vote to convict the president, but also what the opinion polls currently indicate about the impeachment process: it could bolster the president and rebound on her Democratic Party ahead of a crucial election year.
Her uncharacteristically angry outburst at a reporter in a recent press conference and the stern admonition she delivered to her colleagues who cheered when the momentous votes were tallied suggest that her misgivings persist.
Democrats in a bind
The Speaker had no choice but to fire ahead with the impeachment process when the whistleblower came forward about the infamous
Ukraine phone call and the hard left of her party demanded the ultimate sanction.
It is, of course, too late at this juncture, yet a censure motion would have been a far shrewder ploy, politically speaking.
Such a motion would have forced congressional Republicans to effectively endorse the president’s behaviour, which even his most ardent defenders – at least in private – have to admit was questionable.
Now there is wrangling over the looming trial in the Senate.
Speaker Pelosi, seemingly acting on advice from Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe, is determined not to deliver the articles of impeachment to the GOP-controlled Senate until its leadership agrees to conduct a fair trial in which Trump administration officials are called as witnesses.
She is wise to do so in the sense that the relatively small segment of the American people who will decide next year’s election might not appreciate something of a kangaroo court with, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has himself admitted, a biased jury doing the bidding of the president’s legal team.
On the other hand, it is unlikely that anything will alter the verdict.
All eyes on 2020
Moreover, senators who are also presidential candidates, such as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, won’t be best pleased with uncertainty over the trial dates.
They need to be in Iowa, New Hampshire et al campaigning, not in Washington, DC serving on a jury.
Presumably, they would prefer to have it wrapped up by mid-January. The Iowa caucus is on the 3rd of February and the New Hampshire primary is scheduled for the 11th.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the speechifying in the House ahead of the impeachment was that it only confirmed the hyper-partisan nature of American politics at present.
The contributions from Republicans and Democrats alike were entirely predictable, devoid of nuance and driven almost exclusively by ideology, protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
The addition of a cult of personality around Donald Trump has added more poison to a polarised climate.
Lamentably, this polarisation and the lurch of the two parties to the left and right have been on full display in the Democratic presidential primary.
Cast by the media as a battle between moderates, Biden and South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and liberals, Warren and Sanders, the key voters in the states that matter will perceive them all as well outside the mainstream, particularly on the cultural issues that are often dispositive to their final decision making in the ballot box.
By way of example, when asked at a debate, not one candidate had the guts or political nous to affirm that the newly re-elected Governor of (deep red) Louisiana, John Bel Edwards, is welcome in the party.
The governor is anti-abortion and pro-2nd Amendment, but genuinely progressive on a host of other issues.
What sort of message does the candidates’ collective reticence send to men and women in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin whose views are more closely aligned to Governor Bel Edwards than to well-heeled Democratic donors on the coasts?
In terms of where the race to take the fight to Donald Trump is headed, the cliché “it’s anybody’s guess” has never been more appropriate.
There are plausible scenarios in which any of the four aforementioned leading candidates could prevail.
And there is a great deal of uncertainty on the ground.
Too tough to call?
This writer resolved – after a rather dismal 2 out of 4 performance in forecasting the results of last month’s Dáil by-elections – to stop making political predictions. But the answers to the following questions may tell the tale.
Will someone emerge from Iowa and New Hampshire with momentum and capture the public’s attention (here’s looking at you, Pete Buttigieg)?
If Joe Biden fares poorly in these first two contests, will his “firewall” in South Carolina and beyond hold up?
If Warren or Sanders falters and drops out early, could that give the one who remains an advantage, in light of the different dynamics of a battle between one leftist and two more moderate Democrats?
Might the extremely wealthy former Mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg defy the odds and be a factor?
What impact will the proportional allocation of delegates and diminution in the role of the “superdelegates” have?
Looking past the primary, there is a narrative that Donald Trump will win re-election, provided that he isn’t removed from the White House beforehand.
That alternately glib and resigned perspective, however, overlooks the fact that, in 2016, everything that possibly could have gone his way did against a terribly unpopular opponent.
And even then, he won the presidency by less than 80,000 votes in three vital Electoral College states.
Not a done deal
In short, given the state of play in late 2019, I suspect his re-election is more a 50-50 proposition.
There is a long time between now and the first Tuesday of November. It’s important to remember the old truism: “events, dear boy, events.” At any rate, it’s going to be a fascinating year in American politics.
I’ll be monitoring developments as best as one can from 3,000 miles away in this space.
Politics aside, I hope 2020 is a great year for you all.
But, before I go, I hope you’ll indulge me in ending on a personal note, with a tribute to my friend, Noel Whelan.
I can’t write a year-end column about politics and not pay tribute to the real giant in Irish political commentary we lost in 2019.
To me, Noel was a friend, a colleague on the organising committee of the Kennedy Summer School which he founded and a collaborator on various endeavours.
He shared my belief in and passion for electoral politics.
The outpouring of sympathy and admiration from people of all walks of life in this country following Noel’s death showed both the high esteem he was held in and how significant a figure he was.
We miss him.
And as ever, our thoughts are with his family and close friends.
Larry Donnelly is a Boston attorney, a Law Lecturer at NUI Galway and a political columnist with TheJournal.ie.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Seriously! If some psychologists cannot spot it how do the expect teachers to spot it. Where do they get the time? Maybe it’ll be like the voice training they get in the dip, 1 lesson is highly effective.
How about restoring guidance and counselling hours???
A counsellor only gets to see you for a few minutes during an occasional appointment . The teacher who has six hours a day with the child will be able to document behavioural changes and how they interact with others, and can be of assistance to counsellors other professionals in determining the child’s needs.
It’ll be easy to spot in a 35 min class.
Such a training program should be available to all free of charge. It seems that the teachers will again be burdened with it. Ah! Sure the teachers can solve all society’s ills!!! Very important though for the opinionated to kick their asses when the teachers raise valid concerns at their Easter Conferences.
There seems to be a hypocritical attitude when it comes to laying the burdens of society on our teachers while at the same time denying them a decent wage and leaving our young teachers with years of uncertainty by having them hop from one little contract to another. An effective teacher is of value to a community if the job is permanent. That way accumulated knowledge will enable the teacher to be effective beyond the narrow confines of curriculum. The backhanded compliment that the teacher should solve all ills simply illustrates the critical importance of the teacher’s commitment to society because the school environment gives certainty in a very uncertain phase of a child’s life. Very often the whole area benefits because of the teachers’ value to the society beyond the narrow confines of the classroom. Parents will invariably place more trust long term in the teacher where their children are concerned because they will be treated honestly. The teacher unions advocate yes for better pay but also yes for better benefits for their pupils. They give a service to the state which goes beyond that of the ordinary worker who only seeks personal benefit. Value our teachers.
Why can’t parents do a course surely they have a better chance of spotting these signs than teachers in a class of many student . It’s a terrible responsibility to put on teachers after a few hours training
Very welcome idea,one suicide is one to many
If one is one too many, the true figure 550 per annum is a grim figure indeed.
It’s so important that every teacher is trained that it’s only going to cost you
50 Euro to do a half day course .
If Console were really serious about this idea for teachers why not train them all nationwide for FREE.
Why doesn’t the govt pay
This is wrong on so many levels. It seems like just another “schools should…” initiative but the topic here is far more serious than most such calls.
It misunderstands the role of teachers in society and in the lives of children. It’s not actually like “Waterloo Road” or “Home and Away” where Sir or Miss is always available and spends as much time worrying about their charges’ emotions and home-lives as they do teaching them.
To say that a half-day course enables anyone “to respond effectively” to mental distress serious enough to lead to suicide is ludicrous. It is not callous to say this is not teachers’ jobs; we would be doing children a disservice with amateur intervention instead of referral to fully-trained professionals.
The analogy to CPR is unwarranted. CPR takes place in response to a catastrophic event, in a situation where even a few minutes delay can mean the difference between life and death.
There is also a danger of a pattern emerging where enthusiastic graduates of this course intervene with students on the basis that doing makes the teacher a life-saving hero. The question will soon be “Do I have to say I’m suicidal to get help around here?” Students need teachers to be a calm, approachable presence in their lives and part of being a professional is knowing where your job ends and some-one else’s begins.
Great idea. We need a real focus on suicide prevention in this country.
So a half day course will make teachers experts in spotting a potential suicide? Either do it right or not at all.
No doubt this training will happen while the teachers should be actually teaching rather than doing it during their 3 months holidays.
From your own extensive knowledge on the matter, what other training occurs when teachers should actually be teaching? Enlighten us please
Do you do your training in your own time? It will be part of teacher training and part of CPD as part of Haddington Rd. Hours. 43 hours extra I do a year UNPAID!!! Do you work 43 hours unpaid? Fair play to you.
I take it then that you would happily give up your holidays to do a similar training course. Or maybe you would have the children get four weeks holiday in the year which would mean you cannot bring your child on holiday because of the need for your child to be in school. Which might have the side effect of decimating the tourist industry and any other industry which depends on creating for children out of school!!!! The fact is teachers do not decide how much holidays the children receive. That is done by the Dept. of Education and Science following consultation and agreement between it, the Unions and the parents. During the “great snow closures” parents clamoured for the restoration of the lost days. The “solution” was that three days be in some way held back in case of snow. This meant that parents could not book a holiday for the midterm week in February because if it snowed in January they would lose the three days in February. If they had taken the chance to book a holiday would they then cancel in the interest of not losing three days of their child’s education? Also many teachers give up the first week of their summer vacation to attend a plethora of courses for which they can take some personal leave days at the discretion of their Board of Management. Would you do likewise with your holiday? Maybe if you really envy and begrudge the conditions of service of a teacher you should have become one any tried to change the system from within instead of sniping.
We all experience periods of stress, sadness, and self-doubt. ‘These don’t make us mentally ill, they define us as human.’ ~ Dr Howard Forman
We all have a biochemistry but it requires daily work to keep our physical / mental health in good shape. Starting with a good nights sleep and good nutrition. Lots of other things that can help and that can be worked on in schools ~ Yoga, meditation, mindfulness, exercise, emotional resilience, how to deal with bullying, building self-esteem etc Talk therapy can help. Also being with nature. And getting enough daylight and sunshine (when possible).
I went to a lecture by 86 yr old Prof Ivor Browne last week. The lecture theatre was packed. Such an interesting presentation. If only the mental ‘health’ system could see our emotional well being on a more holistic level. The mind and body are very much interconnected. Instead of the predominant biomedical / drugging approach.
The “Refer” part. Is what I would worry about in QPR. I hope that doesn’t mean where the GP puts a teenager on mind altering psychoactive drugs ie “anti-depressants” instead helps in developing their long term needs. Emotional well being is something that needs a life long approach and not some “quick fix” drug that can have severe adverse effects. Something I learned from experience.
Young people in particular should not be on these mind altering drugs, due to the suicide risk. Hence these psychoactive drugs carry a black box warning in the US ~
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/UCM096273
{ Do not stop or change prescribed psychoactive drugs without talking to a good doctor, due to the dangers of withdrawal }
PS Any change that TheJournal could change the stereotypical picture ? Looks like someone who got too much drugs and is hiding in the corner of a mental institution ! That is not really how emotional distress looks like or feels like for most and there are some people who are trying to change the whole “head clutching” culture. Or in this case “shin clutching”.
TED Talk ~ The role of nutrition in mental health by Julia Rucklidge ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dqXHHCc5lA
WRAP App demo ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BK_jLMToeM (Wellness Recovery Action Plan)
About time, this country is MILES behind in relation to spotting mental health issues
Michael ,what is this “holiday” thing of which u speak ,must only b available to the few. Have had such bad experience with “teachers” through my own school years and my children’s school years ,that I think it would b wiser to send teachers on courses to prevent people from becoming suicidal ,by learning to communicate in an agreeable manner , Its so easy for a teacher to wreck a child’s self confidence ,and it’s this lack of self confidence that starts the decline in a child’s mental well being .
Eilish, if a child is a brat then there will be problems with the teacher. There’s your issue I’m sure. A little bit of parenting goes a long way.
Speaking as someone who tried to end my life, the period when I was planning my death I became very calm and content because I knew that the end was coming for the intolerable emotional pain I was experiencing. Nobody could have forseen that I had a plan to end my life. Suicidal people are not always going around with a sad face. this training will not help teachers.
Why don’t parents just give their children to schools after birth so they don’t have to do any child care at all.Schools are for educating your children.Teachers get enough flak for not teaching properly now they must become counsellors aswell – in one day !
For anyone suffering from depression, I recommend the http://destroydepression.com/info.php system. Written by a former depression & PTSD sufferer, it teaches 7 natural steps which help to eliminate depression from your life and the success rate is very high.
This thread appears to have gone viral among teachers… They are red thumbing all over the place…
Shur their on there 2 week Easter hols… With another mid term coming up before their 12 week summer hols I guess it’s only right that they do this course during term time… Bless their over worked souls.
have your say