Accountability For Republicans Who Voted Against Impeaching Trump

On Tuesday, we took a look at how Trump's electoral toxicity and his impeachment is making it worse for 3 specific Republicans in swing districts-- John Katko (NY-24), Fred Upton (MI-06) and Rodney Davis (IL-13)-- to run for reelection. For example, when likely general election voters were asked if they are more or less likely to support a Member of Congress who opposes impeachment these were the results in each district:

• MI-06 (Upton)

• much more likely to support- 31%
• somewhat more likely to support- 7%
• no difference- 9%
• somewhat less likely to support- 6%
• much less likely to support- 47%

• NY-24 (Katko)

• much more likely to support- 32%
• somewhat more likely to support- 5%
• no difference- 7%
• somewhat less likely to support- 8%
• much less likely to support- 48%

• IL-13 (Davis)

• much more likely to support- 34%
• somewhat more likely to support- 4%
• no difference- 8%
• somewhat less likely to support- 6%
• much less likely to support- 48%

Lord only knows what will happen to this flaming asshole now. I certainly wish him all the worst-- along with the corruption-soaked Norcross machine and the DCCC recruiters who forced him down the throats of South Jersey Democrats for so many years. Hopefully we can watch him lose his reelection bid as a Republican. No doubt Trump promised to clear the field for him, although as far as I can tell, there are still three Republicans running against him.

Jefferson Van Drew (DCCC-NJ)

A few days ago, New York Magazine columnist Ed Kilgore asserted that overconfident Trump backers are ignoring a key lesson from 2016. He observed that "If you forced yourself to watch significant portions of the House Judiciary Committee’s markup of articles of impeachment, you undoubtedly heard the Republican hypothesis that the entire exercise is an effort to head off a certain Trump reelection next year. This assumption was often hurled at Democrats as a taunt:

[T]here was a moment during Wednesday night’s talkathon when Buck [R-CO] taunted his Democratic colleagues for proceeding with impeachment despite what he said would be the disastrous political consequences. “Say goodbye to your majority status,” he said, “and please join us in January, 2021, when President Trump is inaugurated again.” Other Republicans echoed him, reflecting the capital’s current conventional wisdom that the President, although he remains disliked and distrusted by a majority of the country, is not only going to emerge from impeachment with a largely unified Republican vote to acquit him but also strengthened for his reëlection campaign.

NOT a reason to impeach Trump

"Impeachment aside," wrote Kilgore, "any casual perusal of pro-Trump conservative news and opinion outlets shows an impressive consensus that the president is cruising to a 2020 victory, with impeachment viewed as a base-mobilizer rather than a development that will repel swing voters, as this neat summation from the Washington Times smugly assumes:

American Spectator columnist David Catron offers a handy, succinct rationale for President Trump’s victory in 2020, ideal for use in political skirmishes at work or cocktail parties. Mr. Catron notes that a “failed impeachment” will weaken Democrats, strengthen the president and further motivate his already loyal supporters.

“Trump will win reelection in 2020 for three reasons: First, the voters are always reluctant to replace a president in a time of peace and prosperity, regardless of his perceived flaws. Second, a transparently partisan impeachment vote in the House followed by a fair trial and acquittal in the Senate, will seriously damage the Democratic brand while sparking an internal civil war between its moderate and leftwing factions. Finally, this ideological conflict within the opposition party will result in the nomination of a weak compromise candidate to face a vindicated and politically stronger incumbent president awash in cash and supported by highly motivated voters,” Mr. Catron writes.

The Trump campaign itself is reinforcing this spin forcefully:

After Pelosi and her committee chairs introduced the articles of impeachment, on Tuesday, Trump’s campaign “war room” tweeted out a video clip of Trump’s face superimposed onto the body of the Marvel Comics supervillain Thanos, a genocidal warrior who aims to use his power to destroy half of all life in the universe. “House Democrats can push their sham impeachment all they want,” the tweet read. “President Trump’s reelection is inevitable.”

That's a pretty amazing video by Andrew Romanoff. I've never seen a better discussion of the Climate Crisis in a campaign ad. In talking about climate change denier Cory Gardner (R), his opponent-- who instantly attacked him for releasing the video-- Romanoff noted that "In 2014, Cory Gardner won a seat in the Senate by promising to be 'a new kind of Republican.' Five years later, he’s proven to be anything but-- voting instead in lockstep with Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump. Now Gardner has yet another chance to make good on his promise and uphold the Constitution. In 2014, he told us: 'When my party’s wrong, I’ll say it.' Don’t hold your breath." No, instead of holding your breath, contribute to Andrew's campaign here.

Teresa Tomlinson is a progressive Georgian running for the Senate seat held by all-in Trump supporter David Perdue. She told us today that "The senators’ vote on impeachment sets the standard of conduct for all presidents going forward. The writers of the constitution were clear in Federalist Paper No. 66: should the Senate refuse to impeach the president upon evidence of impeachable acts, the senators will be held to account by their electorate."

The gerrymandered 25th district in Texas is lucky. They have two strong progressives competing to take on Trump ass-kisser Roger Williams. One, Julie Oliver talked with us about impeachment: "It's bigger than any short-term electoral positioning or political consequence or whatever political consultants or pundits say. It's history. And Roger Williams-- whose only achievement in the House has been to fall under an Ethics Review for self-dealing and who has passed one bill, to name a post office-- will now be remembered as having tied himself to this historically corrupt president. The facts are damning. Donald Trump extorted a foreign country to investigate his political rival by withholding Congressionally approved military aid, an impeachable offense. By putting his corrupt interests before Texas, he has failed to uphold his Constitutional duty."

Julie's primary opponent Heidi Sloan, sees it much the same way. "Roger Williams has done almost nothing for the people in TX-25," she noted. "What little he has accomplished overwhelmingly benefits his rich friends and business colleagues, so you'd think he might be interested in at least pretending to his constituents that he isn't totally corrupt. Not the case with Williams-- he has no reputation for leading with integrity, and he has no interest in building one now, and that is why he will vote against impeachment. Williams has no accountability to his district, and that's what happens when millionaires get to hold onto their seats for four terms without any real gains for the working class to show for all that time. In our campaign, we are showing the people of TX-25 what accountable leadership looks like. By opposing impeachment after a long record of failing the poor and working class in his district, Williams is pushing even many of his conservative constituents to stay home on election day. We're going to break his winning streak by bringing working class people with us." Please use the Turning Texas Blue thermometer on the right to contribute to either Heidi or Julie-- or both.

I asked other candidates how their neighbors are looking at impeachment. These are candidates endorsed by Blue America, and each is running for a swingy seat occupied by Republican incumbents. You can contribute to their campaigns here.

The rear jacket of Alan Grayson's new book

State Rep. Jon Hoadley is running to represent the southwest corner of Michigan (MI-06) and he's going to have defeat a Trumpist who disguises himself as a "moderate," Fred Upton. If he wasn't such a political coward, Upton probably would have voted to impeach Trump. But he is a coward and he didn't. "The voters in southwest Michigan know what President Trump did was wrong," said Hoadley. "The President should not invite foreign powers to interfere in our elections, and no one is above the law. At a moment when our elected leaders should put politics aside and live up to our Oath of Office, Congressman Upton did not. Voters will remember." Short and sweet.

And it was the same for Omaha progressive Kara Eastman, who is taking on devout Trumpist Donald J. Bacon. She told us that "According to a recent poll we commissioned, Donald Trump is way underwater in our district. At a recent town hall, nearly 200 people loudly held Rep. Don Bacon to task for his unwavering support of the president. Bacon has buried his head in the sand  when it comes to Trump's high crimes and misdemeanors and we plan to successfully hold this vote against him through next year's election."

Liam O'Mara is in a tougher district than Kara or Jon. The PVI is a daunting R+9. The GOP incumbent is weak, corrupt and swimming in Trumpishness. Let's see how happy Riverside County independent voters were with Calvert's vote against impeachment. O'Mara: "In a vote as momentous as impeachment, members of Congress have a duty to be impartial and weigh the evidence. Doing so is the only way to ensure the proper function of our Framers' system of checks & balances. When our Representatives cast votes on an issue like this along purely partisan lines or out of fear from their voter base, they have violated their oath of office and sacrificed any claim to honesty. Is this a stable republic? Or is the GOP, and Calvert, so deep into the cult of personality that they are working to turn it into something else?"