By Daniel Bobinski
The Democrats know they won’t succeed in impeaching President Trump. They also know their Presidential candidates don’t resonate with voters. And then there’s the economy, which, despite Obama’s declarative prognosticating to the contrary, is doing very well.
Bad candidates and a good economy are one of the reasons Democrats are spending millions of our tax dollars on impeachment hearings. They can’t give us a good reason to vote for their candidates, so they’re trying to give us reasons to vote against Trump. Yes, covering up Deep State malfeasance is another reason Democrats started impeachment hearings, but I’ll save that for a different column.
Why the Democratic candidates can’t win on their own
No one in the 2020 lineup on the Left has the slick (but forked) tongue of a Bill Clinton or a Barack Obama. The top runners are Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders, (and arguably) Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg.
Joe Biden can’t seem to get through the day without making gaffes, touching young girls and sniffing their hair, or struggling to locate where his audience is. Even the Marxist media will have a tough time combating these trouble spots, so it will be hard for swing voters to swing for Joe.
It will also be a hard for swing voters to pull the lever for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, given that both want Socialism for the United States. Warren wants to spend $54 Trillion over ten years for single-payer health care plus eliminate all private plans. This will require a massive tax increase on middle class families that even the Congressional Budget Office says will produce only 1/40 of what is needed. Warren won’t get too many swing votes with that idea.
Among Sanders’ many Socialist ideas are his desire for mandatory $15 minimum wages and free college tuition. Apparently he doesn’t see the negative ripple effects of these lofty-sounding goals (and can’t live by them himself), but I believe enough swing voters will realize the true cost of those policies, and Bernie will retire as a senator.
Personally, I can’t see how Kamala Harris is still in the race, and depending on which poll you read, Buttigieg is doing only slightly better than Harris, despite the legacy media’s attempt to prop him up.
The Democratic candidates are who they are, and each has their own cult following, but none of them have a national appeal. And that matters. As the LA Times reports, all the quibbling about issues doesn’t matter to Democratic voters; all they want is someone who can beat Trump. Unfortunately, nobody in the current lineup of candidates can do that.
The economy, stupid
Another reason the Democrats need every possible edge to avoid a total embarrassment next November is the economy. James Carville was right in 1992 when he told Bill Clinton’s campaign staff, “[It’s] the economy, stupid.” Democrats capitalized on a nationwide recession in 1992, but the trouble for them today is that problem doesn’t exist. Trump has a policy of removing regulations and the economy is doing much better than all the never-Trumpers predicted.
Remember when Obama said that America would never see 3 percent growth again? Lots of “hope” he was injecting into our country, huh? Thank God that “changed” in 2016. The economy has been soaring and people don’t like changing leaders when an economy is doing well.
Enter an impeachment that will not succeed
The stated catalyst for starting impeachment proceedings was that Trump is abusing his office for personal gain. Nothing has come up in the hearings to show it’s true, but at this point, the Democrats don’t care. They have other reasons for the charade.
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) was correct when he said these proceedings are “an investigation in search of a crime.” Nobody the Democrats have brought forward (and even coached while on the stand) has testified that Trump did anything wrong, nor that he sought personal gain. Witnesses have said they don’t like Trump’s policies. Witnesses have said Trump’s been rude. They’ve also said Trump has done inappropriate things. All of that may be true, but those aren’t impeachable offenses. To date, no facts have been presented that Trump has done anything worthy of his removal from office.
Sorry, Ambassador Yovanovitch. I know President Trump said rude things about you. Not a crime. And Adam Schiff is claiming witness intimidation, but I didn’t see you checking your Twitter feed during your testimony. It was Rep. Schiff who interrupted your testimony to make an accusation against Trump, but again, not a crime. Oh, and Judicial Watch says you “may have violated laws and government regulations by ordering subordinates to target certain U.S. persons using State Department resources.” Maybe that’s why you were let go. But I digress.
Let’s sum up the impeachment proceedings thus far with what Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) asked Ambassador Volker: “In no way shape or form ... did you receive any indication whatsoever that resembled a quid pro quo. Is that correct?”
Ambassador Volker: “That’s correct.”
Democrat’s change of verbiage
Turns out the term quid pro quo wasn’t gaining traction with voters, so enter a new approach. The Democrats did polling to discover words people thought were more worthy of impeachment. As a result of that poll, Democrats stopped using the phrase “quid pro quo” and started using “bribery,” “extortion,” and “obstruction.”
I’ll not take space here to explore those accusations. Instead, let me strongly recommend you read Jonathan Turley’s opinion piece at The Hill, Democrats seek to redefine crimes to reframe the Trump impeachment. It’s an excellent and informative column.
However, as we all heard the new words, it was both comical and sad to watch strategically chosen Democratic talking points get spewed across the media. Almost in unison, Left-leaning media outlets began saying Democrats had “sharpened their tone,” or “sharpened their case.” The word “sharpened” (obviously coordinated) brings with it the connotation of sharpening a blade or a spear – the idea that Dems were now going in for the kill. Do take note: most legacy media outlets did not tell us that the reason for the “sharpened tone” was Democrats had surveyed voters to find words with better traction.
These new words are an important part of the plan. After the impeachment falls flat in the Senate, the legacy media will find ways to broadcast those words as often as they can. With that, the ever-loyal Democratic base will remain convinced those crimes occurred, even without any facts. But the ongoing use of those words will also be used to influence swing voters. Democrats need those voters to think Trump was guilty of those things, too.
Why? Because they don’t have a good reason for swing voters to vote for their candidate. They simply want to convince enough swing voters that orange man is not just bad, he’s really bad. He uses bribery and extortion and obstruction. Never mind that it won’t be true. They just need a few people to believe it.
Many people do not understand the court system
If I were to summarize my observation of what’s come out of the impeachment proceedings thus far, it’s mainly about what these witnesses heard (hearsay) and how they felt about it.
I might as well have been watching a long, slow, boring episode of Oprah.
Frustrating for many have been Adam Schiff’s prepared remarks, speaking as if his theories about motives and actions were established facts. As a person who deeply values truth, I, too, was frustrated with Schiff’s behavior, and more than one person I respect thought Schiff’s lying was criminal. But it turns out members of Congress cannot be arrested while Congress is in session. (There’s a treason exception in that rule, so that may become relevant.)
Another frustration: Federal Rules of Evidence commonly prohibits hearsay being admitted as evidence in court, and yet most of the testimony was hearsay. But impeachment hearings are not an official court. Still, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) told several witnesses that if they were in an actual court room, most of their testimonies would not be admissible because it was merely hearsay.
Unfortunately, many people do not know these things. And the more I thought about this, the more I realized Schiff knows exactly what he’s doing. This whole theatrical production is part of the Democrats’ campaign strategy for 2020.
Democrats are building their 2020 campaign strategy using our tax dollars
Democrats know they will fail at their Hail Mary attempt at impeaching Trump. They will lose this game, because to win they would need 20 Republican Senators to flip, and that’s not going to happen. But Democrats are not playing to win. Instead, they’re slyly using millions of our tax dollars to put on a theatrical production, and create a platform for their 2020 campaign while doing so.
After the Senate clears Trump in their trial, the Left-wing media will keep talking about bribery and extortion and obstruction. And Democrats will hit the campaign trail, saying, “You shouldn’t vote for Trump. We voted for impeachment because he obviously deserves to be gone, but the partisan Senate wouldn’t remove him. Now it’s up to you, the voters. You need to remove him.”
If you doubt this, consider what Becket Adams wrote in the Washington Examiner:
The burden is on the impeachers to make impeachment appeal to a broader audience, to make it more than just a partisan exercise taking place within the bubble of the former "Russiagate" conspiracy theory. If the hearings appeal only to die-hard #Resisters, journalists, and politicos, then this entire episode will be nothing more than an exercise in futility.
To sum it all up, Democrats know they have their reliable base – the 30 percent or so of voters who vote Democrat no matter what. But they also need swing voters to win, and right now many swing voters aren’t convinced any of the Democratic candidates are worthy. In November of 2020, swing voters still won’t have a reason to vote for a Democrat. But Democrats are hoping they can ride the bribery, extortion and obstruction themes for a year so swing voters will have a reason to vote against Trump.
And Democrats are setting this all up using millions of our tax dollars – for their own personal gain.
Daniel Bobinski, M.Ed. is a certified behavioral analyst, best-selling author, columnist, corporate trainer, and a popular keynote speaker. In addition to working with teams and individuals to help them achieve workplace excellence through improving their emotional intelligence and improving the way they do training, he’s also a veteran and a Christian Libertarian who believes in the principles of free market capitalism while standing firmly against crony capitalism. Daniel writes on both workplace issues and political issues for multiple publications. Reach Daniel for help with your workplace through his website, MyWorkplaceExcellence.com. For things political, use @newbookofdaniel on Twitter.