Some Democrats appear to be getting queasy about the whole Trump impeachment circus.
A small group of vulnerable House Democrats is floating the longshot idea of censuring President Donald Trump instead of impeaching him, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the conversations.
Why is that? Guess.
Those Democrats, nearly all representing districts that Trump won in 2016, huddled on Monday afternoon in an 11th-hour bid to weigh additional — though unlikely — options to punish the president for his role in the Ukraine scandal as the House speeds toward an impeachment vote next week.
Because they know that they're going to get MURDERED for this back home.
The idea of censure, according to the lawmakers, is to offer a competing alternative to impeachment that could attract at least some Republican support on the floor. It would also help Democrats avoid a lengthy impeachment trial in the Senate, which some in this group fear could tilt public opinion toward the GOP in the final months before the 2020 election.
It wouldn't be unprecedented; Andrew Jackson got censured. But will it happen? Extremely doubtful. As long as she has the votes to push impeachment through to the Senate, I don't think Nanner McBotox would mind some Democrats breaking ranks to protect themselves. Because ultimately, I think even Nanner knows this dumpster fire isn't going anywhere.
A small group of vulnerable House Democrats is floating the longshot idea of censuring President Donald Trump instead of impeaching him, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the conversations.
Why is that? Guess.
Those Democrats, nearly all representing districts that Trump won in 2016, huddled on Monday afternoon in an 11th-hour bid to weigh additional — though unlikely — options to punish the president for his role in the Ukraine scandal as the House speeds toward an impeachment vote next week.
Because they know that they're going to get MURDERED for this back home.
The idea of censure, according to the lawmakers, is to offer a competing alternative to impeachment that could attract at least some Republican support on the floor. It would also help Democrats avoid a lengthy impeachment trial in the Senate, which some in this group fear could tilt public opinion toward the GOP in the final months before the 2020 election.
It wouldn't be unprecedented; Andrew Jackson got censured. But will it happen? Extremely doubtful. As long as she has the votes to push impeachment through to the Senate, I don't think Nanner McBotox would mind some Democrats breaking ranks to protect themselves. Because ultimately, I think even Nanner knows this dumpster fire isn't going anywhere.
5 comments:
Not necessarily murdered. However, the controversy presents them with a dilemma they don't want. They vote one way, a part of the base stays home. They vote the other way, they alienate a modest corps of ticket-splitters and a modest corps of swing voters. Either could be decisive in a close election.
This will turn IMHO upon how thin or thick each winning margin was. The one closest to me won by only 2%.
Which I guess shows how toxic they think impeachment is. When the "articles of impeachment" basically boil down to Bad Orange Man Beat Hillary So You Know He Had To Have Cheated, they know this thing is dead on arrival.
Is it just coinkydink that the impeachment committee vote was unexpectedly postponed (just until tomorrow, but still postponed) shortly after the U.K. election results indicating a massive Conservative Party landslide became known? The Brexit referendum in 2016 was sort of a harbinger of Trump's victory so could this also be a sign of things to come?
From your keyboard to God's Ear, Elaine. ;-)
Post a Comment