Friday, November 1, 2019
Ten Questions on Impeachment and the 2020 US Elections
1 - One year out from the 2020 elections, what does it look like?
One year out from the 2020 elections American politics is very polarized. The US is experiencing the greatest gap in income and wealth at least since the 1920s and studies point to a nation with rigid social mobility. The result is a nation divided geographically, racially, and most important, politically.
The country is very divided across a range of issues including health care, the economy, foreign policy, and most important, over the performance of President Donald Trump. Democrats and Republicans have very different views on Trump’s performance, and the coming 2020 elections to a large extent will be a referendum on him.
2 - What are the big election themes?
Really the 2020 elections are about Trump–a referendum on his performance and whether he should get a second term, or even impeached or removed from office. But beyond Trump, the major issues seem to be health care, both cost and access, the economy, which seems to be slowing, immigration, and perhaps foreign policy or how the US engages with the rest of the world.
3. On Thursday the Democrats in the House formally voted to authorize an impeachment inquiry. What was the significance of that vote?
First, this was not impeachment, merely formalizing what has been going on for several months. The Constitution gives Congress broad investigatory and oversight powers and the line between those functions and their constitutional power of impeachment is thin. There is amble case law on this as precedent. Thus, for a legal perspective the vote on Thursday meant little, but politically it was significant.
With that vote Donald Trump is only the fourth president in US history subject to a formal impeachment inquiry. That is not a great club to be in. But also politically, the vote is important for other reasons. Trump and the Republicans have thus far complained that the impeachment process is not legitimate and transparent, thereby justifying the president’s refusal to cooperate. Never ask for something because you might regret getting it. Those reasons not disappear. Again, from a legal perspective, none of this mattered, but now politically if the president or Republicans refuse to cooperate when they have the ability to do so it looks bad for them politically. Also, the president’s decision not to cooperate looks even more like possible obstruction of justice.
Also, now the formalizing of the impeachment inquiry sets up a long process of educating the American public about the president’s behavior. If the president fights the inquiry, it drags the process further into 2020, placing impeachment into the center of the primaries and perhaps the general election. The more Trump fights, the more it drags on, the more it gets into the center of the election. How the impeachment and the 2020 elections intersect is a great question. Will it mobilize Republicans or Democrats? Or is the issue really how it impact party base mobilization and swing voters in a few swing states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin? This latter scenario may be the real issue.
The impeachment complicates the ability of the two parties to work together, which was already bad. It also complicates the electoral picture because it is not clear which party the impeachment process favors. Will it boast Democratic or Republican base voting. How will it impact swing voters, especially in a cluster of swing states such as in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Finally, the timing of a possible impeachment and Senate trial is critical to how it impacts politics.
4 - Three months are left before the primaries begin and four months before Super Tuesday, which this year will have California and Texas. Where are the Democrats?
Right now the Democratic field for president is wide and deep, but there are really only a handful of serious candidates. Generally, Iowa and then New Hampshire are the two states that have the biggest influence on the presidential nomination process in the US. The Iowa caucuses are February 3, 2020. Yet this coming year California and Texas have moved their primaries to March 30, with early voting in the former coming the day of the Iowa caucuses. These two primaries may make Iowa less important, or change the strategy of the primary process. California and Texas will require a lot of money and momentum, and it is not clear that doing well in Iowa will provide either. In addition, candidates may need to decide whether to commit resources to Iowa–with few delegates–or work to do well in California and Texas, which have more delegates. The change in primary schedules complicates the strategy for 2020.
Moreover, while the Democrats are united again Trump, they lack a defining narrative of what they want to do and what they stand for. They are missing the elusive narrative. Right now they are a party divided facing a president who has a unified Republican party behind him. Despite the slowing of the economy, a dreary manufacturing sector, and how health care and the trade wars are hurting his base economically, there is no sign that these factors are eroding his support.
5 - Who are the favorites among Democrats?
At this point it is Joe Biden, Elizabeth, Bernie Sanders, and Peter Buttigieg who are the top tier candidates in terms of money raised and standing in the polls, Biden is the leader among the more centrists of the party while Warren and Sanders are fighting for the left. The questions will be who emerges as the candidate of the left and then how will they square off against Biden and then which side–the moderate or the left–prevails within the Democratic party.
What has been surprising is the endurance of Biden. Despite his weak debate performance, he still is at or near the top in national and many state polls.
6 - What about Trump’s wall? Is it still an issue.
The wall was always a metaphor about other things that Trump was forced to own and take literally as a promise.
The wall will continue to be an issue for Trump and his base, but the impeachment and court challenges to the wall are complicating this as an issue. Trump will raise it at rallies but he has somewhat moved on to running against his impeachment and Democrats as his core issues along with going after immigrants.
The other issue of possible concern for Trump is the slowing of the US economy, but so far it does not look like it is affecting his support among his political base.
7- How will the China theme impact as elections?
China is a surrogate for immigration, isolationism, and protectionism. These themes resonate with the Republican base and so far there is no indication that the economic consequences are weakening support among Trump’s base.
8 - Is it possible to apply for an independent (Bloomberg) or a competitive third party to enter the race?
People always talk of an third party candidate or party but the entry barriers, such as costs and legal challenges to get on the ballot, make it unlikely that a third party will emerge. Bloomberg also dislikes Trump enough that he will not enter as a spoiler.
9 - What about the congressional elections?
It seems unlikely the House will flip, especially with the number of Republicans who are retiring. The issue is whether the Republican can hold the Senate. Currently that have a 53-47 effective majority. In 2020 there will be 35 Senators up for election, of which 23 are Republicans. The impeachment process and possible Senate trial will test their loyalty–support the president or act to protect their own Senate seat.
One should also not forget that many state legislative seats are up for election in 2020. This is the election will determine control of the state houses going into the 2021 census and redistricting.
10–Any last thoughts?
Forget all the national polls. Remember that the presidential election is about the electoral college and the race to 270 electoral votes. The next president is the only who moves a handful of swing voters in a few swing counties in a few swing states. That is the real presidential election.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for the interesting article, dear Mr. David Schultz.
ReplyDeleteI don’t know how much the topic of Ukraine is significant and important for American citizens, in relation to impeachment (perhaps this will be a strategic mistake of the Democratic Party). I think that the topic of economics, taxes, welfare and healthcare is much more important for most US citizens. The Republican Party can take advantage of the fact that the Democratic Party focuses not on important internal issues for ordinary Americans, but on foreign policy issues.
Please, I have a few questions related to your article:
1) There is an “Amar Plan” according to which the states that acceded to the agreement will oblige their electors to vote for the candidate who will receive the majority of the votes not in his state, but throughout the country. As soon as the total number of electors of such states exceeds the minimum required for victory (270 votes), the theoretical possibility of winning the candidate with the fewest votes will be excluded. This should lead to the introduction of popular direct elections in practice, provided that the electors comply with their agreement. By the end of 2014, the state was joined by the states of Maryland (10), New Jersey (14), Illinois (20), Hawaii (4), Washington (12), Massachusetts (11), DC (3), Vermont (3) ), California (55), Rhode Island (4) and New York (29), with a total of 165 votes out of 270 required. The following states are currently considering joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, NPVIC: Michigan (16) and Minnesota (10).
How much do you think the Amara Plan can make the election results more predictable and transmit the votes to the candidate who will receive the majority of the votes not in his state, but throughout the country?
2) As of 2017, there were 164 cases of “bad faith” of electors, but they did not change the outcome of any presidential elections. In 2016, seven electors voted contrary to the opinion of the state population, but their protest did not lead to a change in the election results. Electors elect the president. Formally, they must vote in accordance with the will of the voters, but there is no federal law with such a requirement, there is only a fine for voting not in accordance with the will of the majority; the maximum fine under state law is 1000 dollars. In addition, in almost all states, electors are accountable to the party that appointed them. So far, none of the electors have been prosecuted for voting for another candidate.
How likely is the situation that electors can vote contrary to the opinion of the state population and this will lead to a change in the election results? If this happens, is it possible to change the result of such a vote?
3) The fate of the presidential election should have been decided by swing states. There were nine of those in the 2016 elections: Florida (29), Ohio (18), Michigan (16), North Carolina (15), Georgia (16), Arizona (11), Nebraska (5), Iowa (6), and New Hampshire (4). Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona are especially important, as we see, on this list due to the large number of electors.
You didn’t mention Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nebraska in your article. Do you think these states have already decided on a presidential candidate?