How Badly Will Their Votes Against Impeaching Trump Cost Swing District Republicans?

Fore! by Nancy Ohanian

Michael Scherer, writing for the Washington Post Wednesday, reported that "When the dust clears, the result is most likely to look more like a draw than a victory, say political strategists from both sides." He quoted Democratic pollster Geoff Garin: "I am confident that not a single Democrat anywhere in the country next year will lose their seat because they voted for impeachment." And he quoted Republican pollster Glen Bolger: "I am not convinced that anybody is in significant danger but the small number that represent the other team’s area, and there are a lot fewer than there used to be." I disagree-- with both of them.

I suppose that an argument can be made that John Katko (R-NY), Fred Upton (R-MI) and Rodney Davis (R-IL) were already among the walking dead. But the argument is, at best, a stretch if not spurious. All three swing district Republicans are putting up an intense fight to hold onto their seats, and despite voting against impeachment, each is raising huge war chests. Katko has already raised this $1,182,000 cycle. Davis has raised $1,504,629. And Upton, who is independently wealthy, has raised $962,016 and is spending as though his political life depends on it-- which it does.

Tuesday we looked at polling from their districts showing that most voters are less likely to vote from them specifically because of their impeachment votes. Change Research, which did the polling, asserted in their analysis that "if these Republicans are hoping to take on enough of Trump’s water today to make it through their GOP primary, and rely on their approval ratings on the economy to survive another general election, they should take a look at their dismal approval ratings on voters’ top priority, health care costs. Just 37% approve of Rodney Davis’ handling on health care costs, just 32% approve of John Katko’s handing, and a dismal 26% approve of Fred Upton’s handling of health care costs... It is clear that voters, even in these more conservative-leaning districts, believe that the President’s conduct is wildly inappropriate and worthy of the investigation underway. Regardless of their feelings about impeachment, majorities in these districts believe that Trump has engaged in conduct that will ultimately provide the basis for impeachment articles-- including abusing the power of his office (52%, 47% strongly), withholding military funds to pressure another country to investigate a political rival (52%), putting his personal political interests before the good of the country (51%, 47% strongly), and engaging in corruption (51%). Majorities also believe he has intimidated a witness (53%), undermined the rule of law (51%), and even committed crimes (51%). About half of voters in these GOP-held districts already support impeachment without reservation, while just three-in-ten voters oppose impeachment and think Trump did nothing wrong. This leaves over one-in-five who are still impressionable on the impeachment question. These impeachment persuadables include:

• he 14% who currently oppose impeachment because they “haven’t seen enough evidence to know if his conduct was wrong,”

•  the 6% who believe “his conduct was wrong, but it is not impeachable,”

• the 1% who think “his conduct was impeachable, but impeachment will divide the country 
and the public should vote to remove him in the next election,” and

• the 2% who are undecided on impeachment. 


Change Research emphasized that Katko, Upton and Davis "have few convincing arguments in their arsenal. The argument that 'Donald Trump’s actions are very troubling, but with an election coming next year, Congress should not overturn 63 million votes by impeaching the President now' was not convincing at all to a stunning 55% majority of voters, including 36% of Republicans. A similar argument that says 'Donald Trump may have engaged in wrongdoing, but it is not worthy of impeachment, which will divide our country and stop progress on critical issues like health care and trade deals' was not convincing at all to 52% of voters, including 30% of Republicans. Also unconvincing is an argument that 'President Trump was right to ask his lawyer to investigate corruption in Ukraine. Ukraine has had it out for Trump since the 2016 election,' which was not convincing at all to nearly half of voters. This conspiracy theory seems to have some traction, however, with the Republican base. While 83% of Democrats and 46% of independents give this a 0 on a 1-10 scale (where 0 means it is not convincing at all and 10 means it is very convincing), 47% of Republicans say it is a very convincing argument against impeachment."

Unfortunately for Katko, Upton and Davis, NY-24, MI-06 and IL-13 don't have enough Republican voters to win an election without substantial support from independents, who overwhelmingly reject their arguments for not voting to impeach. Change Research concluded that "A majority of voters in these key districts think what Trump did was wrong and, once they hear the facts, are less likely to support Members of Congress who are opposed to the impeachment inquiry. The message is clear: these representatives should put politics aside during impeachment and do their job."

So will it cost them? Yes, with one caveat. Their Democratic opponents have to make the case against them next summer and fall leading up to the election. Jon Hoadley (MI-06) and Dana Balter (NY-24) are talented political leaders. I have less faith in the DCCC's establishment hack running in IL-13.

It was no surprise that Donald J. Bacon voted against impeaching Donald J. Trump. They're couldn't be more similar and each supports the other. Omaha progressive congressional candidate Kara Eastman noted that "Majorities of people nationally and in NE-02 recognize that Trump did something very wrong and abused his power. While White House propaganda and media bothsides-ism has somewhat tempered the number of people willing to commit to impeach-and-remove, the fact is that Republicans like Don Bacon will seal their political fates with their vote against impeachment across the nation. It's about checks and balances pure and simple."

Liam O'Mara's opponent in Riverside County, Ken Calvert, is a lockstep Trump puppet and no one there, let alone in DC, was shocked when he voted against impeachment. Liam, a history professor, pointed out that "Calvert tried, on the eve of an impeachment vote, to complain that polling did not show voters in favour of impeachment-- saying the Dems had 'failed to make their case.' Not only is this false, it is irrelevant, as any popular action can, in fact, still be found illegal. I can think of quite a few. Impeachment is not a popularity contest. It is part of our system of balanced co-equal branches, meant to ensure lawless officials do not go checked. It involves weighing evidence and deciding a question of legal and constitutional principle. And if Calvert is so unfit to lead on matters of law, and must instead follow the opinion polls, he has no business being in public office."


Now... voting for impeachment may hurt a few useless, worthless Blue Dogs in the reddest of districts, Democrats who tend to vote with the GOP on just about everything. I'd guess Kendra Horn in Oklahoma City and maybe Joe Cunningham in Charlestown, South Carolina and Collin Peterson in western Minnesota. Or maybe the independents in the districts will admire them for taking a tough vote and stickling with their convictions. I suspect it will work with Cunningham and Peterson. 

But the most endangered Democrat is Maine's incredible disappointment, Jared Golden, who campaigned as a progressive and then voted as an arch-conservative all cycle. He was so pathetic on the impeachment vote-- voting for one article and opposing another-- that I think plenty of his 2018 supporters will abandon him next year. "'Standing in the middle of the road is dangerous,' Margaret Thatcher once explained, because you can get hit by cars going both directions. That’s what Golden is experiencing today. Liberals are angry. 'If my congressman, Jared Golden, votes for only one article of impeachment, I will work with all my might to see him defeated next year,' tweeted Stephen King, the best-selling mystery novelist. And Republicans... certainly aren’t placated. 'Golden’s vote to impeach President Trump proves he’d rather stand with the socialist Democrats than Maine voters,' said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Michael McAdams. Golden’s vote will not impact the outcome... But the fact that Golden stands alone says a great deal about not just impeachment but the political era we find ourselves in. Intensifying polarization and tribalism are forcing members to pick a side-- and fully own their decision one way or another-- in ways that used to be much easier to avoid."

In the Iowa U.S. Senate race, I think Admiral (Ret) Michael Franken has what it takes to make the case in regard to Joni Ernst's refusal to seriously consider impeaching Trump. "Republican senators," he told me on Wednesday, "face a Sophie’s Choice: An acquittal will only embolden Trump and cause the GOP even more trouble with suburban, female and independent voters. But if Republicans remove Trump from office, he will just run again in 2020 and take down every GOP incumbent along the way. Republican Senators have to decide whether they want their political destruction coming from outside or inside their ranks. Neither will be pretty."

Trump's Toxicity Has Wrecked The Chances For Republicans Like Rodney Davis, John Katko And Fred Upton To Be Reelected

Remember when I told you that Change Research is this cycle's polling outfit to pay attention to? I was in heaven seeing their latest-- surveys in 3 battleground congressional districts, Michigan's 6th (Fred Upton), New York's 24th (John Katko) and Illinois' 13th (Rodney Davis). All the incumbents are Republicans and all the districts are swingy and flippable. Two, MI-06 and NY-24, have solid progressive challengers, respectively Jon Hoadley and Dana Balter) and the other has a fairly worthless Cheri Bustos/DCCC careerist who stands for nothing at all and is so ashamed of the Democratic Party that she has no issues on her campaign site, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan.

Although IL-13 is now rated R+3, Obama won it convincingly in 2008 and was virtually tied in 2012. Hillary, exactly the wrong kind of candidate for a district like this, lost by 5 points to Trump in 2016. In the primaries, Bernie won resoundingly, showing what Democrats want there-- change not status quo, so of course the Democratic establishment gave them putrid example of the status quo-- Londrigan-- as their candidate. She lost. And she's back again. There are 14 counties in the district, though most of the votes come out of just 5-- Champaign, Madison, Macon, Sangamon and McLean. This table shows how Bernie, Hillary and Trump did on primary day:

• Champaign- Bernie- 20,581 (65.9%), Hillary- 10,542 (33.8%), Trump- 7,645
• Madison- Bernie- 18,723 (54.5%%), Hillary- 15,332 (44.6%), Trump- 15,588
• Macon- Bernie- 4,990 (45.2%), Hillary- 5,945 (53.8%), Trump- 6,655
• Sangamon- Bernie- 10,365 (52.6%), Hillary- 9,255 (46.9%), Trump- 11,930
• McLean- Bernie- 12,936 (62.4%%), Hillary- 7,695 (37.1%), Trump- 8,653
• Macoupin- Bernie- 3,552 (55.0%), Hillary- 2,770 (42.9%), Trump- 3,527
• Christian- Bernie- 1,526 (51.2%), Hillary- 1,395 (46.8%), Trump- 2,392
• Montgomery- Bernie- 1,266 (49.3%), Hillary- 1,241 (48.3%), Trump- 2,269
• Jersey- Bernie- 1,069 (54.5%), Hillary- 853 (43.5%), Trump- 1,902
• Piatt- Bernie- 1,016 (55.5%), Hillary- 787 (43.0%), Trump- 1,496
• De Witt- Bernie- 659 (53.3%), Hillary- 561 (45.4%), Trump- 1,577
• Greene- Bernie- 530 (49.4%), Hillary- 503 (46.9%), Trump- 1,014
• Calhoun- Bernie- 503 (50.7%), Hillary- 446 (45.0%), Trump- 329
• Bond- Bernie- 858 (53.4%), Hillary- 718 (44.7%), Trump- 1,102

Change Research explained that the goals of the 3 surveys "were to understand how closely voters were tracking Trump’s Ukraine scandal, the House Intelligence Committee hearings, what evidence and arguments for or against impeachment are most resonant, whether voters recognize the seriousness Trump’s actions, and how voters expect their member of Congress to hold Trump accountable." It's the final goal that most interests us here but I encourage you to read the whole analysis. These are the PVIs of the three districts:

• IL-13: R+3
• NY-24: D+3
• MI-06: R+4

In their intro, Change Research explains that Katko, Upton and Davis "enter 2020 with exceptionally low favorability ratings and with majorities disapproving of their handling of the impeachment inquiry and their record when it comes to holding President Trump accountable. A majority of voters in these key Republican districts think what Trump did was wrong and, once they hear the facts, are less likely to support Members of Congress who oppose the impeachment inquiry. Specifically, majorities express concern about facts established during the impeachment inquiry and believe that the primary grounds for impeachment have been established-- including believing Trump abused the power of his office, withheld military funds to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political rival, and put his personal political interests before the good of the country. The survey also found that voters will not reward Republicans for their opposition to impeachment: just 38% say they are more likely to support a member of Congress who opposes impeachment at the end of the survey, while a 54% majority says they are less likely to support an impeachment opponent after hearing arguments on both sides. The message is clear: voters in these districts believe their representatives should put politics aside during impeachment and do their job."

I. Republican incumbents are unpopular and voters believe they are not doing enough to hold Trump accountable

The vulnerability of these Republican members of Congress is reflected in their favorability ratings, which start from a net negative position in each district. John Katko is 8 points net unfavorable and Rodney Davis is 10 points net unfavorable. Fred Upton, is a remarkable 40 points net unfavorable. In particular, majorities in these swing districts-- districts where it still pays to appear independent-- disapprove of the job their congressman is doing standing up to President Trump and holding President Trump accountable. Majorities also disapprove of their congressman’s handling of the impeachment inquiry.

But if these Republicans are hoping to take on enough of Trump’s water today to make it through their GOP primary, and rely on their approval ratings on the economy to survive another general election, they should take a look at their dismal approval ratings on voters’ top priority, health care costs. Just 37% approve of Rodney Davis’ handling on health care costs, just 32% approve of John Katko’s handing, and a dismal 26% approve of Fred Upton’s handling of health care costs.

II. Voters are closely tracking the impeachment inquiry

After the House Intelligence Committee’s hearings, seven-in-ten voters have heard or seen a lot about the impeachment inquiry, and they are very concerned by what they have learned.

...It is clear that voters, even in these more conservative-leaning districts, believe that the President’s conduct is wildly inappropriate and worthy of the investigation underway. Regardless of their feelings about impeachment, majorities in these districts believe that Trump has engaged in conduct that will ultimately provide the basis for impeachment articles - including abusing the power of his office (52%, 47% strongly), withholding military funds to pressure another country to investigate a political rival (52%), putting his personal political interests before the good of the country (51%, 47% strongly), and engaging in corruption (51%). Majorities also believe he has intimidated a witness (53%), undermined the rule of law (51%), and even committed crimes (51%).

III. GOP arguments are less effective than those of impeachment supporters at moving ‘impeachment persuadables’

About half of voters in these GOP-held districts already support impeachment without reservation, while just three-in-ten voters oppose impeachment and think Trump did nothing wrong. This leaves over one-in-five who are still impressionable on the impeachment question.

... As the impeachment proceedings progress, these Republican members of Congress have few convincing arguments in their arsenal. The argument that “Donald Trump’s actions are very troubling, but with an election coming next year, Congress should not overturn 63 million votes by impeaching the President now” was ‘not convincing at all’ to a stunning 55% majority of voters, including 36% of Republicans. A similar argument that says “Donald Trump may have engaged in wrongdoing, but it is not worthy of impeachment, which will divide our country and stop progress on critical issues like health care and trade deals” was ‘not convincing at all’ to 52% of voters, including 30% of Republicans.


Also unconvincing is an argument that “President Trump was right to ask his lawyer to investigate corruption in Ukraine. Ukraine has had it out for Trump since the 2016 election,” which was ‘not convincing at all’ to nearly half of voters. This conspiracy theory seems to have some traction, however, with the Republican base. While 83% of Democrats and 46% of independents give this a 0 on a 1-10 scale (where 0 means it is not convincing at all and 10 means it is very convincing), 47% of Republicans say it is a ‘very convincing’ argument against impeachment.


 ...The good news for impeachment supporters is that their arguments for impeachment are stronger by comparison. The strongest arguments say that the evidence demonstrates that Trump’s conduct has reached an established bar for impeachment-- which is what the Judiciary Committee was attempting to demonstrate to the public in last week’s hearings.

An argument that the evidence shows “Trump abused the power of this office for personal gain, an impeachable offense in the Constitution, and in so doing undermined our national security, to the benefit of the Russians, by withholding taxpayer funded military aid to Ukraine” was a ‘very convincing’ justification for impeachment for nearly 4-in-10 voters. As convincing was an argument that the evidence establishes Trump “solicited a bribe, an offense listed in the Constitution as one worthy of impeachment, by withholding taxpayer-funded military aid and a White House visit to pressure Ukraine to give something of value to his re-election.”

A majority of these voters acknowledge that Trump has abused the power of his office, withheld military aid to pressure an ally to investigate a political rival, put his personal political interests above the good of the country, and more. Majorities find the evidence established in the investigation concerning, and majorities disapprove of the way these Republican congressmen are handling the inquiry and their approach to Trump.

...After hearing from both sides on impeachment, a majority of voters in these GOP-leaning districts are now willing to punish these GOP members for their unwillingness to participate in the impeachment inquiry, with 54% saying they are less likely to support a member of Congress that opposes the impeachment inquiry. That includes 54% of voters in IL-13, 53% of voters in MI-6, and 56% of voters in NY-24.

IV. Conclusion

A majority of voters in these key districts think what Trump did was wrong and, once they hear the facts, are less likely to support Members of Congress who are opposed to the impeachment inquiry. The message is clear: these representatives should put politics aside during impeachment and do their job.