With new twists in the story of President Donald Trump’s looming impeachment coming every day — at times seemingly every hour — let’s try jumping ahead to the end. Here are four possible outcomes of this process, ranked from most to least likely.
By far the most likely endgame is that Trump is impeached by the House and then acquitted in the Senate. House Democrats seem determined to move ahead, even if they get no support from Republicans. But on the Senate side, where 67 votes are needed and there are only 47 Democrats, it’s very hard to imagine 20 Republicans voting to remove the president. Gradations of support still may matter. If Democrats wind up with fewer than 47 “yes” votes, for instance, that would be a political disaster; even a single Republican plus all Democrats would be better. Better still for them would be a chamber majority — not least because, if defecting Republicans voted with united Democrats, they could force trial rules favorable to impeachment supporters.
After that, we’re really just guessing. But if I had to bet on a different outcome it would be Trump’s resignation. I’ve seen some speculation that Trump would, unlike President Richard Nixon, fight to the bitter end. But that’s what everyone, including Nixon, expected in 1974. Once Nixon was certain to lose, he realized that putting the nation — and himself — through such an ordeal was pointless. There’s also the possibility of a Spiro Agnew-like ploy. Facing corruption charges, Agnew, Nixon’s first vice president, accepted a deal in which he resigned from office and pleaded no contest to one offense, while the attorney general agreed to forgo further prosecution. If Trump faces prison but could avoid it by quitting, I’d expect him to take that deal. We’re a long way from either scenario, but it’s not hard to see a path from here to there. It would simply require a gradual weakening of Republican support — as it is, very few Republicans are eager to come to the microphones to defend Trump — until eventually it collapsed.
Less likely would be the entire impeachment movement fizzling out in the House. I’d be quite surprised by that at this point. It’s possible that the evidence against the president could turn out to be weaker than it now appears, or that the politics of the situation change. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi no doubt still sees the drawbacks of a party-line impeachment and acquittal. But as of now, it’s hard to see how this train gets stopped. I’m tempted to say this is actually the least likely outcome, except that ...
It’s still difficult to imagine how this ends in removal, something that has never happened to a president. My read of the situation is that a 67 to 33 Senate vote to oust the president is unlikely. Again, there just aren’t 20 Republicans whose support for Trump is soft. That means he’d only be removed after a trial if the whole party turned against him, including a lot of Republican-aligned interest groups and media outlets. The final Senate vote in that case would probably be something like 87 to 13 or even closer to unanimous, with only a handful of radicals holding out.
Even if the party is behind them, however, Republican senators still aren’t going to want to take that vote. Nor are they going to want to sit through a trial that airs Trump’s dirty laundry and might make more than a few other Republicans look bad. Plus, they’re going to be in a hurry to find another presidential nominee while leaving as much time as possible between removing Trump and the election. Which is why, if removal looks like a foregone conclusion, everyone is going to put heavy pressure on Trump to simply resign and get it over with.
I quoted the last sentence in the title of this post, but the second-to-last sentence is interesting too:
... they’re going to be in a hurry to find another presidential nominee while leaving as much time as possible between removing Trump and the election.
Another presidential nominee? If Donald is removed or resigns, Mike Pence automatically becomes president. Wouldn't President Pence also be the obvious (and best) choice to be the 2020 Republican nominee? Apparently Bernstein doesn't think so, and as I've said here before, neither do I.
Update: Great minds think alike? After I published this post I went to the homepage of the Washington Post, which currently has not one but two stories contemplating the possibility that Donald will not be the Republican nominee in 2020. The first, titled "So if Trump gets removed, who's the GOP nominee?" includes a list of potential replacement candidates, some with comments:
1. Mike Pence. Comments: Pence would start in the pole position if Trump were removed from office. But he has never been a formidable figure to national Republicans, and plenty of party activists - pro- and anti-Trump - would want a fresher start if Trump were gone. He'd have to expect a serious challenge.
2. Mitt Romney. Comments: If the GOP had to come up with a candidate on short notice, Romney fits the bill. Heck, did he ever stop running for president after 2008? The irony is that if the GOP could/would/had to rid itself of the incumbent president, it would be free to occupy the large void in the middle of American politics. A center-right Romney-Haley ticket would probably get 55% percent of the vote against Warren, or maybe Biden too.
3. Nikki Haley. Comments: Haley denounced Trump's move to abandon the Kurds. She might be the only person acceptable to both pro- and anti-Trump Republicans.
4. Tom Cotton
5. Josh Hawley. Comments: Hawley would probably be too young to become the nominee. But he is fast becoming a favorite among evangelical Christians who want someone who shares their values without being too identified as one of them. He would make an attractive vice-presidential pick for the nominee, especially if former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley were to emerge on top.
6. Jeff Flake. Comments: Mr. Conscience of a Conservative wants Republicans to "save their souls." Perhaps he could convince voters the best place to buy a ticket to heaven is at the ballot box. And as far as his own celestial fate goes, he might earn some points by running instead of telling other people to do it.
7. Ben Sasse
8. (Tie) John Kasich
8. (Tie) Mike Pompeo
10. Joe Walsh
Joe Walsh is the only one of the three declared Republican candidates who made the list. Who are the others? Bill Weld and Mark Sanford. Who's Josh Hawley? (I admit I didn't know when I first saw this list. Please don't judge.) He's the junior senator from Missouri, age 39, having defeated Claire McCaskill in 2018. (Read the rest of the article here.)
The second article, titled "How likely is it Trump will be on the ballot in 2020?" is a column from Jennifer Rubin, a regular opinion writer at the Post. Here are her thoughts on the subject, along with the (unpleasant) picture of Donald, taken yesterday, that accompanies her article:
photo credit: Alex Wroblewski/Bloomberg
A normal political party — either for political convenience or some remote sense of propriety — would have dumped this guy a long time ago (before, for example, he consigned the Kurds in Syria to a genocide). Trump and the current Republican Party are anything but normal. Their utter shamelessness and the use of propagandist (false) Fox News keeps them bound together in the belief that they can survive this.
How rational is it for Republicans to not only continue carrying his dirty water but supporting his reelection? They would, in 2020, be running with a candidate who comes into their state (if it is remotely winnable for Trump, who exaggerates what “remotely winnable” encompasses), declaring that going to foreign countries to get dirt on rivals is perfectly fine. Ads tying them to his inane defenses and confessions (there is overlap there, I grant you) will rain down upon them.
A presidential nominee with a track record such as Trump’s, and who lost the popular vote in 2016, and who has done nothing but offend voters outside his core base, would ordinarily portend disaster for his party up and down the ticket. Perhaps the incumbent cowards would rather risk losing and watching the Senate and White House turn over to the Democrats than speak out against Trump. They’d rather go down with the cult, for at least they might have a shot at jobs in right-wing organizations.
Other than that, I cannot think of a single, logical reason the Republican Party would want to go into 2020 with this guy. (Who knows which characters — e.g., former national security adviser John Bolton, Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Attorney General William P. Barr — will finally testify against Trump in an effort to save their own skins?)
The latest Fox News poll understandably shook up the president, who blasted the network for releasing a harmful poll. His approval is deep in the red (43 percent approve, 55 percent disapprove, with 47 percent disapproving strongly). He is trailing among all women, white women, suburban women (56 percent strongly disapprove) and white college-educated women (57 percent strongly disapprove) as well as white non-college educated women (43 percent strongly disapprove). Unless there are states with no women, Trump looks ready to get pummeled in 2020.
... they’re going to be in a hurry to find another presidential nominee while leaving as much time as possible between removing Trump and the election.
Another presidential nominee? If Donald is removed or resigns, Mike Pence automatically becomes president. Wouldn't President Pence also be the obvious (and best) choice to be the 2020 Republican nominee? Apparently Bernstein doesn't think so, and as I've said here before, neither do I.
Update: Great minds think alike? After I published this post I went to the homepage of the Washington Post, which currently has not one but two stories contemplating the possibility that Donald will not be the Republican nominee in 2020. The first, titled "So if Trump gets removed, who's the GOP nominee?" includes a list of potential replacement candidates, some with comments:
1. Mike Pence. Comments: Pence would start in the pole position if Trump were removed from office. But he has never been a formidable figure to national Republicans, and plenty of party activists - pro- and anti-Trump - would want a fresher start if Trump were gone. He'd have to expect a serious challenge.
2. Mitt Romney. Comments: If the GOP had to come up with a candidate on short notice, Romney fits the bill. Heck, did he ever stop running for president after 2008? The irony is that if the GOP could/would/had to rid itself of the incumbent president, it would be free to occupy the large void in the middle of American politics. A center-right Romney-Haley ticket would probably get 55% percent of the vote against Warren, or maybe Biden too.
3. Nikki Haley. Comments: Haley denounced Trump's move to abandon the Kurds. She might be the only person acceptable to both pro- and anti-Trump Republicans.
4. Tom Cotton
5. Josh Hawley. Comments: Hawley would probably be too young to become the nominee. But he is fast becoming a favorite among evangelical Christians who want someone who shares their values without being too identified as one of them. He would make an attractive vice-presidential pick for the nominee, especially if former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley were to emerge on top.
6. Jeff Flake. Comments: Mr. Conscience of a Conservative wants Republicans to "save their souls." Perhaps he could convince voters the best place to buy a ticket to heaven is at the ballot box. And as far as his own celestial fate goes, he might earn some points by running instead of telling other people to do it.
7. Ben Sasse
8. (Tie) John Kasich
8. (Tie) Mike Pompeo
10. Joe Walsh
Joe Walsh is the only one of the three declared Republican candidates who made the list. Who are the others? Bill Weld and Mark Sanford. Who's Josh Hawley? (I admit I didn't know when I first saw this list. Please don't judge.) He's the junior senator from Missouri, age 39, having defeated Claire McCaskill in 2018. (Read the rest of the article here.)
The second article, titled "How likely is it Trump will be on the ballot in 2020?" is a column from Jennifer Rubin, a regular opinion writer at the Post. Here are her thoughts on the subject, along with the (unpleasant) picture of Donald, taken yesterday, that accompanies her article:
photo credit: Alex Wroblewski/Bloomberg
A normal political party — either for political convenience or some remote sense of propriety — would have dumped this guy a long time ago (before, for example, he consigned the Kurds in Syria to a genocide). Trump and the current Republican Party are anything but normal. Their utter shamelessness and the use of propagandist (false) Fox News keeps them bound together in the belief that they can survive this.
How rational is it for Republicans to not only continue carrying his dirty water but supporting his reelection? They would, in 2020, be running with a candidate who comes into their state (if it is remotely winnable for Trump, who exaggerates what “remotely winnable” encompasses), declaring that going to foreign countries to get dirt on rivals is perfectly fine. Ads tying them to his inane defenses and confessions (there is overlap there, I grant you) will rain down upon them.
A presidential nominee with a track record such as Trump’s, and who lost the popular vote in 2016, and who has done nothing but offend voters outside his core base, would ordinarily portend disaster for his party up and down the ticket. Perhaps the incumbent cowards would rather risk losing and watching the Senate and White House turn over to the Democrats than speak out against Trump. They’d rather go down with the cult, for at least they might have a shot at jobs in right-wing organizations.
Other than that, I cannot think of a single, logical reason the Republican Party would want to go into 2020 with this guy. (Who knows which characters — e.g., former national security adviser John Bolton, Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Attorney General William P. Barr — will finally testify against Trump in an effort to save their own skins?)
The latest Fox News poll understandably shook up the president, who blasted the network for releasing a harmful poll. His approval is deep in the red (43 percent approve, 55 percent disapprove, with 47 percent disapproving strongly). He is trailing among all women, white women, suburban women (56 percent strongly disapprove) and white college-educated women (57 percent strongly disapprove) as well as white non-college educated women (43 percent strongly disapprove). Unless there are states with no women, Trump looks ready to get pummeled in 2020.
Republicans have been granted an off-ramp from the Trump traffic jam, a way of perhaps saving the Senate and holding down losses in the House. All they need do is declare they will not support him in 2020. It would be easier to get a somewhat competitive candidate to win 30 to 35 percent in an early primary race to help nudge him off stage but it is not, strictly speaking, necessary. All they need is a modicum of common sense and a mammalian survival instinct. Well, yes, that’s why he is still a better than even chance to be the nominee. But the odds are increasing that Republicans one way or another may be forced to shove him aside. When they do, the potential replacement better not be someone who excused the inexcusable. (Read the column here.)
A few more random thoughts:
For a brief moment in history, Joe Walsh was my Congressman. He ran in 2010 against incumbent Democrat Melissa Bean and wasn't expected to win. She had exponentially more money in her war chest; he had never been elected to anything and got minimal support from the Republican party. I never saw her name on any list of endangered incumbents or districts at risk of flipping. Because I volunteered on the Melissa Bean campaign, I was at what was supposed to be her victory party on election night. As the night went on the race was too close to call, so eventually they sent everyone home. A couple of days later, after a recount, Walsh was the winner, part of the big Tea Party movement of 2010. He only served one term, however. He was defeated in 2012 by Tammy Duckworth.
There's one more scenario that's not being discussed much. Call it the LBJ option, or possibly the "declare victory and leave the field" option: If neither impeachment/removal or a Trump resignation happen, Donald could serve out this term but choose not to run in 2020.
As Donald's troubles mount, are writers and photo editors deliberating using the most unpleasant and/or unflattering pictures of him? It certainly looks that way in my Twitter feed.
"If the GOP had to come up with a candidate on short notice" These are the words next to Mitt Romney's name on the above list, and as I've said here before, I believe that's the main reason Romney decided to run for a senate seat in 2018. In a post dated January 26 of this year, I wrote this:
I don't for one minute believe that Romney, at the age of 71, has any real interest in being the 97th-most senior member of the U.S. Senate, which is what he currently is. I've thought from the moment he announced his run that his real reason for getting himself elected to the senate is strategic, based on the belief that Donald may not last his full term: Mittens wants to be in position to raise his hand and humbly offer to serve. (To be clear, and obviously, if Donald leaves office for any reason, the VP automatically becomes president. I'm talking about Senator Romney offering to be the 2020 nominee.) (Read the entire post here.)
Update #2. Jonathan Bernstein continues to point out ways in which Trump's situation is similar to Nixon's, as well as ways in which it is not. Note that in the second tweet, I think he means "kids":
Update #3 on Monday evening. A few more unpleasant, or possibly unhinged, pictures of Donald, from his rally in Minneapolis last Thursday night.
From NY Mag:
From the Washington Post:
From CNN:
Update #4 on Friday, October 18. I'm not the only one considering the LBJ scenario. It came up in reporter Aaron Blake's Friday live chat at the Washington Post:
Q: GOP Plan B
Hypothetical scenario. Trump says he's not running in 2020 because why not. Who are the front runners to challenge Biden/Warren?
A few more random thoughts:
For a brief moment in history, Joe Walsh was my Congressman. He ran in 2010 against incumbent Democrat Melissa Bean and wasn't expected to win. She had exponentially more money in her war chest; he had never been elected to anything and got minimal support from the Republican party. I never saw her name on any list of endangered incumbents or districts at risk of flipping. Because I volunteered on the Melissa Bean campaign, I was at what was supposed to be her victory party on election night. As the night went on the race was too close to call, so eventually they sent everyone home. A couple of days later, after a recount, Walsh was the winner, part of the big Tea Party movement of 2010. He only served one term, however. He was defeated in 2012 by Tammy Duckworth.
There's one more scenario that's not being discussed much. Call it the LBJ option, or possibly the "declare victory and leave the field" option: If neither impeachment/removal or a Trump resignation happen, Donald could serve out this term but choose not to run in 2020.
As Donald's troubles mount, are writers and photo editors deliberating using the most unpleasant and/or unflattering pictures of him? It certainly looks that way in my Twitter feed.
"If the GOP had to come up with a candidate on short notice" These are the words next to Mitt Romney's name on the above list, and as I've said here before, I believe that's the main reason Romney decided to run for a senate seat in 2018. In a post dated January 26 of this year, I wrote this:
I don't for one minute believe that Romney, at the age of 71, has any real interest in being the 97th-most senior member of the U.S. Senate, which is what he currently is. I've thought from the moment he announced his run that his real reason for getting himself elected to the senate is strategic, based on the belief that Donald may not last his full term: Mittens wants to be in position to raise his hand and humbly offer to serve. (To be clear, and obviously, if Donald leaves office for any reason, the VP automatically becomes president. I'm talking about Senator Romney offering to be the 2020 nominee.) (Read the entire post here.)
Update #2. Jonathan Bernstein continues to point out ways in which Trump's situation is similar to Nixon's, as well as ways in which it is not. Note that in the second tweet, I think he means "kids":
Trump, oddly enough, has more long-time *Republicans* working for him. Which may work the same...or not. But other than his kid and son-in-law, not too many personal loyalists around now, and only a few (Hicks, most notably) who were there but departed.— Jonathan Bernstein (@jbview) October 13, 2019
Update #3 on Monday evening. A few more unpleasant, or possibly unhinged, pictures of Donald, from his rally in Minneapolis last Thursday night.
From NY Mag:
From the Washington Post:
From CNN:
Update #4 on Friday, October 18. I'm not the only one considering the LBJ scenario. It came up in reporter Aaron Blake's Friday live chat at the Washington Post:
Q: GOP Plan B
Hypothetical scenario. Trump says he's not running in 2020 because why not. Who are the front runners to challenge Biden/Warren?
A: Aaron Blake
Good one!
-Pence
-Haley
-Sasse
-Cruz
-Portman
-Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey
And I wouldn't be surprised if Romney looked at it, honestly. (You can read the entire chat here.)
Update #5 on Saturday, October 19. Another bad picture of Donald. I said previously that Trump's increasingly unpleasant appearance is indicative of his deterioriating mental state, and it's still true:
Trump’s season of weakness: A president who prizes strength enters key stretch in a fragile state @PhilipRucker https://t.co/G4BN9EJ16l— David Nakamura (@DavidNakamura) October 19, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment