Category: 2020

GOP Sen. Joni Ernst’s approval ratings are plummeting, another good sign for Senate Democrats

Posted on by Kerry Eleveld

A year ago, things were looking pretty rosy for GOP Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, with her approval rating hitting a high point of 57% in February 2019. A year later, following Senate Republicans' sham zero-witness impeachment trial and their subsequent acquittal of Donald Trump, Ernst's approval ratings have taken a hit, slipping fully 10 points to 46%.

A plurality of Iowa voters, 41%, still say they will definitely vote for Ernst this fall, but 31% also vowed to vote against her, and another 20% were open to considering someone else. Democrats are currently fielding candidates in a five-way primary, so Ernst's challenger isn't clear yet. But starting the race with 51% of your constituents either vowing to vote against you or open to an alternative is not a strong start for an incumbent senator. 

Wanna take back the Senate? Give $3 right now to the effort to flip the chamber and kick Mitch McConnell to the curb.

Hawkeye State independents reflect the wariness of the larger electorate, with 32% pledging to back Ernst and 25% promising to vote against her, while 31% consider voting for someone else.

Trump's stumbles on trade and Ernst's unwillingness to challenge him on anything are also part of the equation. One undecided voter said she would support whoever was willing to take on Trump. "You have to get people in there who are willing to take him on,” said 62-year-old Kerri Christian. 

Ernst joins a quartet of GOP senators who are facing an uphill climb to reelection: Susan Collins of Maine, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Martha McSally of Arizona, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. In addition, Democrats just put another GOP seat in play with the announcement that Montana Gov. Steve Bullock would take on GOP Sen. Steve Daines for his seat in November. 

That's half a dozen solid GOP targets to work with in a year in which Democrats need a net gain of three or four pick-ups, depending on whether Trump is reelected, in order to flip the chamber.

Not defending Hunter Biden, but Republicans are lying about him (of course)

Posted on by kos

Now that Joe Biden is headed toward the Democratic nomination for president, Republicans are reviving their efforts to smear him via his son, Hunter, and Hunter’s service on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Nothing untoward has ever been proved against Hunter, not even alleged (beyond generic) “corruption,” and the search for something untoward is all an effort to create this cycle’s version of “but her emails.” 

Key to the Republican argument is the notion that the younger Biden had no qualifications for the job. “When speaking with ABC News about his qualifications to be on Burisma's board, Hunter Biden didn't point to any of the usual qualifications of a board member," Donald Trump lawyer Pam Bondi said at his impeachment trial. "Hunter Biden had no experience in natural gas, no experience in the energy sector, no experience with Ukrainian regulatory affairs. As far as we know, he doesn't speak Ukrainian."

Trump being Trump, he’s whittled all that down to the claim that Hunter Biden was appointed to the board because he “didn’t have a job.” 

Since we’re going to be hearing about this nonstop for the next eight months (ugh), here’s the reality.

Hunter Biden is a graduate of Yale Law School, by far the best and most prestigious law school in the country (sorry, Harvard). Notes Trump fact-checker extraordinaire Daniel Dale, at the time that “Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of Burisma in 2014, he was a lawyer at the firm Boies Schiller Flexner, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's foreign service program, chairman of the board of World Food Program USA, and chief executive officer and chairman of Rosemont Seneca Advisors, an investment advisory firm. He also served on other boards.”

Boies Schiller Flexner was founded by David Boies, the same Boies who defeated Microsoft in an antitrust case, who represented Al Gore in the 2000 election recount, and who successfully challenged California’s ban on gay marriage. (Also, the firm represents Harvey Weinstein, and Boies himself represented fraudulent firm Theranos, so … I’m not saying it’s all happy unicorns—I’m just reinforcing that it’s not some backwater ambulance-chasing firm. These are powerful heavy hitters.)

His teaching gig in Georgetown’s foreign service program, which is focused on international development, shows that Hunter did have expertise and an active interest in international relations and development. That makes sense, because World Food Program USA is focused on ending global hunger (and is currently raising money for relief efforts among Syrian refugees).

Rosemont Seneca was co-founded by Christopher Heinz, son of Teresa Heinz (of ketchup fame) and stepson of John Kerry. There’s little information about the firm online, but it looks like a garden-variety hedge fund. No one has alleged anything shady about it yet. But what it does show is that Biden had connections to the world of high finance that would be of interest to any conglomerate looking to raise capital and expand into new markets. 

And by all indications, Hunter was an active member of the board of Rosemont Seneca, investigating possible expansion opportunities and connecting the company to legal and financial resources in the United States. 

Was he on the board, likely, because of his last name? Probably. Was it a stupid idea to join such a board while his father was vice president? Of course. But no less stupid than pretty much everything the Trump children have done since their father entered the White House. Still, ugh. It sure would’ve been nice to head into the general election with a candidate unencumbered by such baggage. 

We now get to spend the rest of the year playing the “both sides are corrupt” game, muddying the waters on an issue (corruption) we should own easily. But pretending that Hunter had zero qualifications for the job, or worse, had no job? It’s utter horseshit, and we should be very clear to call it out as such. 

Republicans are going to believe whatever they want to believe. That’s the power of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. If Trump says it’s okay to go to work even when infected with COVID-19? Okay then! Mission accomplished. All is well.

But we should fight and make sure the traditional media doesn’t repeat those claims as fact. Because, like pretty much everything else that comes out of Trump’s mouth, it’s utter horseshit. 

Obamacare lawsuit? What Obamacare lawsuit? Senate Republicans play dumb

Posted on by Joan McCarter

It's a horrendous look for Republicans, in the middle of a potential national epidemic and global pandemic, that their party and their White House are going to tell the Supreme Court this fall that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional and should be destroyed. So it's no great surprise that Republican senators who have to face voters in November don't want to talk about it.

Asked by The Hill about their position on this lawsuit, they dodged and weaved. Freshman Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst is going to have a hard time making this answer work for the next eight months: "I'm not saying whether I support it or not. It's in the hands of the Supreme Court now, so we'll see," she said. Maybe she feels the need to tread lightly here—she does have a primary opponent. He's just "some dude," but apparently Ernst still isn't willing to go out on any kind of limb by saying she thinks affordable health care for people is good.

Please give $1 to our nominee fund to help Democrats end the Republican Senate majority.

Arizona's stand-in, Sen. Martha McSally, who is there by appointment filling the late John McCain's seat, is trying to use that hook from impeachment days—it's in the court now, it’s in a "judicial proceeding"—and she won't comment. As if the Supreme Court was hanging on the words of a fill-in senator it’s never heard of before to make its decision. That's about as pathetic a response as you can get. Even McSally's counterpart, the other just-filling-in-for-now senator, Kelly Loeffler from Georgia (who's only been there a couple of months), did better. Eventually. Stymied by the in-person question, she had her office follow up in an email. "Regardless of what the courts do or do not decide, there is no question Congress needs to address healthcare issues facing Americans," Loeffler's spokeswoman said, offering that the senator wants a bill that "lowers insurance costs" and "expands coverage options." Which the ACA does, of course, for most people. But she's new. How could she be expected to be prepared to speak intelligently about the one thing that has dominated electoral politics for 10 years?

Sen. Thom Tillis, a vulnerable Republican from North Carolina, also wouldn't defend the lawsuit or even give his position on it. "What I'm more focused on is how we get back to a rational discussion about protecting pre-existing conditions, the kinds of things that are potentially at risk that for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would be opposed to, providing some certainty by just voting those provisions into law independent of the lawsuit." None of us can understand why anyone would be opposed to protections for people with pre-existing conditions, so this legal challenge is kind of a mystery. Except for the part where Republican attorneys general and governors and the Republican president are saying they should be struck down by the court. That's something Tillis should have to answer for.

Steve Daines of Montana was nearly as bad as McSally. He just brushed the question off, saying, "We're going to be talking about a lot between now and next year." Which means nothing, considering they've been talking a lot about it for 10 years and have managed to do absolutely nothing. Well, not nothing, actually. Republicans held literally dozens of repeal votes in the House and also brought three lawsuits trying to destroy the law. Spoiler alert: They will not have a plan in 2021 if the Supreme Court invalidates the law. Perhaps the most pathetic of the lot is Colorado's Cory Gardner, who seems resigned to his losing fate and didn't even bother to respond to the question.

On the issue that flipped the House in 2018, and that is at the top of voters' minds in 2020, Senate Republicans still don't have any answers. But they've got several months to come up with something to say before the Supreme Court and the case are back in the news with the arguments in the case. Judging by past performance, they'll have nothing.

Here’s another poll for Susan Collins to be fretting over

Posted on by Joan McCarter

Need a mood lightener today? Sen. Susan Collins is 4 points behind her leading potential general election opponent in the latest PPP poll, trailing Sara Gideon 47-43. A year ago when PPP polled a potential Collins-Gideon match up, "Collins led by 18 points at 51-33." Yes, that's a 22-point shift in a year's time. Why such a cratering of support? The PPP polling memo says "that in the wake of opposing impeachment, Collins has lost most of the crossover Democratic support she's relied on for her success over the years."

Her vote for Brett Kavanaugh didn't do her any favors, either. But the double whammy of Kavanaugh and impeachment pretty much seals that deal. In April of 2019, Collins had a 32% approval rating with Mainers who were Hillary Clinton voters, trailing Gideon with them 59-28. Now she has a 9% approval with them, trailing Gideon 81-10. Overall, Collins’ approbate rating is 33%, with a disapproval of 57%. That leaves an undecided or no-opinion of just 10%, not a good look for a four-term senator.

Let's make sure her time is up. Please give $1 to help Democrats in each of these crucial Senate races, but especially the one in Maine!

Collins' fall from electoral grace is the most stunning this cycle, but she's far from the only Republican incumbent who's going to be having some serious fret over PPP's polling. In polling over the last weeks, it has found Mark Kelly leading Martha McSally 47-42 in Arizona, Cal Cunningham leading Thom Tillis 46-41 in North Carolina, and in Colorado John Hickenlooper over Cory Gardner 51-38.

That's worth kicking in some dough, no?

A note on our fundraising for the Maine Senate seat and others on the slate: this is the escrow fund that will go to the winner of the primary in each state. We're not going to put the official Daily Kos thumb on the scale in primaries where there isn't a crappy incumbent. All the money raised in this effort will go to the Democratic challengers once they're official.

You want to make the Supreme Court a fight for 2020, Moscow Mitch? You got it

Posted on by Joan McCarter

Moscow Mitch McConnell is clutching his phony pearls, shocked, shocked that Sen. Chuck Schumer would dare politicize the Supreme Court. Yes. Mitch McConnell. The McConnell who stole a Supreme Court seat from President Barack Obama and called it, "One of my proudest moments." The same McConnell who refused to allow an FBI investigation into credible allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court nominee who had perjured himself, repeatedly, before a Senate committee.

In case you missed the brouhaha, Schumer spoke at an abortion rights rally at the Supreme Court Wednesday following the arguments in the latest abortion case, one that threatens the court’s integrity if it reverses a decision made just four years ago that protects access to abortion.

Enough of this. Please give $1 to our nominee fund to help Democrats and end McConnell's career as Senate majority leader.

Schumer riffed off of the threat Brett Kavanaugh made to Democratic senators during his confirmation hearing. "You sowed the wind," Kavanaugh snarled at the senators, and "the country will reap the whirlwind." He accused Democrats of "a calculated and orchestrated political hit fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election," and even said that his hearing was "revenge on behalf of the Clintons," since he was on Kenneth Starr's team during the Clinton impeachment. So what Schumer said Wednesday echoed Kavanaugh's words back to him. "I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh," Schumer said, "You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."

Was the last sentence impolitic? Sure. Schumer admitted as much. Was it threat to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh directly? No. Of course not. It was Schumer telling it like it is: These justices played politics and paid lip service to respecting precedent to get on the court, and they are political actors now. But cue McConnell and his plastic pearls. This was a "threat," McConnell said, a "Senate leader appearing to threaten or incite violence on the steps of the Supreme Court" and "astonishingly, astonishingly reckless and ... irresponsible."

Yeah, right. And what did McConnell say when the occupier of the Oval Office he is enabling attacked Judge Gonzalo Curiel for his Mexican heritage? Or Judge James Robart as a "so-called judge." Or Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who he says should recuse themselves from "anything having to do with Trump or Trump related."

Where was McConnell's concern for the independent judiciary then? Yeah, invisible. McConnell did not say one word in defense of those judges, in defense of an independent judiciary, because he doesn't believe in it. He is more than happy to turn as much of the federal judiciary into Trump courts—TRUMP courts—as he possibly can. It doesn't matter if the judges he installs are unqualified or incompetent or raging extremists and white supremacists. All the better, in fact, for McConnell's vision for our republic.

McConnell is playing with fire here. If this court, now with Neil Gorsuch—the guy he installed by stealing a seat from President Obama—and Brett Kavanaugh—the accused sexual assaulter and perjurer—decides to overturn four-year-old precedent on abortion? If that happens, McConnell's majority is done. Which, by the way, was what Schumer was talking about at the Supreme Court Wednesday. It's what he said on the Senate floor Thursday morning: "The fact that my Republican colleagues have worked, systematically, over the course of decades, to install the judicial infrastructure to take down Roe v. Wade—and do very real damage to the country and the American way of life—that is the issue that will remain."

McConnell wants this fight? He's got it.

Pelosi Calls Herself ‘Lioness,’ Insists Trump Is ‘Most Dangerous Person’ In American History

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

In a glowing interview with Variety magazine, Nancy Pelosi hammered President Trump as the most dangerous person this country has ever seen.

The Speaker of the House also presented herself as a “lioness,” determined to protect the children from this dangerous President.

“I have real problems with this president because he doesn’t tell the truth, he doesn’t honor the Constitution and he’s harming children,” she said unironically as a person who doesn’t tell the truth, honor the Constitution, and harms children

“My whole message is about children,” the staunch abortion advocate claimed. “Anybody who hurts children — I’m a lioness. Watch out.”

Pelosi then engaged in her trademark hyperbole over the ‘dangers’ of President Trump.

“We have the most dangerous person in the history of our country sitting in the White House,” the California Democrat suggested, advising Democrats to turn out and vote to defeat him.

RELATED: Trump Hammers ‘Incompetent’ Pelosi For Trying to Politicize Coronavirus

The Children

Odd how Pelosi, the ‘lioness’ protecting children, is the current leader of a Democrat party that supports abortion right up until the moment of birth.

Also odd, how she didn’t utter a word about children being separated from adults who were using them as a means to cross the border when Barack Obama was doing it.

Some ‘lioness.’

It’s all for show, of course. Pelosi isn’t concerned about the children so much as she’s concerned about the next election.

“People thought Hillary would win so they didn’t all turn out,” she said of the 2016 election. “Nobody could possibly think that somebody like Donald Trump could be elected president of the United States.”

RELATED: Pelosi Frets: End of the World If Trump Wins in 2020

All For Show

Furthering the argument that everything she says and does is politically calculating, Pelosi admitted to Variety that her State of the Union stunt this year was, in fact, well thought out in advance.

Though previously claiming she tore up her copy of President Trump’s speech spontaneously, Variety reports that “the decision to rip up her copy was not impulsive.”

“He used the Congress as the backdrop for a reality television show when he had absolutely no reality in his speech,” Pelosi complained.

Speaking of losing touch with reality, the top Democrat has previously fretted that this “dangerous” man winning in 2020 would mean the end of “civilization as we know it.”

What will really sadden Pelosi is the knowledge that it was her push for impeachment that is going to help Trump get re-elected.

The post Pelosi Calls Herself ‘Lioness,’ Insists Trump Is ‘Most Dangerous Person’ In American History appeared first on The Political Insider.

Eric Trump Says His Dad Would ‘Destroy’ Joe Biden in a Debate

Posted on by Guest Author

On Fox & Friends Monday, President Donald Trump’s son Eric Trump said his Dad would “destroy” Joe Biden in a presidential debate.

Fox News host Steve Doocy said, “You know who did not help Joe Biden? Nancy Pelosi and the people in the House and the Senate regarding impeachment because as they pushed the Trump narrative regarding impeachment, ultimately, every time they would bring that up, then Hunter Biden, Burisma, all that stuff, came up to essentially ding Joe Biden.”

RELATED: After Democrats Pursue Impeachment, Trump Raises $15 Million from Small Donors

Eric Trump Slams Democrats

Eric Trump chimed in, “At the same time, Nancy Pelosi was keeping — the Democrat Party — was keeping all the senators in Washington, D.C., trying to give Biden a leg up in Iowa and other states, right?”

“They were all working on the nonsense impeachment sham,” the younger Trump continued. “They tried to hurt Bernie the entire time. They have tried to hurt him the entire time. It’s going to be interesting.”

The Younger Trump Blasts Bernie

Eric Trump then buried Bernie Sanders chances against his father.

“Would you rather run against Bernie?” the President’s son continued. “A socialist, a whackjob, who wants 85 percent taxes, right? I mean, the guy took his honeymoon in the USSR. [He said] Venezuela should be the model society for America to run on.”

Then he set his sights on Biden.

‘My father would destroy that guy on the debate stage’

“Or would you rather run against the guy who you showed two seconds ago, who said his son was the attorney general of the United States, who said he was running for Senate?” Trump said.

“My father would destroy that guy on the debate stage,” Eric Trump declared.

And isn’t he right?

RELATED: Goofy Biden: Doesn’t Believe Economy Is Good, Suggests Non-Citizen Could Run For Office

Nominating Joe Biden Might Be the Worst Mistake Dems Ever Made

The forever gaffe-prone Biden has committed more flubs in the 2020 Democratic primaries than likely at any other time in his career. He will be easy for an always sharp Donald Trump to walk all over in the general election. Even Bernie Sanders keeps his wits about him better than Biden.

As the Democratic establishment moves to solidify party centrists around the former Vice President, history may prove that nominating Joe Biden was the worst mistake the party ever made.

The post Eric Trump Says His Dad Would ‘Destroy’ Joe Biden in a Debate appeared first on The Political Insider.

Bloomberg Called Out During Interview For Lying About Trump’s Coronavirus ‘Hoax’ Comments

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Michael Bloomberg was called out by reporter Scott Pelley during a ’60 Minutes’ interview for spreading a lie about President Trump’s comments on the coronavirus.

Pelley, a CBS News reporter, asked Bloomberg for his thoughts on the coronavirus emergency. The Democrat candidate for President responded by spreading his own hoax.

“I find it incomprehensible that the president would do something as inane as calling it ‘a hoax,” Bloomberg falsely claimed.

Pelley stepped in to correct Bloomberg, who didn’t even bother to admit he had misspoken.

“He said the Democrats making so much of it is a Democratic hoax, not that the virus was a hoax,” Pelley explained.

To rehash – Bloomberg lied about the President’s comments, then accused Trump of being “inane,” “ignorant,” and “irresponsible.”

Pot, meet kettle.

RELATED: Trump Hammers ‘Incompetent’ Pelosi For Trying to Politicize Coronavirus

Democrat Hoax

Fascinating, isn’t it, that President Trump would call hysteria over the coronavirus generated by Democrats and the media a hoax, and they would proceed to prove his point by flat-out lying about what was said.

Here’s the reality.

Trump told supporters at a campaign rally that the resistance party would do everything in their power to use the coronavirus emergency as a means to take him down – similar to the Russia collusion witch hunt.

“Now, the Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus,” Trump said.

He added, “One of my people came up to me and said, ‘Mr. President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.’ That didn’t work out too well. They couldn’t do it. They tried the impeachment hoax. And this is their new hoax.”

RELATED: Cher Spreads Fake News Story Alleging That Trump Described Coronavirus As A ‘Hoax’

Not Mini-Mike’s First Lie, Probably Not His Last

Having a reporter call you out in the middle of a ’60 Minutes’ interview for being a liar isn’t the first time Bloomberg has been embarrassed on the national stage.

It’s not even the first time a normally Democrat-cooperative media has called him out for lying about the coronavirus itself.

Just last week, the Associated Press fact-checked Bloomberg along with other Democrat colleagues for distorting the truth about the Trump administration’s preparedness in dealing with coronavirus.

“There’s nobody here to figure out what the hell we should be doing,” Biden said during a debate. “And he’s defunded — he’s defunded Centers for Disease Control, CDC, so we don’t have the organization we need. This is a very serious thing.”

Not so, according to the AP.

“Bloomberg is repeating the false allegation in a new ad that states the U.S. is unprepared for the virus because of ‘reckless cuts’ to the CDC,” the AP reports.

“Trump’s budgets have proposed cuts to public health, only to be overruled by Congress, where there’s strong bipartisan support for agencies such as the CDC and NIH,” they added. “Instead, financing has increased.”

The post Bloomberg Called Out During Interview For Lying About Trump’s Coronavirus ‘Hoax’ Comments appeared first on The Political Insider.

Mark Levin Blasts Pelosi and Schumer as the ‘Last People I Want Playing Doctor With Me or the American People’

Posted on by Guest Author

Conservative talk host Mark Levin blasted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democrats overall on Thursday for their criticism of President Trump’s response to the coronavirus outbreak.

‘The last people I want playing doctor with me or the American people are Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi’

“I watch this and I realize there’s a lot of stupid people on TV,” Levin told Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “The last people I want playing doctor with me or the American people are Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.”

RELATED: Joe Biden Really Just Claimed Half The American Population Has Been Killed By Gun Violence

Levin then read a number of things Trump has done since the outbreak began, even as Democrats accuse the administration for not having a good response.

“There’s no CDC cuts. There’s been [funding] increases,” Levin said. “Certain individuals have been quarantined by this president — the first time a U.S. president has done that in over half a century. The White House coronavirus task force was appointed over a month ago. The president temporarily suspended entry into the United States.”

Democrats Should Have Been More Worried About Coronavirus Than Impeachment

Levin said that while Trump’s team worked feverishly to contain the virus, Democrats were too busy worrying about the impeachment trial.

“From January 16 to February 5, the United States Senate was paralyzed by the House Democrats and Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi with this outrageous impeachment trial where the Senators had to sit on their hands, shut their mouths and couldn’t pass any business,” Levin charged.

“They couldn’t address the coronavirus because Pelosi and Schumer shut down the Congress,” he continued. “They don’t want to talk about that, do they?”

Levin then slammed the 2020 Democratic field.

RELATED: Mark Levin Destroys Obama on Wiretapping and Abuse of Power 

Liberals Have No Answers

“The Democrats, they go to the microphone and they attack. They don’t know anything,” Levin said. “What is their plan? What is the Schumer-Pelosi-[Bernie] Sanders – [Amy] Klobuchar- [Michael] Bloomberg whatever plans? They have great plans for containment. Open borders, eliminate ICE, no vetting of foreigners, sanctuary cities, nationalize and destroy the greatest healthcare system, destroy our pharmaceutical companies … that will come up with the solutions? ”

“The answers won’t come from the liberals and the Democrats,” Levin added, “which is why they attack.”

The post Mark Levin Blasts Pelosi and Schumer as the ‘Last People I Want Playing Doctor With Me or the American People’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Ever since impeachment, independents have gotten really clear on which party cares about them

Posted on by Kerry Eleveld

Donald Trump’s impeachment and subsequent acquittal have clearly focused the minds of independent voters as to which party really gives a damn about them. When asked whether Democrats or Republicans are "more concerned with the needs of people like you?”, respondents consistently moved toward Democrats over the course of the impeachment process, and strikingly so after Senate Republicans acquitted Trump, according to data from Civiqs. 

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi first announced the inquiry, a plurality of 34% of independent respondents said “neither” party cared, while 31% said Democrats, and 29% said Republicans. But over the course of the inquiry, the “neither” contingent dwindled, with most poll respondents concluding Democrats cared more about their personal concerns.

By the time House Democrats impeached Trump, a plurality of 33% of respondents said Democrats were more concerned with them, while “neither” and Republicans tied at 31%. But after Senate Republicans acquitted Trump, the share of independent voters saying Democrats cared about people like them shot up to 37%, while Republicans stagnated at 31% and “neither” dwindled down to 27%.

Civiqs Results

This data reinforces recent polling from Gallup showing that nearly 60% of voters think their congressional representative deserves to be reelected, the highest level of public satisfaction with congressional members since 2012. Both surveys bode well for Democrats in November.

But hey, impeachment was supposed to doom Democrats’ politically and pundits tell us Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is masterful for selling out our country. Apparently, independent voters don’t agree.