The Guardian: Here's the real reason Trump is attacking 'the squad': he's scared of their politics

As the 2020 election campaign begins, Trump and the Republicans have not been coy about their strategy. They intend to foment hatred of “the other” among their predominantly white base, to weaponize false accusations of antisemitism against progressive politicians, to pour kerosene on the fires of the culture war and fight – against women’s rights, LGBT rights, reproductive rights – with renewed vigor. [...]

These proposals are popular, and not only among liberal Democrats, but across a wide swath of the American public. A poll conducted earlier this year found that 60% of independent voters supported Ocasio-Cortez’s 70% top tax-rate proposal, as did 45% of Republicans. Polls consistently show a clear majority of Americans back Medicare for All. Even as sweeping a proposal as the Green New Deal enjoys more support than opposition among likely voters, Obama-to-Trump voters, and moderates. There is an obvious desire among the broader public for the kind of transformational politics that the members of the Squad have brought to Congress.

Indeed, while much of the media coverage of the various Squad members have focused on their identities, their appeal goes far beyond matters of representation. Of course, representation is important, and the Squad, comprised of women of color, represents not only important “firsts” – the first Muslim-American congresswomen, the youngest ever member of Congress, the first black female representative from Massachusetts. They represent what America looks like today far better than the pale, greying gerontocracy that rules the country. At 45, Pressley is the oldest member of the Squad; Nancy Pelosi, for comparison, is 79, and Trump, 73.

read the article

Axios: Trump's new impeachment problem

Why it matters: This has the potential to fundamentally change the conversation around impeachment, which has so far mostly focused on possible instances of obstruction of justice as laid out by Robert Mueller's findings. [...]

Our thought bubble: Does racism fit the definition of high crimes? Congress gets to define the term. And if past is prologue, one of Andrew Johnson's articles of impeachment was a non-criminal high misdemeanor of speaking ill of Congress. [...]

What to watch: It's too early to tell whether other members of the Democratic caucus, including Green's colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, will take up impeachment with him now that he's renewing bigotry as the reason.

read the article

FiveThirtyEight: The House Probably Has A Pro-Impeachment Majority Right Now

The general argument from this bloc is that impeachment serves little purpose because the GOP-controlled Senate is unlikely to seriously consider removing the president from office. Moreover, these lawmakers argue, impeachment proceedings might result in a political backlash against Democrats. (That the Senate would not vote to remove Trump is almost certainly true; I have some doubts about whether the public would necessarily turn against Democrats because of impeachment.) [...]

For one, polls suggest a majority of Democratic voters support impeachment, and many of the party’s activists are pushing the idea hard. So there would be strong political pressure for a “yes” vote in many of these members’ districts. Secondly, Pelosi, in particular, has argued she believes Trump has committed impeachable offenses — so she would have a hard time defending a “no” vote on the substance. [...]

Democrats have 235 votes in the House, so at least some members who represent the 31 districts that supported Trump in 2016 would have to back an impeachment resolution for it to pass by simple majority (218). And that could hurt their re-election prospects in 2020, perhaps jeopardizing Democrats’ majority. Pelosi is aware of the cross pressures these members would face from an impeachment vote and is trying to take that on her herself instead of leaving these members in a tough position.

read the article

The Guardian: Don't be fooled. The midterms were not a bad night for Trump

True, some of the most strident white nationalist and white supremacist Republicans were defeated – although an open neo-Nazi like Arthur Jones still got over 25% of the vote in the third congressional district of Illinois, while openly white nationalist and pro-Confederate Corey Stewart lost the Virginia Senate race with virtually the same score as his conservative predecessor six years ago. Perhaps most painful for Trump was that Kris Kobach, a key player in his ill-fated and ill-named Presidential Advisory Commission on Electoral Integrity who has a decade-long history of racial voter suppression, was handsomely defeated in the Kansas gubernatorial race. [...]

On the other side of the political spectrum, the Democratic party made modest overall advances, in terms of seats rather than votes – barely taking the House, while staying well behind a US Senate majority. That said, the party has changed fundamentally in composition. Two years after Bernie Sanders’ failed challenge for the presidential nomination, there will be almost as many democratic socialists as conservative-leaning Democrats (known as Blue Dog Democrats) in Congress. While still a minority, they will be a loud minority, convinced they represent the future of the party. [...]

Whether the Republican establishment likes it or not – and more and more are actually perfectly happy with it – the Grand Old Party is now Trump’s Party. Their fate is intertwined with his. The old conservative Republican party is dead, for now. In the coming two years they will campaign as a radical right party, led by an omnipresent leader, who will define the Republican party for a whole generation of Americans.

read the article