Monthly Archives: January 2020

The Republican National Committees campaign to reelect President Donald Trump will increase its commitment to Florida and other key states by millions of dollars, adding another 300 staff members to 18 states.

The announcement comes out of the RNCs winter meeting in Doral, where Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and RNC members approved a seven-figure expenditure to increase the Trump Victory campaigns staff presence in targeted states by Feb. 1.

It also comes two days after the RNCs counterpart, the Democratic National Committee, announced its own build-up of staff and investment in Florida and other swing states.

The RNC move will increase Trump Victory staffing to 622 employees in Florida, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Neither national party detailed how much of the money would go to Florida.

Fueled by the unprecedented grassroots support for President Trump, we have built the largest data-driven field program in our partys history. Its an operation that benefits Republicans up and down the ballot, and one the Democrats simply cannot match, McDaniel wrote in a news release.

The DNC announced Wednesday it is launching a new, multimillion dollar investment it calls Battleground Build-Up 2020 for groundwork and professional staffers to challenge Trump in Florida and a handful of other swing states in the November election.

The RNC said it plans additional waves of staffing as the year progresses. Republicans also expects to continue to out-raise Democrats in party money, noting that at the end of November the RNC had $63.2 million cash on hand, while the DNC had $8.4 million.

The RNC said its Trump Victory campaign knocked on its one millionth door last weekend and boasted having activated thousands of volunteers. It also touted developing a state-of-the-art data program, thanks to a $300 million investment, which is made available to every Republican candidate.

Read more from the original source:

Republicans upping investment in Florida and other key battlegrounds - Florida Politics

Former Sen. Jeff FlakeJeffrey (Jeff) Lane FlakeThe Hill's 12:30 Report: House managers to begin opening arguments on day two Flake: Republicans don't speak out against Trump 'because they want to keep their jobs' GOP senator calls CNN reporter a 'liberal hack' when asked about Parnas materials MORE (R-Ariz.) said on Monday that someRepublican senators dont speak out against President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump says his advice to impeachment defense team is 'just be honest' Trump expands tariffs on steel and aluminum imports CNN's Axelrod says impeachment didn't come up until 80 minutes into focus group MOREs behavior because theyre afraid of how it could affect their chances at the ballot box.

Do you think, senator, that you should have spoken up more? Do you regret that you didnt speak up more? And why is it so difficult for Republicans to speak up against this president when they dont believe what hes doing? host Gayle KingGayle KingWarren fends off questions on Sanders: 'I'm not going there' Flake: Republicans don't speak out against Trump 'because they want to keep their jobs' Lifetime to release sequel to 'Surviving R. Kelly' MORE askedFlakeon "CBS This Morning."

"Its difficult because they want to keep their jobs."@JeffFlake on why he thinks Republicans don't speak out against President Trump. pic.twitter.com/jBpRGWwDnH

Well, because they want to keep their jobs, and the president is extremely popular among Republican primary voters, Flake said. That is a subset of a subset of a subset. But they are those who decide who represents the party and the general election.

Flake, who was very vocal in his criticism of Trump until the Arizona Republican retiredfrom the Senate in 2018, was also pressed about commentshe made last year in an op-ed in which he said that Senate Republicans will also be on trial when the upper chamber takes on Trumps impeachment case.

They are, in a sense, because this president wont be there forever, Flake said. Hell either be gone this time next year or four years from now. Then what happens to the Republican Party?

My fear is people out there know that, even if this is not an impeachable offense, that the president did something wrong and for Republicans to maintain that he didnt is just wrong, he continued. And this has long-term ramifications for the party if we act as if we are just devoted to the president no matter what out of this cult of personality that weve seen. We certainly saw it in the House.

He was also asked about his past criticism of Trump while serving in Congress and whether he wished he would have done things differently then.

You always look back and say I could have done this differently or that, he said.

But I did speak up and I decided that I would have to condone behavior I couldnt condone or accept positions I couldnt accept if I wanted to win reelection. Thats why I didnt," he added.

See original here:

Flake: Republicans don't speak out against Trump 'because they want to keep their jobs' | TheHill - The Hill

Ezra Klein writes in the New York Times today that Democrats can move to the left and they are but they cant abandon the center or, given the geography of American politics, the center-right, and still hold power. And yet, Republicans can abandon the center. Thats unfair!

Yeah, it is. And if you want to find out why its true anyway, read Ezras piece in the Times. Or, in the spirit of a picture being worth a thousand words, stare at this Gallup chart for a while:

The liberal share of the population has steadily increased over the past few decades, but it still tops out at 26 percent. That means Democrats need about two-thirds of independents to create a majority. And that means appealing to the centeror in some places to the center-right. Its the only way to get to 51 percent.

Republicans, by contrast, start out with 35 percent. If they manage to appeal to just the conservative portion of independents, they can get to 51 percent. So thats what they do.

At this point, a bunch of people in comments are going to start going on about how ideological self-ID has changed over the years and centrists are more liberal than they used to be and all the polls say liberal views command a majority, blah blah blah. Just stop it. All youre doing is kidding yourself. The hard truth is that America is not an especially liberal country, and that means its tough being the liberal party. You have to go slow and you have to compromise.

But how do Republicans get away with being so damn extreme? Shouldnt that scare off the moderates? Maybe it should, but again, life isnt always fair. Conservatives, by definition, want to keep things the same, and being extreme about keeping things the same is just not that scary. Liberals want to change things, and being extreme about change is scary. So Republicans can win even with a nutball right-wing caucus making up a big chunk of their party. Democrats cant.

This is a drag. But the fact remains that America has historically progressed in tiny spurts: a few years during the New Deal; a few years in the mid-60s; a few months (literally) after Obama was elected president. There are modest wins and modest losses the rest of the time, but thats all. The American public just cant handle very much liberal progress at a single time, and if you dont like that, you need to figure out how to sell liberalism so well that the chart above turns significantly upward. Give me a call when you figure out how to make that happen.

See the original post:

Sorry, But Democrats Have to Compromise and Republicans Don't - Mother Jones

Fans of ABCs The View are wondering who will replace the seat left vacant by co-host Abby Huntsman. With her recent departure, viewers are expecting a panelist with the same conservative political leanings as Huntsman in order to level the liberal playing field and backup outspoken Republican Meghan McCain.

This former co-host revealed that the show strived to represent a balanced view on social and political topics, to the point where The View creator Barbara Walters asked her to take on a certain political persona.

Actress and reality star Jenny McCarthy has a variety of credits to her name, including Playboy model, television and film actress, and host of radio and TV shows. Currently at the judging table on Fox NetworksThe Masked Singer, McCarthy is enjoying the shows success as well as her her marriage to singer/actor Donny Wahlberg, whom she wed in 2014.

McCarthy was considered for The View in 2013. Wanting to stretch herself professionally in a more serious venue, she decided to try out for the daytime talk show. I remember thinking to myself,I want to do something that has a little more class to it. And spread my wings a little bit, she said, according to Vulture. I thought to myself,Thats where Im going next.

After being invited by executive producer Bill Geddie to audition for Season 17, McCarthy became the frontrunner. I went on and it went great, and I went on again, McCarthy said. They said, Youre in the top consideration to be a co-host.

Despite an offer for her own talk show with CBS and substantial competition from other applicants including Brooke Shields and Ali Wentworth, McCarthy was offered the seat at the table and she accepted.

Jenny brings us intelligence as well as warmth and humor, Walters said in 2013 before McCarthy joined the show, according to USA Today. She can be serious and outrageous. She has connected with our audience and offers a fresh point of view. Jenny will be a great addition to the show as we usher in an exciting new chapter for The View.

Bringing a hip and humorous vibe to the show, McCarthy fit perfectly with the programs plan to portray a lighter tone. Letting go of co-hosts Joy Behar and Elisabeth Hasselbeck, producers at The View were looking to go in a new direction with Season 17.

How Bill [Geddie] sold it to me is that they actually let go of Joy and Elisabeth because they wanted to get rid of politics, McCarthy said. It was polarizing. Thats the word he kept using: It was verypolarizingto the audience. We want pop culture, irreverent, fun, sassy I checked all those boxes for him.

Yet once she started the show, McCarthy seemed to get mixed signals. They initially had me come on to be the pop-culture girl because they wanted to change it, McCarthy told Watch What Happens Live host Andy Cohen in December 2018. And then Barbara didnt know who anybody was, pop culture-wise.

McCarthy went on to reveal that she soon received an odd request to portray a certain political stance. And then they came in my dressing room and said, Can you just act Republican so we have another point of view?' the reality star recalled. And I said, How do I act Republican?

The Masked Singer co-host has gone public with stories on Walters during her time, revealing how demanding the legendary news woman could be as a boss.

You know the movieMommie Dearest? I remember as a child watching that movie and going, Holy cow! McCarthy said in the Vulture interview. Ive never seen a woman yell like that before until I worked with Barbara Walters.

When speaking to Cohen in 2018, McCarthy praised how McCain is standing her ground on the daytime talk show as the resident Republican. I love her on The View, McCarthy said. They needed an opposite point of view in order to be The View you need different sides.

Read the original here:

This Former Co-Host of 'The View' Says She Was Told To 'Act Republican' - Showbiz Cheat Sheet

This past week, U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw called on his fellow Republicans to take climate change seriously a welcome development.

No, the Houston-area congressman isnt coming out for the Green New Deal being promoted by a fellow freshman with a high profile, New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rather, he is backing a new initiative from House Republicans that offers a more conservative approach to the problem.

With polls showing voters in both parties increasingly concerned about global warming, the move by Crenshaw and other young Republicans to acknowledge the threat and put forth a plan is shrewd politics, if nothing else.

Some of Crenshaws 2nd District constituents may be cynical about his motives, as he looks ahead to a potentially tough re-election fight in the fall. But his willingness to challenge climate change deniers is something to cheer, given that they have outsized influence in the House GOP.

Crenshaw discussed the issue during a question-and-answer session on Wednesday at the Texas Public Policy Foundations annual Policy Orientation in Austin.

The Republican proposal doesnt have a hashtag yet, Crenshaw said, but hes pushing for Clean Frontier. It consists of 12 bills, including one that he authored, the Launching Energy Advancement and Development through Innovations for Natural Gas (LEADING) Act of 2019. The measure directs the U.S. Department of Energy to use up to $50 million for research and development related to carbon capture technologies. Republicans are also working on legislation that would promote the planting of trees as another way to sequester carbon and reduce plastic pollution, among other things.

The overarching goal of these efforts, Crenshaw explained, is to counter the lefts push for more aggressive government action with an approach that emphasizes innovation as a way to address the climate crisis.

If you do polling, if you ask both conservatives and liberals what they think about the environment, its up there in concerns, he said.

The environment is also a top concern for independents, Crenshaw added, along with health care. That being the case, it would be tempting, but perilous, to scoff at concerns about climate change.

From a political standpoint, we cannot ignore it completely, Crenshaw said.

Hes right.

Crenshaw is among the Republicans who cant afford to ignore the issue. He was elected in 2018 by roughly 6 points. He has since become a fixture on political talk shows and proved a top fundraiser. Still, Democrats believe he is vulnerable in a year with Trump on the ballot. And climate change is a real concern for many voters in this storm-battered district, which swoops from central Houston to Kingwood.

With that said, many Republicans have been unduly skittish about engaging over the lefts calls for climate action particularly since Barack Obama was elected president in 2008. Republicans got a lot of political mileage running against Obamas cap-and-trade bill, which they called job-killing.

Republican Bob Inglis, a former South Carolina congressman and the founder of republicEn.org, spoke of a lost decade on this front when we met in Houston in December, as part of his efforts to enlist conservatives to the cause.

And young conservatives in Texas, who have been pushing party leaders for a different approach, commended Crenshaws remarks.

I think its great, said Josiah Neeley, a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, based in Austin. It shows he is aware the old GOP playbook on climate is out of date, and hes thinking constructively on the issue.

The House GOPs proposal might not go as far as one would like, Neeley continued, but hes at peace with that.

Im always for talking about a carbon tax, but I recognize its a big lift, particularly with Congress in the state its in, Neeley said. I think it makes sense to work on more focused ideas that can be done in the short term.

Jay Kay Aiyer, a political scientist based in Houston, was more skeptical of Crenshaws advocacy.

It's a step in the right direction, but his argument is based on political expediency, not an understanding and acceptance of the science, said Aiyer.

I think we've set the bar so low that saying something that is relatively basic is now grounds for celebration, he added.

Indeed. We have. And not without reason. A look at Crenshaws Twitter feed helps explain why.

The American people should know: theres a 3rd option when it comes to addressing climate change, Crenshaw tweeted, the day before his appearance at the Austin event, linking to an article about the impending proposal from House Republicans.

Its not the absurd Green New Deal, & its not inaction, he continued. Its innovation & itll decrease emissions without sacrificing our economy. Example: carbon capture, LNG, hydro & nuclear.

This anodyne tweet received some 1400 responses, some of which commended Crenshaw for speaking up on the issue, some of which questioned his motives in doing so, and many of which denounced him for the perceived sin of playing footsie with the left.

You idiots! The climate changes all the time and most of the changes come from the main energy source, the sun, not environmental issues, wrote one of the respondents.

#ClimateChangeHoax is a ploy to dupe us into squandering trillions of dollars worth of our resources, said another, 2ATexan.

This tweet is alarming. Not on subject matter but the words you used, replied a woman named Allison. I used to think you were a good guy, now I fear you are part of the plot to take down our President!

Its not clear who these people are, where they live, or if theyre even Americans. I would doubt many of them are based in the Houston area, where back-to-back-to-back historic storm events have raised both awareness and urgency about the issue at hand.

But the rhetoric used by Crenshaws online critics is reminiscent of that used by the president, on the subject of climate change.

This week, for example, Trump was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where he called on his fellow world leaders to reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse.

They are the heirs of yesterdays foolish fortune tellers, Trump continued. And I have them, and you have them, and we all have them. And they want to see us do badly, but we dont let that happen.

That head-in-the-sand approach, as Crenshaw said, isnt a smart one for Republicans, or helpful for anyone. But its nonetheless being espoused by the president, with whom Crenshaw has often made common cause. That being the case, its good to see this young Republican congressman advocate a different path, even though in his case its also smart politics.

erica.grieder@chron.com

View post:

Grieder: Dan Crenshaw is right to say that Republicans cant afford to ignore climate change - Houston Chronicle

Ive been a Republican since I was 18-years-old. I hardly recognize the party todayat least, the party in Washington, D.C. But even in the distressed state its in, I would rather fix the Republican party than leave it.

The Republican party I joined on the eve of the Reagan era brought different people and ideas together. That was the secret of its widespread support. But although it was diverse, it was not unprincipled. When Republicans remember the good old days, we remember the values we share.

What do we share? First, Republicans are conservatives. We value order, stability, prudence, honesty, and the preservation of our republic. We have always put a premium on respect for established institutions: they can be improved, but they should not be denigrated or assaulted.

What else are we? We are patriots. We love the Constitution, revere the Madisonian system for the political work of art that it is, respect those who defend our way of life, and are watchful against those who would threaten it.

We love freedom, and our heritage of freedom. Ive always said I want the government out of your pocketbook and out of your bedroom. That basic American tradition of individual libertyand personal responsibility, because to be free you must run your own lifegoes back to Madison, Jefferson, and the Founders, who gave us not only our laws, but our greatest words.

We are capitalists. We might differ on any number of policies, but we firmly believe there is no such thing as government money, only taxpayer money. In my time as governor of Massachusetts, I was named one of the two most fiscally conservative governors in the United States by the Cato Institute. But I dont consider it just a matter of pinching pennies. Its about a genuine belief that people are wealthiest and happiest when the government stays away from micromanaging their work, and that if you produce something, its yours to keep.

And we are republicans, in the original sense: We believe, as Lincoln put it, in government of the people, by the people, and for the people, not that government is a separate entity that dominates its citizens. Theres a place for government, but fundamentally it is there to protect your rights, not to dictate what they are.

From time to time, Ive differed with the majority of my party on some issues, but not on ultimate ends. When I say we have to do something to avert catastrophic climate change, its because we should be protecting our citizens welfare, not limiting growth or socializing the economy. When I am skeptical of wars in the Middle East, its because I think theres a better way to conserve American power, not because I want to weaken our position. Bottom line: I believe in the Republican partys core principles, even if I sometimes differ in how I would apply them.

Podcast January 24 2020

On today's Friday Bulwark Megacast, host Charlie Sykes is joined by Jonathan V. Last and Jim Swift to discuss impeachmen...

The Republican party should return its focus on the 18 issues we agree on, not the 8 we disagree on.

We need to get our fiscal house in order and stop running trillion-dollar deficits that are going to destroy us.

We need to figure out how to preserve American power and influence in the world while on a budget. (I have some thoughts.)

We need pro-liberty judges who will not up-end the Bill of Rights. (I oppose many of President Trumps policies, decisions, and actions, but I think Neil Gorsuch was a good Supreme Court pick.)

We need a real, and humane, border strategy instead of a wall that is a combination of a government land grab and a slogan.

We need to go back to supporting free enterprise and entrepreneurship.

We need free trade, and trade organizations with international allies, and an end to uncertainty about trade wars.

We need a solution to healthcare that brings prices down while turning patients into customers, not supplicants to a state-operated system.

We need to protect religious freedom.

And we could go on, because theres a lot of work for us to do.

Only by rallying around our core principles again and remembering who we really are can the Republican party become a real governing party again.

Read more here:

The Values We Share (or Why I Am A Republican) - The Bulwark

SaturdayJan25,2020at3:01AM

Ive become weary of Republicans complaining that impeaching the president is a device to overcome the will of the people who elected Donald Trump.

Of course it is! That is the definition of impeachment! You cant impeach someone who hasnt first been elected!

No Republicans complained that they were overturning the will of the people who had elected Bill Clinton. The delegates at the Republican convention were reduced to chanting Lock her up! in reference to Hillary Clinton. Impeachment would have to wait, I presume. (And no, I wont make an issue of the fact that the president was elected with a minority of the popular vote.)

And heres another thought: President Trump and his acolytes have complained that the House of Representatives impeachment hearings were one-sided because their people werent heard. They never mention that the president and members of his administration repeatedly were offered the opportunity to testify and declined.

It reminds me of the classic definition of the familiar Jewish word chutzpah: A man murders his mother and father and then pleads for mercy because hes an orphan.

Still, I agree with my late father, who liked to repeat during hard times: The republic will survive.

Larry Fox, Brewster

Excerpt from:

Republicans are schooling us in the definition of 'chutzpah' - Cape Cod Times

Shell be joined by Cruz and Rubio, who are special targets of my disappointment because they were once special targets of Trumps ugliness. They know it firsthand and well.

They campaigned against him for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, when he didnt just criticize them but viciously belittled and even savaged them. He conspiracy-theorized a role for Cruzs father in John F. Kennedys assassination.

A pathological liar, Cruz called Trump.

But now that Trump is president and his base has become the most impassioned constituency in the party, Cruz is his biggest cheerleader and a ready mouthpiece for all of those lies. He has swapped thoughts of 2016 for thoughts of 2024, when theres another opportunity to reach for the White House and Trumps loyalists will come in handy. Hell have to muscle aside Javanka and Don Jr., but thats a pickle for another day. First step: acquittal!

Rubio has long fashioned himself a foreign-policy maven and took a hard line when it came to Russia. So you might think that the Trump presidency would be especially galling to him. You might also think that Trumps bullying of Ukraine which left the country more vulnerable to Russian aggression would be some sort of breaking point.

But hes a Republican member of Congress in 2020, which means hes a sycophantic shell of his former self. And having bitten his tongue about Trumps global misadventures, hell now abet more of the same by helping Trump stay in office.

There are so many other Republican senators to marvel at. Mitt Romney, what was the point of diving back into public life if youre going to prop up a president whose fraudulence you once gave a whole long speech about? Lamar Alexander, you venerated Howard Baker, a fellow Tennessean who once held your Senate seat and put principle above partisanship by standing up to President Nixon. Why not do the same and stand up to President Trump?

Susan Collins, I cant imagine the exhaustion of your role as political wild card, scrutinized to a fare-thee-well. But come on. If youre going to pride yourself on autonomy, you need to exercise it when it matters most.

Its not fun to be any of you right now, with McConnell above you and #MAGA hellions below you poised to make your life a misery if you stray. But no one forced you into public service. When you entered the Senate, you took an oath, and you took another one on Thursday. I have a third question, maybe just a rewording of the first and second: Doesnt that nag at you even a little?

I invite you to sign up for my free weekly email newsletter. You can follow me on Twitter (@FrankBruni).

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow this link:

Senate Republicans Are Bathed in Shame - The New York Times

WASHINGTONThe biggest news about this corrupt administration* was not made in the Senate chamber on Tuesday. It was made out on the campaign trail by Senator Professor Warren. From CNBC:

Make no mistake. If we ever are going to repair the damage done by this administration*, it is going to have to include a thorough fumigation of every corner of the national executive. The first big mistake made by President Barack Obama was his determination to look forward, and not back. Too many of the criminals working for the last worst president in history skated. Too many Wall Street vandals got away clean. That cannot be allowed to happen again. The corruption of this administration* is unprecedented. It demands this kind of unprecedented response.

And we might as well look to the future, because the present is too dismal to contemplate. In the Senate on Tuesday, the Republican Party, represented by its majority caucus, formalized its fealty to this renegade administration*. It had several chances to demonstrate a modicum of independence, a smidgen of human courage, and it failed every time. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer proposed amendments to add further documents and witnesses to the deliberations. All of them failed by a straight, party-line 53-47 margin.

Alex WongGetty Images

In this, no Republican was different from any other Republican. Lisa Murkowski and Tom Cotton were the same. Thom Tillis and Ted Cruz were the same. Cory Gardner and Jim Inhofe were the same. Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse were the same as Mike Rounds and Mike Enzi. And they were all the same as Mitch McConnell. There were no moderate Republicans in the Senate on Tuesday. There were no Never Trumpers. There were only collaborators. There was no independence in the Senate on Tuesday, only complicity. And it was a deadening, sad thing to watch. The only real reaction was another cup of soggy oatmeal from the increasingly useless Susan Collins.

First of all, I dont believe a word of that. I think that three weeks from now, or whenever, shell find a way to weasel out and, even if she doesnt, I dont think there are three other Republicans who would follow her to a free buffet, let alone to a vote that would inconvenience the White House. Every single Republican in the chamber on Tuesday looked like theyd rather be anywhere else, up to and including hanging by their thumbs from the Key Bridge.

I like to look around and see how many of my colleagues are looking guilty, said Senator Amy Klobuchar. I saw a lot of them just sitting there, looking down. The Democratic senators seem content to plug along, letting the majority keep voting down what would seem to anyone whos ever watched a police procedural on TV to be reasonable requests. All this talk about how theyre asking the Senate to do the Houses work, thats just BS, said Senator Mazie Horono. Im listening very carefully, I take notes, and then I make my comments parenthetically, like, 'What a bunch of...

House manager Hakeem Jeffries later made a fine presentation of how many witnesses testified in previous impeachments. (Andrew Johnsons trial had 40 of them.) Thats the kind of thing that will survive on the record after all the knee-jerk constitutional negligence has been toted up. Barack Obama was wrong in 2008 and Joe Biden is wrong today. The fever never will break. The patient is going to have to die.

Here is the original post:

There Were No 'Moderate Republicans' in the Senate on Tuesday. Only Collaborators. - Esquire

The sun sets over the US Capitol on the third day of the Senate impeachment trial Thursday. Samuel Corum/Getty Images hide caption

The sun sets over the US Capitol on the third day of the Senate impeachment trial Thursday.

On the second day of their opening arguments in the Senate impeachment trial, Democratic managers honed their case. They hope to persuade a narrow band of Republican senators to support the introduction of new evidence and witnesses.

And some Republicans have begun to voice concerns about the White House legal team's approach to the trial. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said he wants the team to respond directly to claims made by the Democratic side.

This episode: campaign correspondent Scott Detrow, White House correspondent Tamara Keith, and congressional editor Deirdre Walsh.

Connect:Subscribe to the NPR Politics Podcast here.Email the show at nprpolitics@npr.org.Join the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Find and support your local public radio station.

Go here to see the original:

A Few Republicans And The American Public: Democrats Target Their Impeachment Message - NPR