GOP Senators face the "Prisoner's Dilemma" with multiple actors.

[eppur_se_muova]

Last edited Fri Jan 24, 2020, 06:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Two members of a criminal gang are arrested and imprisoned. Each prisoner is in solitary confinement with no means of communicating with the other. The prosecutors lack sufficient evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge, but they have enough to convict both on a lesser charge. Simultaneously, the prosecutors offer each prisoner a bargain. Each prisoner is given the opportunity either to betray the other by testifying that the other committed the crime, or to cooperate with the other by remaining silent. The possible outcomes are:

If A and B each betray the other, each of them serves two years in prison
If A betrays B but B remains silent, A will be set free and B will serve three years in prison (and vice versa)
If A and B both remain silent, both of them will serve only one year in prison (on the lesser charge).

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

For 45 to be convicted, a substantial number of GOP Senators would have to be willing to risk the backlash, *NOT KNOWING* in advance of their vote whether the vote would succeed. It would be very easy to vote for conviction after enough Senators had voted guilty (or enough Dems remained to vote that conviction was a mathematical certainty), and not much courage would be required if votes to convict were piling up fast enough that convict seemed certain. But if GOP Senators are not being open with each other about their true willingness to vote to convict, each will evaluate the risk of failure as being higher than it really is, motivated by cautious self-preservation, and vote against their true beliefs -- hence, the dilemma.

What would it take for a group to convene *without* GOP leadership present, discuss the situation openly, and count heads to see who would *really* vote to convict if they could do so safely ? We've heard leaks and rumors from pundits and GOP insiders about how there are really lots of GOP Senators *wanting* to vote against 45, but afraid to buck The Authorities. Do any of them care enough to organize, and get a meaningful head count ? IIRC McConnell is actively discouraging discussion, most likely for exactly this reason. If there's a GOP Senator out there somewhere with her/his own spine, they need to start such discussion precisely because that's what McConnell doesn't want. McConnell places his own survival above that of any of his Senators in blue-leaning states, and they should know that.

When the vote is taken, the roll is called in alphabetical order. If some GOP Senator early in the list -- such as Alexander or Collins (ha!) -- were to vote for conviction, that might push a few others over the fence. If even one other than the "usual suspects" were to do so, it could have a really profound effect, indeed, a shock -- and might trigger enough votes to squeak out a conviction. But I don't have much hope that Collins will do anything important at all, unless wasting everyone's time is somehow important.

My own Senators are a Dem and a 45-supplicant GOPer late in alphabetical order. But if you have a GOP Senator early in the list who might be straddling the fence, give them a call !

By Telephone

Alternatively, you may phone the United States Capitol switchboard at [phone]. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.

https://www.senate.gov/general/contacting.htm

ETA: corrected "impeach" to "convict" everyhwere.

[mainstreetonce]

1. I think it would be easy

To get the votes for witnesses using your scenario.
To get the votes for conviction and removal....that's a stretch.

[eppur_se_muova]

6. Yeah, that's the thing. If they know they're not going to convict -- why take any risk at all ?

Best to be Good Germans, and hope the war will end soon with no big price to pay.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. My senators are Schumer and Gillibrand, so I know how they're voting, but...

don't kid yourself-- GOP senators will know exactly who's voting how before the vote is taken.

And don't be surprised if "safe" senators are recruited to vote "guilty" by those who fear for their seats. I can't believe that there aren't at least a half dozen R's who aren't disgusted by the tangerine wankmaggot and would love to see him gone. But, most have to fear for their seats. Vote trading is done all the time on bills, why not on impeachments?

[kurtcagle]

3. Ha! Thought so too

I'd thought the same thing, that this was a classic game theory scenario.

One point. The Senate is voting to convict and remove, not impeach. The chance of removal is nearly non-existent. However, there is significant psychological impact if at least a majority vote to remove. It makes it far harder for Trump to claim acquittal, not that he won't do it anyway

[eppur_se_muova]

7. Oops, you're right, I changed "impeach" to "convict" later on but forget to change the others. nt

[Turbineguy]

4. They can vote to convict and remove and have Pence sworn in

in a few minutes.

[global1]

5. There's Power In Numbers....

Come on Repug Senators - you can rid yourself of this bully - if you only pull together.

Trump will be so busy defending himself from the SDNY that there is no way he be able to avenge you.