Impeachment polls surprisingly well

May 8, 2007

I’m quite certain that neither Bush nor Cheney are going to be removed from office before January 2009. Even if the House Dem leadership dramatically switched gears and pursued articles of impeachment, and even if the House somehow decided to pass impeachment resolutions, I can’t imagine a scenario in which two-thirds of a narrowly-divided Senate votes to remove either of these two from office. It’s probably a better use of time to focus energy on the 2008 election, making sure Bush’s successor is an improvement.

Having said that, a surprising number of Americans seem to think impeachment is a good idea. From the very conservative magazine, Human Events:

Few serious observers think things will ever get to actual impeachment. And yet the American public seems more open to the concept than many imagine, according to a new national poll. The implications of this public sentiment could be huge for the 2008 presidential elections.

Our InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion poll asked this: “Would you favor or oppose the impeachment by Congress of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney?”

Favor: 39%
Oppose: 55 %
Undecided/Don’t Know: 6%

Among independents, 42% backed impeachment. That’s quite a few.

For that matter, I should note that InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion is not a liberal polling firm — it’s led by Matt Towery, a former Republican state lawmaker who ran Newt Gingrich’s political operation for several years.

Just to be clear, I hesitate to even bring up impeachment, because I know it’s not going to happen. I was on a conference call with Speaker Pelosi recently and someone mentioned the issue. She didn’t hesitate to shoot down the idea quickly, saying, “Bush isn’t worth” the time and energy that would go into impeachment proceedings.

I am, however, struck by the results of what is ostensibly a Republican poll. For a fringe idea, four-in-10 Americans is quite a few.

what is important is to bring out all of the criminal and unsavory activities engaged in by the bush administration. if impeachment hearings bring this out, it will have served its purpose. if not, they need to be brought out in other congressional hearings and investigations.

  • Maybe we can get it up to 6 in 10, then let the reThugs impeach him.

    zzz… snix.. snort… dammit who woke me up?

  • On a few levels Speaker Pelosi has a few points to make. Impeachment would, I am sad to think, only elevate Mr. Bush’s presidential standing (you know, he was dangerously relevant enough to warrent removal from office). No, let’s let this aberrant presidency expire, and while it does, front load a few safeguards against any type of repeat by these political numskulls who are currently at the WH. I forecast the term Bush League will be with us for a long time as a term that represents a lawless executive who wished to harm our democratic way of life. -Kevo

  • I have to disagree with you CB. Perhaps they won’t be removed from office, but I think impeachment proceedings would serve as a reminder to any future administration that there are consequences if you violate your oath to the Constitution. To NOT start a serious impeachment debate, to fail to pursue such incredibly wanton abuses of the law Bu$h and Cheney have perpetrated says that there are no consequences. If Nixon was to be impeached for lying about his knowledge of a burglary, if Clinton was impeached for lying about a sexual liason, then why the HELL wouldn’t Bu$h be impeached for lying about the reasons to go to war?!? War is THE biggest event a country can undertake. We are talking about thousands of lives ruined, and these people have the audacity to give the big one finger salute to the majority of Americans.
    To me, there is no other option other than impeachment. If they aren’t impeached, then remove that ability from our laws.

  • She’s right, Bush isn’t worth the time and effort it would take to impeach him. However, the Constitution is worth every amount of time and effort needed to ensure it’s survival, and the survival of our nation. The only way to stop anything like this occuring again, is to uphold the Constitution as the sacred document in American life. And until the Dem leadership, heck and even the few responsible honorable Reps there may be left in this country, get their minds around the concept , that in another 10, 20, 25 years, we’ll be faced with another out of control demagogue. Just as Bush is Nixon on Crack, the next guy will be Bush on Meth.

    Our brilliant founders put within the Constitution itself, the self- correcting measure of impeachment. The anger this would cause from the rabid right, those scary fascists with guns, would be ultimately worth it for the future of our nation.

    It’s time for every citizen in this country to stand up and declare they are either with the Constitution, of they are with the President. Nothing will ever undo the damage done to that piece of paper by the treasonous and felonious people in this administration, other than impeachment.

    So yes, Speaker Pelosi’s right, it’s not worth the time, neither is trying them for treason, neither would it be worth the time to turn them over to the Hague for war crimes and crimes against humanity. But it must be done. She needs to consider it more along the lines of some drastic necessary surgery that will cripple, but it will save the life of the body politic.

  • If your elected representative thinks that Bush is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, it is their sworn frickin’ duty to impeach, not a politically calculated option.

    You can’t go around saying “Bush broke the FISA law, Bush swept aside international treaties, Bush took the nation to war based on lies”, and then turn around and say, “but he still deserves to be our President for the next 2 years.”

  • I support citizen pain’s observations.

    Let history show that the Democrats attempted to prosecute the man who tortured POWs and wiretapped our own citizens while the Republican party defended their criminal leader.

    It can be a mark of shame they regret 50 years hence.

    As for the implausibility of removal. If a 250 lb policeman catches a teenage track star breaking into a house, isn’t he still obligated to chase the burglar despite the slim chance of apprehension? You enforce laws as best you can. When Congressmen take the oath of office and swear to defend our Constitution, I have never heard that this defense was strictly optional based on their chances of success. Pelosi’s argument should be moot.

  • I’m not worried about the Speaker — she’ll come round in time. Happened with civil rights, happened with Vietnam, happened with Nixon, will happen again.

    I’ve seen the impossible become the inevitable more than once, and I’m only 50.

    If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

  • I am with Ohioan #7! The Dems need to remove him if he deserves to be removed. For all teh bitching about politization of issues it is time to put the money where the mouth is.

  • We’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

    Impeaching them causes a national uproar, and probably loses a lot of swing votes that may have gone our way. Then again, we probably gain a lot of swing votes too… Either way, the resolution will never pass the Senate, so we come off looking ineffectual in the end, no matter how right our position.

    Not impeaching Bush/Cheney sends the message that they were inept, but not criminal. And that’s what has been so dangerous about them. Not only have they done EVERYTHING wrong since taking office, but they’re ignored laws and in some cases broken laws to get their way. And we can’t let those actions go unpunished, otherwise they become the precedent for future administrations.

    Even if we don’t have the votes to impeach, I think impeachment brings the serious nature of the Bush administrations crimes front and center into the national spotlight. No matter what the bobble-heads on FOX say about it, every American is going to hear about the Bush administrations high crimes. And that’s the important aspect of impeachment proceedings.

    As much as I hate the idea of a Dem loss in ’08, Bush being branded a criminal in front of the American people is more important than Democrats not rocking the electoral boat before 2008.

  • I’m content for Congress to keep the heat on the Bush Misadministartion with hearings bringing to light of day all the criminal endeavors they have perpetrated on us since 2001 and to embarrass Bushie and marginalize his authority whenever possible like the Rethugs did to Clinton in the prior administration. Relentless pressure to bring out all the incompetence of Bush and his minions for the next 20 months is a much more effective way to tarnish W’s “legacy”, which coincidentally is all this dickhead cares about given his stubborness on Iraq policy, and a million other things he has fucked up since he stole the 2000election.

  • What this conversation assumes is that Dems in Congress have to bring it up out of the blue. BUT if more and more towns and state legislatures pass resolutions, in the process cataloguing the long list of crimes and malfeasance, it gets publicity and changes the agenda.

  • Pelosi is just looking at Impeachment as a tool for removing these crooks from office but she fails to take into account that we want them to be prosecuted, to be barred from ever holding public office in the future. Time and energy be damned…we want Justice. We want them held accountable for virtually destroying our nation more so than any other previous administration. Pelosi does herself and the Dems an injustice for they will always be looked upon as the congress who cared more for politics than justice, who were cowards without the stomach to prosecute criminals or to defend our constitution. The whole world needs to see that the majority of Americans did not support what this administration did or what they stood for. America and the world needs closure on this Bush disaster, else we demonstrate that fascists do have a place in our government and that our country could be taken over if the administration had been just a bit more cautious. Americans will tolerate anything. I have found it difficult to like Pelosi ever since she said Impeachment is off the table. Even if she felt that way why voice it publicly? Didn’t she just give permission for this administration to do anything because now they know there’s no threat of impeachment here? I thought to myself, why would she say that and I was not alone in thinking this. I’m still angry. These guys lied us into a war, spit on the constitution and the Bill of Rights, Politicized the DoJ with the intent of suppressing the Democratic vote, stole 2 elections, practically bankrupted the nation, and corrupted nearly every federal agency with their political appointees…the list goes on and on. If we don’t impeach these people we might as well not even have an impeachment clause, I mean who the hell would you impeach? Just what was left out, no sex in the WH. I mean WTF is wrong with you? Taking impeachment off the table when hell, you’re lucky you still have a table left. And you’re going to let them get away with it. The deaths, the corruption, the torture and loss of personal freedom compel you to impeach…but you know better eh? Is politics the price of Justice or Justice the price of politics? Make them accountable.

  • I remember well the wing nut fringe who impeached President Clinton in spite of the fact that there was VERY little general support for the impeachment of a very popular president. The Bush Administration has made it imperative that every patriotic American DEMANDS impeachment in order to reestablish the rule of law and the balance of powers.

  • Perhaps the dems are a bit tenuous due to the fact that Clinton had a 60% + approval rating during his impeachment proceedings. HOWEVER, you can’t compare Bu$h to Clinton. That’s like comparing fish sticks to a Swordfish filet. Dems, if you are listening, IMPEACH BU$H and CHENEY! Now is the time to demonstrate to your constituents and the world that this is a nation of laws, and they will be enforced. We MUST send the message to other countries that in a true democracy, that such usurpations of our laws WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!!!

  • It seems that many of the posters here have it right, while CB and the Democratic Party leadership have it wrong. So what if it’s politically unlikely that enough Republican Senators would vote to convict? Hold the hearings, get the evidence out there, and put the onus on those Senators to decide where their true loyalty lies; with their country, or with its President.

    It’s a win-win situation. Either El Res is successfully impeached, and the GOP goes down with him. Or the 2008 Election is a referendum on whether or not the electorate think he should have been found guilty.

    Hold the bloody hearings and let nature take its course. It’s the ‘politically smart’ thing to do. No going for impeachment just makes them look like they’re scared of taking on the Beltway Chorus and having nasty things said about them. Like that doesn’t happen every day anyway.

  • More than anything else, I want to see investigations and hearings. I would love to see Bush impeached and he and the nation deserve it, but at the moment it just isn’t going to happen. First, impeachment proceedings now would encourage Bush’s supporters to rally and for people to sympathize with him as a persecuted underdog. Secondly, there’s the time factor: we’ve had six years of a teflon presidency held up by a compliant media, the right wing noise machine, and a unified Republican party that wouldn’t know oversight from a hole in the ground unless a Democrat held the presidency, and there’s less than two years to go. (In contrast, Nixon’s 1974 resignation came only after more than a year and a half of political manoeuvring and slow political re-alignment of Nixon’s “silent majority”.) By January we will all be focussed on the presidential elections to the point of ignoring Bush. Also, Bush has survived such a litany of unconstitutionality, corruption, and incompetence, it’s hard to imagine what could take him down.

    Nonetheless, an endless succession of hearings by Conyers and Waxman is necessary, and could scrub away any remaining telfon and goodwill. Enough people are now passing up on the Kool-Aid that (I think) Bush could face a sudden tsunami of disapproval if he screws up once or twice more in ways that penetrate the consciousness of the average voter, such as a scandal over oil prices, a terrorist attack, or a another bungled Katrina-level disaster. (I can’t believe I’m saying “another”, but this is our reality.)

    Americans have been unbelievably forgiving & supportive of Bush & the Republicans, but they are nonetheless historically very fickle, and it is not the logical things that set them off. Just as Joseph Welch’s relatively mild “have you no decency” speech brought an end to McCarthy, politicians in the US rarely seem to fall for the reasons that they soundly deserve, but they trip up on minor details that take on a life of their own and prove fatal (in the manner of Al Capone getting jailed for income tax problems). I have faith in the Bushies that they can produce a truly scandalous scandal before the end of his presidency: Thus I’m rooting for Republicans and the public to get outraged over some small detail and end up forcing his resignation.

  • Pelosi can’t cry for impeachment because she in next in line if Bush and Cheney are gone. For her not to take impeachment off the table would appear self-serving and overly ambitious. There is no point in impeaching Bush w/o Cheney, so lets concentrate on the corruption hearings in Congress. If the information gets to the people and the mood of the country gets angrier, we may still have an impeachment. Nobody deserves an impeachment trial more than the Bush/Cheney. It is important for the Republic to not allow these shenagans to go unnoticed and let the illegal policies of these two thugs pass into history as precedent.

  • let’s see, 3300+ American soldiers dead, 24,000+ seriously wounded,
    tens (or hundreds) of thousands Irais dead & wounded, all due to Bush’s decisions.
    Warrantless wiretapping, torture, politicizing the Justice dept., and let’s not forget about all the corporate lobbyists put in charge of the public wealth. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
    And no punishment for these people? I don’t think so.

    Unlike the Clinton farce, the people are leading on this. And it would have happened already if the corporations did not have a subservient, submissive, incestuous relationship with republicans.

  • Dang, I meant Media Corporations having a subservient, submissive, incestuous relationship with Republicans.

  • this is just another example of the disconnect between the universe of media discourse and the lived reality of the american people. say what you will, but the preterite pay more attention than the elect ever give them credit for.
    now let’s all shut up and look at the pretty box changing colors again.

  • Does anyone remember what the poll numbers were for supporting the impeachment of Clinton? I don’t recall it being that significant, but then again, I may have just blocked it out.

  • CB: “I can’t imagine a scenario in which two-thirds of a
    narrowly-divided Senate votes to remove either of these two from office.”

     

    There were 42 Republican US Senators in the 93rd Congress (<http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm>http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm)
    in August 1974. Nixon resigned before the House had a chance to impeach him or
    the Senate to try him. He resigned after Barry Goldwater and two other
    Republican senators told him he could count on at most 15 Republican votes in
    the Senate (<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,942972,00.html>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,942972,00.html).

     

    The reason for the lack of Republican support of Nixon:
    clear evidence of criminal wrong-doing that was unearthed during the Watergate
    criminal investigations.

     

    The lesson I take from this is that the impeachment process
    itself can turn up evidence that lead members of the President’s own party to
    vote for his impeachment (House) or conviction (Senate). Remember, all the
    House members and almost half (21) of the Republican Senators face the voters
    in 2008. As more evidence comes out of Bush and Cheney’s wrong-doing,
    Republicans in Congress will be thinking about how to justify votes on
    impeachment and conviction to their constituents.

     

    N. Wells (#19): “More than anything else, I want to see
    investigations and hearings.”

     

    Impeachment would heighten focus on investigations of
    wrongdoing. Impeachment would be an investigation. According to watergate.info
    (I haven’t verified this with thomas.gov or another more official source):

     

    "On February 6, 1974, the House of Representatives
    passed House Resolution 803 by 410-4 to authorise the Judiciary Committee to consider
    impeachment proceedings against Nixon.

     

    This is the text of HR803: "RESOLVED, That the
    Committee on the Judiciary acting as a whole or by any subcommittee thereof appointed
    by the Chairman for the purposes hereof and in accordance with the Rules of the
    Committee, is authorized and directed to investigate fully and completely
    whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its
    constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United
    States of America. The committee shall report to the House of Representatives
    such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as it deems
    proper."

     

    First, it is clear that the resolution called for investigations–just
    the thing that opponents of impeachment say they support! And they did
    investigate–articles of impeachment were not voted out until late July 1974,
    five months later.

     

    Second, only one committee in Congress takes up impeachment investigations:
    the House Judiciary Committee. It is currently investigating the US Attorney
    purge. The Senate Judiciary Committee is doing the same, so the House Judiciary
    could leave the Attorney purge to the Senate, take up impeachment, and increase
    the number of separate investigations.

     

    Third, the House Judiciary Committee can do more than one
    thing at a time. While conducting its attorney purge investigation, it has also
    had time to pass a federal hate crimes bill, express concern about a raid at a
    mall in Chicago, look for justice for survivors of the 1921 Tulsa riot, examine
    federal judicial compensation, and investigate Katrina’s impact on New Orleans’
    criminal justice system. And that’s just press releases from April (<http://judiciary.house.gov/PressRoom.aspx>http://judiciary.house.gov/PressRoom.aspx).

     

    Davis X. Machina (#9): “I’ve seen the impossible become the
    inevitable more than once, and I’m only 50.”

     

    I’ve seen the impossible become inevitable just with regard
    to impeachment twice over the last month in Vermont. Both the state House and
    Senate leaders were adamantly opposed to bringing up impeachment resolutions.
    Massive calls and two visits to the Statehouse by large numbers (135 and 400,
    respectively) of people changed their minds. The resolution passed the Senate
    and, unfortunately, failed in the House.

  • My feeling about impeachment is that at some point there may no longer be any choice in the matter. Bush and Cheney have been daring the Dems to impeach for some time, what with the outright refusals to respond to congressional subpoenas, or, before that, the bald admission that they are breaking the FISA law. If Bush himself has a public meltdown, or has to be restrained physically from launching a catastrophic Iranian invasion, then impeachment could move from unthinkable to imperative over the course of a very short time.

    Barring something dramatic like that, however, I think CB is right that Bush will survive to the end of his term, to attend the new Hillary inaugural after signing a flurry of pardons.

  • I can’t imagine a better way to improve the situation in Iraq than to repudiate the whole Bush administration and make a fresh start with new leadership at the very top. Getting rid of Rumsfeld wasn’t enough. We need a new leader ASAP who is willing and able to engage in actual diplomacy and make some tough choices. Just letting things slide for another 2 years is a bad idea.

  • There’s a big difference, regrettably, between knowing these guys are guilty and getting impeachment to stick. Emotionally, everyone wants the Bush gang pilloried and clapped in irons. Practically, as CB says, that ain’t gonna happen. However persuasive the case, it won’t pass the Senate. Knowing that, best not to waste the time and energy.

    I think the slow, relentless tearing apart and dismantling of the whole rotten edifice by the various Congressional committees is a far better way to go. There is more opportunity to discover hidden fissures and deceits than through impeachment hearings. It may not be as glamorous but it is probably more thorough. As the evidence of numerous contraventions, corruptions and misdemeanors accumulates, so eventually will the balance tip and indictments follow.

    The oversight and investigative procedures are less eye-catching than impeachment. They are more subtle, hidden and painstaking, but in this situation, in the long run, they are probably more effective in exposing the wrongdoings of this administration than a more dramatic but ultimately doomed impeachment effort could achieve.

    In the end “Bush isn’t worth” the time and energy that would go into impeachment proceedings is a far more damning and humiliating statement, in the circumstances, than an impeachment attempt itself would ever be — whatever our emotions are telling us. Keeping these guys there turning on the spit is a more salutary spectacle than dignifying them with impeachment. It’s a hard one, I know, but the weight of political wisdom still rests with Pelosi.

    Of course, if it ever actually did happened.. different story

  • Lots of good comments above. I’m one who sees the conservative movement as more of a threat than any individual (including Bush or Cheney), and that while they may be down, the Repubs are by no means out. The 06 election may have given Dems a foot in the door but I can’t help thinking events could conspire to slam it shut again. Maybe I’m just overly cautious because there’s no way Gore or Kerry should have lost their bids on the WH — and yet they did. At the same time, I don’t know that the US can survive another R in the WH just yet.

    So, as much as George and Dick deserve to be in prison, much less impeached, I think continuing investigations that dribble out the nature of their abuses over the course of the next two years might serve us better in the long run.

  • As much as I, reading CB’s chronicle of Bush misfeasance and malfeasance every day, believe the whole lot should be impeached and perp walked, I would not agree with the commenters above who advocate Congress actually try it.

    I have yet to see any polling showing majority support for it. Impeachment is very difficult, very divisive, and ties up the ability of Congress to do much of anything else. Most of the relatively apolitical middle will find it a step too far, and if the country is not solidly behind it, we actually run the risk of being more divisive — something many here often complain about from BushCo. There is so much that needs done to try and fix everything these Elephants in china shops broke that stopping most progress to impeach — particularly when it is only useful of Cheney is impeached, too, and it may not even be able to be completed by Jan. 2009 — that I think the masses would turn strongly against us on this one and we’d risk losing in 08. Taking Bush, personally, out – while satisfying – means nothing if his Movement holds in 08. Much better in the long run to simply contain Bush for two years and make sure his Movement loses in 08.

  • I seem to be in the minority with Dee Loralei. Impeachment isn’t a process undertaken because of polling data and political expediency. It’s a DUTY as defined by the Constitution. The case is solid, and the hearings would confirm that. As far as I’m concerned Pelosi is derelict in HER duty by taking it “off the table.” It isn’t about weather it’s worth it or not. Unless you don’t consider the Constitution “worth it” either.
    Repiglicans are already trying to seperate themselves from this Administration. Imagine how much more they would run for the hills when the truth comes out in the hearings.
    Then again, since the media wouldn’t report on it anyway, even that might not matter.

  • SHAME on the author for continually saying “it will never happen”.
    SHAME on anyone who gives credibility to the notion that “it’s not worth it”.
    SHAME on people who consider “strategy” as a reason to not investigate these high crimes

    The majority of these comments are right: impeachment is the only option. And it can easily happen. Dems have the house and senate. Everyone knows these guys deserves it. The articles have been introduced for Cheney. Impeachment was FAR less popular with the public the last 2 times it was used than it is now. Demand that your congress back these articles NOW.
    The world is watching.

    • Comments are closed.