FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

The 2020 Democratic Impeachment Strategy and Why it Makes Sense Now

For so long “If to impeach the president?” was the question, now the question is “When?” Maybe thus far Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s decision not to pursue impeachment of Donald Trump made electoral sense.  But increasingly a 2020 impeachment next summer just as the presidential general election is kicking into high gear makes sense both as a tool to mobilize the Democratic base, weaken Donald Trump, and place pressure on Mitch McConnell and the Republican Senate.

espite calls by many in the Democratic party base and in the House to impeach Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi has resisted it.  This was the case even after the Muller report documented 11 instances of obstruction of justice.  Pelosi’s justification ranged from “He’s just not worth it” to there are not enough votes in the Senate to convict or the fear that impeachment would produce a Republican base backlash that would all but guarantee trump’s re-election.

However the revelations of Trump seeking to leverage military aide to Ukraine in return for the latter investigating Joe Biden changes the calculus.  It does so for several reasons.  One, the gravity of the problem is greater with apparently clearer evidence of the president inviting a foreign government to interfere in US elections.  Two, it involves direct abuse of power by the president to leverage US military aid for personal partisan purposes.  Three, for Democrats, it is direct attack by Trump on a presidential front runner and if the former is not sanctioned or punished for that, who knows what ever other dirty tricks might occur.

But additionally, two other variables come into play.  The first is that now a majority of House Democrats support impeachment.  Two, it is the issue of time. Timed precisely, a Senate trial would get maximum political payoff for Democrats.  This is why Pelosi is reconsidering impeachment now.

Assume Democrats had moved to impeach Trump earlier this year after the Mueller report came out.  Perhaps Trump is impeached in the House, but then the Senate acquits.  Trump would then be able to use the acquittal as vindication that he did nothing wrong, and also then accuse Democrats that the impeachment was simply a partisan ploy.  The result?  Political backlash and Republican mobilization, especially in a few swing states such as Ohio and Florida, thereby re-electing Trump.

Now consider a new scenario.  The House begins impeachment hearings later this year and into next.  During that time perhaps new information about Trump emerges.  Sometime in the summer 2020 the House votes on articles of impeachment just as the Republican national convention takes place and the general election starts.  Here, much in the same way the Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign was dogged by the on and off and on again investigation by the FBI, Trump begins his general election campaign facing a Senate trial which would distract his campaign.

In addition, a Senate trial in later summer or the fall would be a terrific way for Democrats to pressure Mitch McConnell and the Republican majority for control of that body.  In 2020, there will be 35 Senators facing election, with 23 of them Republican.  McConnell and the Republicans will face a difficult choice–hold a trial and acquit or refuse to hold a trial.  With the former option, a vote to acquit can be used against Republicans in a battle for the Senate.  With the latter option, McConnell–who is also up for re-election–he looks like he is playing politics or refusing to perform his constitutional duties.  Either way, with the timing so close to an election, it pressures Republicans on their votes to acquit or not, providing last minute motivation for Democrats to vote.  Moreover, to ensure the Democratic base and swing voters are motivated, especially suburban female voters who drove the 2016 Democratic victory, make sure that at least one of the articles of impeachment also includes something about sexual harassment, Justice Cavanaugh, or something similar.

No doubt this strategy runs the risk of a Republican base backlash.  But given that the Democratic party base is larger than the Republican one, and given polls suggesting independents do not like Trump, such a move by Pelosi and the Democrats makes sense, potentially handing them the House, Senate, and the presidency.  Accomplish that and repeal the Senate filibuster rule and the Democrats are as free to obliterate the Trump legacy as Trump sought to do with Obama.

More articles by:

David Schultz is a professor of political science at Hamline University. He is the author of Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter.

Weekend Edition
May 22, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Hugh Iglarsh
Aiming Missiles at Viruses: a Plea for Sanity in a Time of Plague
Paul Street
How Obama Could Find Some Redemption
Marc Levy
On Meeting Bao Ninh: “These Good Men Meant as Much to Me as Yours Did to You”
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Shallò: 120 Days of COVID
Joan Roelofs
Greening the Old New Deal
Rob Urie
Why Russiagate Still Matters
Charles Pierson
Is the US-Saudi Alliance Headed Off a Cliff?
Robert Hunziker
10C Above Baseline
Pam Martens - Russ Martens
The Fed’s Chair and Vice Chair Got Rich at Carlyle Group, a Private Equity Fund With a String of Bankruptcies and Job Losses
Eve Ottenberg
Factory Farming on Hold
Andrew Levine
If Nancy Pelosi Is So Great, How Come Donald Trump Still Isn’t Dead in the Water?
Ishmael Reed
Alex Azar Knows About Diabetes
Joseph Natoli
Will Things Fall Apart Now or in November?
Richard D. Wolff
An Old Story Again: Capitalism vs. Health and Safety
Louis Proyect
What Stanford University and Fox News Have in Common
Pete Dolack
Work is Inevitable But its Organization is Not
David A. Schultz
America and the Rise of the Chinese Century
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Fears the Nakba: How Memory Became Palestine’s Greatest Weapon
Heather Gray – Jonathan King
Coronavirus and Other US Health Threats? Fund Public Health Not Foreign Wars
Brian Cloughley
Don’t Be Black in America
Kenn Orphan
A Pandemic and a Plague of Absurdity
Matthew Stevenson
Our Friend Eugene Schulman
Richard C. Gross
The Man Who Cried Wolf
Ron Jacobs
Road Trippin’
Robert P. Alvarez
A Simple Solution for the Coronavirus Crisis in Prisons
Aadesh Ravi
The Long March of the Locked-Down Migrants
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
The Proliferation of Conspiracy Theories & the Crisis of Science
Nilofar Suhrawardy
The Other Side of Covid-19
Binoy Kampmark
Battles Over Barley: Australia, China and the Tariff Wars
Cesar Chelala
Donald Trump can Learn Something from Mao Zedong’s Mistakes
Nicky Reid
The New New Cold War is Pretty Much the Old New Cold War
Dave Lindorff
As Republicans Face November Disaster, Efforts to Undermine Social Security Mount
Gaither Stewart
Remembrances of Meeting Cult Novelist Andrzej Kusniewicz in Warsaw
Gary Olson
“No. It’s Capitalism, Stupid.”
Jesse Jackson
The Legacy of Brown v. Board of Education
Phil Knight
Wilderness and Recreation: an Uneasy Partnership
Alicia Salvadeo – Carolyn Pandolfo
No Bernie, Delegates Won’t “Turn Down the Volume”!
George Wuerthner
Massive Logging Putsch Planned for Wyoming’s Medicine Bow Forest
Laura Finley
The Peace Sign: A Safe Greeting and Sign of Victory over COVID!
Bernie Horn
To Save Lives, and Democracy, We Need to Vote by Mail
Dean Baker
Can You Make Stagnating Incomes Go Away? The NYT Wants You To…
Christopher Brauchli
Great Minds Think Alike: From Trump to Bolsonaro
Sophie Jones
Mutual Aid in Queens Amidst COVID-19
Jimmy Centeno
A Memoir of Time and Place: Margaret Randal’s “I Never Left Home”
David Yearsley
Corona Carpenter
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail