Republicans won’t hold members of their own party accountable, so we have to

Senate Republicans have now acquitted Donald Trump in his second impeachment trial.

Thanks to the Senate's six-year terms, many of the Republicans who set aside their oaths to protect the Constitution in favor of protecting their lord and master, Donald Trump, won't be on the ballot next year. But quite a few of them will be, and several hold very vulnerable seats. They must face a reckoning for their party's failure to hold a dangerous renegade president accountable.

So where do we start? With the 2020 election barely in the rearview, we don’t yet know who our nominees will be in next year’s Senate races, but the good news is, we don't need to wait. ActBlue's Democratic nominee funds allow us to start fundraising for 2022 Democrats right now, and that's exactly what we're going to do.

Republicans won't hold members of their own party accountable, so we have to. Chip in $1 right now to each of these six Senate Democratic nominee funds to flip Republican Senate seats from red to blue in 2022.

These nominee funds will hold all donations in escrow until Democratic primary voters in each state pick candidates for Senate. Then, all the collected contributions will be transferred to the Democratic nominee in one fell swoop as soon as they win their primary. This will give our candidates a huge cash infusion at a time when they'll need it most and set them up to take back Republican seats and expand our Senate majority in 2022.

Daily Kos used these nominee funds to great effect in the past. We raised millions of dollars in 2017 and 2018 for Democratic House nominee funds in dozens of districts that ultimately flipped from red to blue—and made Nancy Pelosi Speaker. We can do something very similar now.

The 2022 Senate map looks good for the Blue Team on paper. Democrats are defending just 14 seats to the Republicans' 20, and four Republican incumbents have already announced their retirement. Three of those four departures are in competitive states—North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—and more GOP senators may yet announce their retirements in other swing states. However, in a midterm election with an incumbent Democratic president, we can take nothing for granted or we could end up with another 2010- or 2014-style wipeout.

Senate Republicans acquitted Donald Trump of high crimes and misdemeanors twice. So make them pay: Donate $1 right now to each of the Democratic nominee funds targeting vulnerable Senate Republicans in 2022.

Community Spotlight: Taking the temperature of the Daily Kos community

Reading the Daily Kos’ Community's stories through the whipsaw events of the past few months has been enlightening. As Besame has noted before, when a crisis hits, we tend to come together to share and reflect on the events that are shaping history even as we live them. When a crisis resolves, especially when the resolution benefits people, our attention moves quickly to new challenges. After all, we're a community of activists, and it's the role of the activist to push change.

The inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris signaled a deep sigh of relief, like a breath held so long that the lungs burn. We gave ourselves permission to feel good, and to enjoy that feeling while knowing that there's a lot more work to be done before democracy is secure. Violent fascism continues to threaten us, and we have the chance to turn our country—finally—toward the path of fulfilling the promise of America for all our citizens, redressing past sins, and extending equality to all.

That's how this week started. But if you want to know how it's going, I have three words for you: Senate impeachment trial.

When the Senate gaveled into session and the trial began, you could sense the mood shift and the tension ratchet up on Daily Kos. I doubt that last week most of us were really aware of the level of violence, the intimate involvement of the former president in both planning and execution, or the terrible trauma inflicted on all the people who found themselves under attack. But we know now. And we're watching—still watching.

This week's rescued stories are presented chronologically. See if you can spot when the trial started.

10 RESCUED STORIES FROM 4PM EST FRIDAY Feb. 5 TO 4PM FRIDAY FEB. 12, 2021

Community Spotlight’s Rescue Rangers read every story published by Community writers. When we discover great work that isn’t receiving the attention it deserves, we rescue it to our group blog and publish a weekly collection—like this one—each Saturday. Rescue priorities and actions were explained in a previous edition, “Community Spotlight: Rescuing your excellent stories for over 14 years.” You also can find a link in Meteor Blades’ “Night Owls” series, which publishes daily between 10-11PM EST.

"Alone with his thoughts, he felt a rising sense of rage and fear, combined with a feeling of helplessness.  He tried to suppress it, but it kept coming back." In “Changes,” Bankshot writes of Mr. Finley, an elderly widower who is grieving, worn down by time, habitually angry, and casually racist, yet clueless about the socialism that brought him the Social Security and Medicare that his life depends on. Bankshot has authored 17 stories, this being their first rescue.

In “Occult & Psychical Sciences: The Tragicall Hifstory of Dr. John Dee, Part 1 of 2,” Clio2 weaves the story of John Dee, whom history remembers mostly as a counselor of Elizabeth I. Dee was a magician and alchemist around the history of his time. "No solid career path existed for learned men in Elizabeth’s England, outside of the clergy. Dee’s activities earned only fees for particular projects, inherently unreliable. He was continually petitioning the Queen for a pension, or for some ecclesiastical position, to provide a solid, steady income." In her carefully researched biography, Clio2 explains the practices of alchemy and divination as precursors to the scientific method as well as the tools of the charlatan and fraud. The story of Dee's precarious career as court magician and queen's counselor concludes next week. “Occult and Psychical Sciences on DK” explores all phenomena spooky and occult. Clio2 has authored 190 stories for Daily Kos.

Through text and illustration, skralyx explains the natural science behind why “The Big Dipper rises, heralding the approach of Spring.” The Big Dipper has been important throughout history because it points the way to Polaris, the North Star, pointing the enslaved toward freedom as surely as it gave mariners a steady reference point in the early nights of navigation. "The North Star can tell us a lot more than simply which way north is. It’s directly above the Earth’s spin axis, so if you’re at the North Pole, it’s directly overhead, and if you’re at the Equator, it's right on the horizon. But if you’re in between those two, you can measure the angle from the horizon to the North Star, and voilà!  That is your latitude." Skralyx, who writes often about science, joined the Daily Kos Community in 2005 and has published 408 stories, with 39 rescued.

Bisleybum celebrates “Tiny things” that grow in the shadow of bigger things. A trip to the University of Tennessee Forest Resources Research and Education Center is an opportunity to meander down trails that feature their "own ecological niche, whether an oak-hickory population or a rhododendron cove. These weren’t your everyday suburban trees. In just over the span of a year I learned to identify almost four dozen trees by bark or leaf. Bit by bit though, my eye would be caught, as the seasons changed, by other patches of green." These patches of green led the author to look for "the tiniest of plants, the ones you would easily overlook unless you are specifically looking for them." Bisleybum has been a member of the Community for 10 years. Of their 102 stories, 12 have been rescued.

Enoch Ro0t, a retired engineer who restores antique tools and often writes about their craftsmanship, explains the working and operation of an unusual brand of block plane in “Forgotten tools: Chaplin's patented planes, 1872-1914.” While sharing the beauty and utility of the tools, the author points to the diversity of tools available from many companies in the past, now narrowed due to corporate buyouts and mechanization. "I’ve been intrigued by the ingenious ways some of the smaller 19th-century plane manufacturers worked around the patents held by the major players of the day." Enoch Ro0t takes these unusual planes apart to display their utility as tools and their beauty as works of art, and compares their relative strengths as essential to a woodworker. The author has published 37 diaries. This is his 10th rescue.

Laurel in CA explains how Davis, California, is marshaling community resources and town/gown cooperation to combat the pandemic in “Fighting the COVID-19 pandemic: a campus-community partnership in Davis, CA.” She writes that thanks to the Healthy Davis Together project, "Our efforts have worked so far to keep Davis’ case count low relative to other nearby communities. Even our nursing homes and retirement communities have escaped major outbreaks, with only a handful of cases reported. The university is adding vaccine capability to its testing sites and mobile vans as fast as vaccines become available." Davis offers a model for other blended communities to pool resources and achieve better coverage for everyone. A retired medical school professor, Laurel in CA has authored 52 stories, with nine of them rescued.

“Faster than a public bus, more persistent than a carpooler, able to leap long traffic lines in a single light. Look! Out in the street—it’s a dog, it’s a lawn chair; no, it’s the Iron Tortoise! Yes, (a) strange cyclist from another consciousness, with powers of perseverance far beyond those of ordinary bikers; and who, disguised as a mild-mannered seismic analyst astride his trusty steed, fights a never-ending battle for road space, justice, and a less motorized way of life.” In this the first installment of an adventure, solo-biking 480 miles around the Nevada Test Site to raise support for the ban of nuclear testing, Iron Tortoise recounts the “Iron Tortoise origin story --- 1989 Nevada Peace Ride, Part 1.” A prolific writer since joining the Community in March 2020, Iron Tortoise has authored 301 stories.

Psychusa identifies an overlooked source of inspiration for Donald Trump's peculiar brand of fascist showmanship in “Trump, Republican lies, and wrestling bad guys.” A fan of professional wrestling in childhood, "as I grew up, like most of us, I realized that it was all a put on fantasy and violence in real life was no joke." Still, the author observes that many adults fall into the easy good/evil soap opera drama in which professional wrestling traffics, and further, that Trump is a master of the negative face of that soap opera. "Make no mistake about it, Trump and his Republican enablers hold a monopoly on organizing around the dark side of human emotions, and would make even (Vince) McMahon jealous. In that respect, it still compares in many ways to the appeal of wrestling." Psychusa has authored 43 stories for the community, this being the first rescue.

In a Spanish-language book club of Latinx readers, plus one Spaniard and a Kiwi, Senorjoel relates how two members brought into the discussion Black writers who changed their lives. Weaving together Amanda Gorman and Langston Hughes, "Song of Spain," and the impeachment trial, the author meditates on how some can be “Waving a flag and mouthing rot,” and asks us to remember "our compatriots who have stood for the greater good. People like policeman Eugene Goodman. Like John Lewis and Cori Bush. And our artists, writers, and poets." Senorjoel writes on a wide variety of topics and has published 52 stories since joining in 2016.

Manny Payne takes us down a personal Valentine’s Day path with humor and pathos in “A smile, a laugh, a chuckle on me as I go SEARCHING FOR VALENTINE'S DAY.” The vignettes range from cajoling a boyfriend who thought the event was politically incorrect into “getting swept away by capitalism just this once,” to delivering a card to another boyfriend only to stick it under the door of the wrong house and get irked with him for not responding. The days, over the years, have been bittersweet, but the accumulation of them and lessons learned along the way remind us that even secret attempts at thoughtfulness can have long-lasting impacts. Manny Payne has been a Kossack for just over a year, and this is their first story and first rescue.

In “45 words,” outsidethelines closely parses Donald Trump's tweet on Jan. 6 telling his supporters to go home. The analysis reveals Trump's mastery of rhetoric and consistent use of religious language to incite outrage and justify violence, ultimately explaining why these 45 words are a "message which straddles that day, Jan. 6, from the four to five years of Trump and right-wing messaging before, and for many years to come." Outsidethelines has published seven stories, with this being their first rescue.

COMMUNITY SPOTLIGHT is dedicated to finding great writing by community members that isn’t getting the visibility it deserves.

  • To add our rescued stories to your Stream, click on the word FOLLOW in the left panel at our main page or click on Reblogs and read them directly on the group page.
  • You can also find a list of our rescued stories by clicking HERE or using the link in Meteor Blades’ Night Owls open thread that publishes daily between 7-9PM Pacific time.

An edition of our rescue roundup publishes every Saturday at 1 PM ET (10AM PT) to the Recent Community Stories section and to the front page at 6:30PM ET (3:30PM PT).

Despite a bipartisan vote to convict, Trump is acquitted after Senate fails to reach 2/3 margin

After a confusing day, the United States Senate voted on Saturday afternoon 57 to 43 in favor of convicting Donald J. Trump in his second impeachment trial. Though this was, by far, the greatest bipartisan vote in favor of impeachment in the nation’s history, it still was not sufficient to reach the necessary two-thirds of the Senate necessary for conviction.

Among those Republicans voting with Democrats were Richard Burr, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Pat Toomey. 

With that vote, the court of impeachment is adjourned and Republicans have shrugged off their last flirtation with the idea of democracy. 

Saturday, Feb 13, 2021 · 8:59:25 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Burr on his decision to convict Trump pic.twitter.com/KuwPvyuVLJ

— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) February 13, 2021

Saturday, Feb 13, 2021 · 9:02:52 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Sen. Chuck Schumer: "This trial wasn't about choosing country over party, not even that. This trial was about choosing country over Donald Trump, and 43 Republican members chose Trump."

Saturday, Feb 13, 2021 · 9:05:41 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

CASSIDY on Guilty vote: “Our Constitution and our country is more important than any one person. I voted to convict President Trump because he is guilty”

— Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) February 13, 2021

Saturday, Feb 13, 2021 · 9:13:06 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Trump has released a gloating statement. I’m not going to quote any of it. Just know that he doesn’t take a moment to condemn the violence on Jan. 6.

The founders of this country would have convicted Trump and banned him from office … unanimously

It’s easy to lose any perspective on U.S. history when you’re busy trying to live through it. But for those of us who will be around in 20 years or so (depending, of course, on what happens in the interim) it seems likely that there will be no shortage of withering commentary concerning this particular time. The country is being treated to the spectacle of a twice-impeached president charged with weighty crimes on the cusp of escaping justice due to the abject cowardice and contemptible self-dealing of one major political party. 

Two notable analyses have appeared in the last few weeks asking a patently obvious question: Would the founders of this country, the authors of its Constitution, towards whom all of our politicians profess such heartfelt fealty and respect, convict Donald Trump for his actions on Jan. 6? Would they bar him from ever holding public office again?

The answer appears to be unequivocal: Not only would he be convicted and banned from office for the rest of his wretched existence as long he remained a U.S. citizen, but the verdict committing him to that fate would be unanimous.

The Trump “defense,” such as it is, relies on parsing the semantics of what is or is not “incitement.” The defense contends that at worst, when Trump delivered his rousing call to action from behind his temporary, hardened Plexiglass-protected rostrum—pausing with significance between each phrase to ensure they had the desired impact upon the mob he himself had summoned before him—that he was merely “speaking his mind.” It was simply impossible, the lawyers insisted, to equate what Trump said with what his followers then did.

That defense sounds specious because it is in fact specious. It ignores the context of the moment itself, the notorious months of preparing the mob for just this event. It ignores the urgency impressed upon that mob, its deliberately chosen participants, and the careful timing as Congress set to work only a few hundred yards from where he spoke. It ignores the gravity of the offense that actually occurred. But most of all, it ignores the fact that this was the president of the United States—someone at the absolute pinnacle of power in the country—delivering the message to his deluded faithful, all with the intention of overturning the election.

Dr. Eli Merritt, visiting scholar at Vanderbilt University writing for The New York Times, explains how this country’s actual creators—Madison, Hamilton, Franklin, and such—would have viewed such an event.

If the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 were sitting today as jurors in the Senate impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, one thing seems certain based on the historical record. Acting with vigor and dispatch, they would cast two near unanimous votes: first, to convict the president of an impeachable offense, and second, to disqualify him from holding future federal office.

They would vote in this way, unmoved by partisan passions or the defense’s claim that the Senate lacks jurisdiction, because they believed as a matter of civic principle that ethical leadership is the glue that holds a constitutional republic together. It was a principle they lived by and one they infused into every aspect of the Constitution they debated that summer in Philadelphia nearly 234 years ago.

Suffice it to say that the hoary excuses we hear from the Senate floor in defense of this demagogue would have earned derision and contempt from those whose efforts created the very body of legislators now sitting in judgment in Washington, D.C. Merritt cites numerous examples, showing how someone with the moral emptiness of Donald Trump is a textbook example of everything the founders despised and warned against in an American president.

To fully appreciate their views on the subject, it’s necessary first to understand the type of people the founders expected to hold office, including the highest office. They strove for individuals possessing virtue, wisdom, and common decency. As Merritt notes, they stressed these necessary qualities for those in government nearly every day of the debates that later were memorialized in the Federalist Papers. 

The founders were not fools, however. They recognized that imperfect people (just white men, in those days) would invariably occupy high positions in government. But there was a special breed they singled out as most dangerous to the nascent republic.

They also left behind unequivocal statements describing the type of public personalities the constitutional republic must exclude from office. Through carefully designed systems and the power of impeachment, conviction and disqualification, those to be kept out of office included “corrupt & unworthy men,” “designing men” and “demagogues,” according to Elbridge Gerry.

Alexander Hamilton fought hard to endow the new government with checks and balances to preclude “men of little character,” those who “love power” and “demagogues.” George Mason devoted himself to devising “the most effectual means of checking and counteracting the aspiring views of dangerous and ambitious men.”

To explicitly prevent the ascendancy and exercise of power of such demagogues, they created the checks and balances that exist in our governmental structure—from the separation of powers to the mechanism for impeachment. As James Madison noted, the threat such men presented could be “fatal to the Republic.”  

The corruption we are witnessing on the Republican side of the Senate is the most literal example of Madison’s warning that could be imagined.

Frank Bowman is a Curators’ Distinguished Professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. His article, written last month for the Washington Monthly, dovetails with Dr. Merritt’s analysis of the likelihood of the Framers’ position regarding the behavior of Donald Trump:

[A] singular concern of the Framers, not merely when debating impeachment but throughout the process of designing the constitutional system, was the danger of a demagogue rising to the highest office and overthrowing republican government.

Bowman notes that founders such as Jay, Madison, and Hamilton, among others, specifically drew upon historical precedents from ancient British, Greek, and Roman History when developing, articulating, and justifying the language they ultimately implemented when writing the Constitution. The penalty of impeachment, for example, was derived from a practice utilized by the British Parliament. Impeachment in Britain (by the British Parliament) could not remove the king, but could be utilized against his most favored—and most dangerous—allies to remove them from office, with a full range of penalties upon conviction with a view towards keeping them out of public life.

As Bowman explains—echoing Dr. Merritt—in the founding days of the republic, the potential enemy was not a landed aristocracy; instead, “the particular threat that haunted the founding generation was the demagogue.”

The founders cautioned against demagogues constantly. The word appears 187 times in the National Archives’ database of the founders’ writings. Eighteenth-century American writers often used “demagogue” simply as an epithet to suggest that a political opponent was a person of little civic virtue who used the baser arts of flattery and inflammatory rhetoric to secure popular favor. In 1778, in the midst of the Revolution, George Washington wrote to Edward Rutledge complaining that, “that Spirit of Cabal, & destructive Ambition, which has elevated the Factious Demagogue, in every Republic of Antiquity, is making great Head in the Centre of these States.”

But the idea at the bottom of the insult was the Framers’ conclusion, based on the study of history ancient and modern, that republics were peculiarly vulnerable to demagogues – men who craved power for its own sake, and who gained and kept it by dishonest appeals to popular passions.

Bowman notes that the founders’ concern about demagogues was so great that it was one of the reasons Madison recommended “large populous districts” for individual representatives, since such a large mass would be less likely to be swayed by such people.

There is no doubt that the founders of this country had someone exactly like Donald Trump in mind when they provided a constitutional mechanism for that person’s removal and expulsion from the right to hold office. The spectacle of a corrupted cabal of Republican senators groveling in fear and cowardice, bending over backwards to defend him, is exactly the nightmare they wished to avoid.

Republicans really are headed for that iceberg, and they have no idea

For the past several weeks, I've been simultaneously consumed with two things: How well the Biden administration seems to have learned the lessons of the Obama administration, and the disintegration of the Republican Party playing out in real time.

And while I've been reveling in the first, the second phenomenon has been simply mesmerizing. In fact, it reminds me of watching the GOP meltdown in advance of the Georgia runoffs and thinking, could this really be happening? Yes, in fact: It was real in Georgia, and now I find myself similarly contemplating the idea that the Republican Party might actually be imploding too.

The supposition has both tangible and theoretical underpinnings, and the tangibles have been presenting for several weeks. The GOP's tarnished image among Americans, an accelerated rate of GOP defections in party affiliation, and a growing discomfort among corporate donors all seem to make recent talks by former GOP officials of forming an alternative conservative party an actual possibility, rather than just the escape fantasy it was in 2016.

In some very concrete ways, this political moment may actually provide fertile ground for the makings of a third party: Exiled leaders who know both the electoral and governance sides of politics, a host of wealthy donors who are ready to pony up for a new venture, and a fresh crop of disillusioned voters who are newly looking for a home.  

But a healthy part of my fascination with the prospect of a budding competitor to the GOP stems from how totally oblivious Republican Party leaders are to the potential threat. In fact, the formation of a third party wouldn't even be conceivable but for the fact that Republican lawmakers have so quickly fumbled the potential for a post-Trump reboot. A narrow window had opened—between the Jan. 6 riot and Joe Biden's inauguration—in which it seemed the GOP might finally break with Donald Trump just enough to remain palatable to a swath of disaffected conservative voters. But without getting into all those particulars (or the numerous preceding missed opportunities by the GOP), what is clear as day now is that Senate Republicans seem poised to acquit Trump yet again of impeachment charges after House Democrats explicitly warned them last year that, short of conviction, Trump would surely betray the country again. 

"We must say enough—enough!" implored lead impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff of California on Feb. 3, 2020. "He has betrayed our national security, and he will do so again. He has compromised our elections, and he will do so again."

Naturally, Senate Republicans immediately hit snooze on that prescient warning so they could get back to business as usual. This time around, the same caucus is planning to acquit Trump on charges that are eminently more comprehensible and that some 33 million Americans witnessed with their very own eyes on Jan. 6. The video evidence presented by House managers was both riveting and searing, and Trump’s defense team withered in the harsh light of the indefensible. 

All of those factors make the posture of Republicans, whatever they might tell themselves, just so blatantly bogus. In fact, even they are admitting House managers presented such a compelling case that Trump would never be electable again. But somehow those same GOP lawmakers stopped short of making the logical leap that acquitting Trump of such a manifest betrayal might also turn them into political pariahs among a meaningful portion of the electorate (which notably in today’s terms could comprise a very small slice of voters). On the one hand, Trump's transgressions were so egregious that he has been rendered unelectable; on the other, they deemed themselves magically immune to any consequences from kowtowing to Trump at the expense of the country.    

So there's a stab at the tangibles that suggest rough sledding ahead for the GOP—an evident fall from grace across sectors accompanied by an impenetrable cognitive dissonance. It seems promising, particularly because Republican lawmakers have proven either too thick or too flat-footed to adjust to the combustible environment in which they exist. Then again, we've been here before, right? Remember all those Obama-era predictions that the GOP was getting ready to fall off a demographic cliff? Any number of D.C. pundits prematurely declared the party dead unless it retooled top-to-bottom. But within a handful of years, Republicans regained control of both congressional chambers. Then along came Trump in 2016, doubling down on the party's most despicable brand of white identity to win the GOP nomination, the election, and make a decent but ultimately unsuccessful stab at securing reelection.

The doomsday arguments pundits were making a decade ago leaned heavily on the numbers game—demographics as destiny—and whether the GOP could find enough voters to get to 50+1 in any given election. But another way of dissecting the fortunes of the Republican Party is through the lens of our political system’s organizing structure in which white identity is rapidly losing dominance as an organizing principle. Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas and I discussed this with political historian Kathleen Frydl on The Brief this week (podcast/YouTube). Frydl recently wrote for The American Prospect, "As the white share of the electorate falls, so too does the reach and relevance of a party dedicated to structural racism." Frydl argues that the U.S. is entering uncharted territory in the sense that, since the nation's founding, at least one of its organized political factions has always been "dedicated to preserving institutionalized racism," whether that meant flat-out slavery or its many descendants over the centuries. "Most important is the fact that the standard historical pattern—that some entity exists ready to accommodate the politics of white privilege without risking majority status itself—no longer applies," she writes.

This proposition—that one party in our two-party system can no longer count on an appeal to white identity alone without risking political irrelevance—has been turning over in my mind. It’s both theoretically compelling and materially intriguing at a moment when the Republican Party has continually proven incapable of reaching out to new demographics even as it undergoes an unusual exodus of voters in critical states across the country. The truth is, many of those voters likely don't want to become Democrats, but they have simply been forced to the exits by the stench and toxicity of Republicanism. In all likelihood, those voters would jump at the chance to vote for a conservative third-party candidate. 

So while I have remained skeptical over the last decade that the nation's demographic shifts would yield anything but a realignment along the left-right continuum in American politics, I now wonder if we are seeing the political precursors that portend a third party on the horizon. How long that third party might exist and whether it could potentially reshape American politics as we know it altogether are different questions entirely. Historically, Frydl notes, third parties such as the “Dixiecrats” of the late ‘40s or Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party of 1912 kicked off a roughly 20-year transition period before one of the nation’s two dominant parties subsumes that movement and consolidates power. But predicting the longevity of a third-party movement is beyond my present-day concerns and certainly the scope of this piece. In the very near-term—as in 2022 and 2024—the initiation of such a movement would be a complete calamity for the GOP.