House Democrat Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

[Trump]

might not have full Dem support on Thursdays vote

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D-NJ) said Tuesday that he will likely vote against a resolution by House Democrats to formalize their secret impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, prompting more uncertainly around whether Thursday's expected vote will go on as planned.

However, even before Van Drew’s comments, House Majority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) had already poured some cold water on plans to vote for the measure Thursday, telling reporters on Capitol Hill: “We’re going to have to consider whether or not it’s ready to go on Thursday. I hope that’s the case.”

how many votes does Nancy need? I think Congress is missing 4 because of resignations so does she need 216?

House Dem Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

 

[Anagram]

There's more than enough Democrats + Amash on record as in favor of it. I'm sure people like van Drew, Horn, Cunningham, Brindisi, etc. will be allowed to vote no if they feel it's in their interest. It'll be interesting to see what people like Rooney, Hurd, and Shimkus do.

 

[Trump]

Dems to watch

Tom O’Halleran (AZ-01)
Josh Harder (CA-10)
TJ Cox (CA-21)
Katie Hill (CA-25)
Gil Cisneros (CA-39)
Katie Porter (CA-45)
Harley Rouda (CA-48)
Mike Levin (CA-49)
Jason Crow (CO-06)
Jahana Hayes (CT-05)
Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (FL-26)
Lucy McBath (GA-06)
Abby Finkenauer (IA-01)
Cindy Axne (IA-03)
Sean Casten (IL-06)
Lauren Underwood (IL-14)
Sharice Davids (KS-03)
Jared Golden (ME-02)
Elissa Slotkin (MI-08)
Haley Stevens (MI-11)
Angie Craig (MN-02)
Chris Pappas (NH-01)
Jeff Van Drew (NJ-02)
Andy Kim (NJ-03)
Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05)
Tom Malinowski (NJ-07)
Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11)
Xochitl Torres Small (NM-02)
Susie Lee (NV-03)
Steven Horsford (NV-04)
Max Rose (NY-11)
Antonio Delgado (NY-19)
Anthony Brindisi (NY-22)
Kendra Horn (OK-05)
Susan Wild (PA-07)
Matt Cartwright (PA-08)
Conor Lamb (PA-17)
Joe Cunningham (SC-01)
Lizzie Fletcher (TX-07)
Colin Allred (TX-32)
Ben McAdams (UT-04)
Elaine Luria (VA-02)
Abigail Spanberger (VA-07)
Kim Schrier (WA-08)

 

[HumblePi]

might not have full Dem support on Thursdays vote





how many votes does Nancy need? I think Congress is missing 4 because of resignations so does she need 216?

House Dem Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

Nancy Pelosi knows she has the votes because if she was unsure she would never call the vote for Thursday.

 

[3leftsdoo]

Pelosi's criminally insane, but she's not stupid.

She wouldn't call the meaningless vote if she didn't have enough donkey arsonists to give her the number she needs.

But some Democrats will vote against, and some Republicans for.

 

[Cardinal]

might not have full Dem support on Thursdays vote





how many votes does Nancy need? I think Congress is missing 4 because of resignations so does she need 216?

House Dem Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

Democrats can afford to lose 18 Democrats. Drew isn't going to deep six impeachment.

The House will vote to impeach, and then Republicans can go on the record and declare whether or not it's acceptable for a President to ask foreign governments to investigate their political opponents.

 

[Rexedgar]

This vote still isn’t the “impeachment vote” as I understand things.....elections have consequences....

 

[Craig234]

There's more than enough Democrats + Amash on record as in favor of it. I'm sure people like van Drew, Horn, Cunningham, Brindisi, etc. will be allowed to vote no if they feel it's in their interest. It'll be interesting to see what people like Rooney, Hurd, and Shimkus do.

The way standard politics work on this is, when a member has a district friendly to the other party, the party only demands enough votes to pass the measure, and lets the members who have the biggest political need vote the other way to help them. But if their vote is needed, they're pressured to vote with the party, but if not, they get to say how against the measure they are (e.g., see faux-moderate Susan Collins vote with Republican when needed, like Kavanaugh).

 

[Trump]

This vote still isn’t the “impeachment vote” as I understand things.....elections have consequences....

correct...its "Impeachment Inquiry" vote....silly word game Pelosi's playing. She even says it's not necessary ....go figure.

The Senate and The President have Pelosi chasing her tail

 

[3leftsdoo]

This vote still isn’t the “impeachment vote” as I understand things.....elections have consequences....

It's criminally insane donkeys in Joker masks patting themselves on the back for their attempts to burn down Country & Constitution.

 

[Chomsky]

The way standard politics work on this is, when a member has a district friendly to the other party, the party only demands enough votes to pass the measure, and lets the members who have the biggest political need vote the other way to help them. But if their vote is needed, they're pressured to vote with the party, but if not, they get to say how against the measure they are (e.g., see faux-moderate Susan Collins vote with Republican when needed, like Kavanaugh).

:thumbs:

This vote will give us a feel for how secure Dems feel for impeachment in cross-over districts. Ditto for the Repubs.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Not a surprise, not every Democrat is in a solid left leaning district and just about anyone will tell you that going through with an impeachment process intentionally draws a few battle lines that end up playing out during the next election as well.

Not the best condition of course, but reality of our two party dominant system.

 

[Craig234]

This vote will give us a feel for how secure Dems feel for impeachment in cross-over districts. Ditto for the Repubs.

Ya, it's a different situation for Republicans on this - with no chance to actually win, do they let the members who would benefit politically vote FOR impeachment, when the only benefit is 'a show of unity'? But that's really a more theoretical question, since I'm not sure there are any Republicans left in Democratic districts, since they have done so much Gerrymandering.

 

[PLizzy]

:thumbs:

This vote will give us a feel for how secure Dems feel for impeachment in cross-over districts. Ditto for the Repubs.

I expect two or three Democrats are going to vote against the resolution, which is absolutely disgusting in its cowardice.

Whether any of the Republicans in the suburbs of Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania who hung on for dear life in 2018 get onboard remains to be seen.

 

[Chomsky]

Ya, it's a different situation for Republicans on this - with no chance to actually win, do they let the members who would benefit politically vote FOR impeachment, when the only benefit is 'a show of unity'? But that's really a more theoretical question, since I'm not sure there are any Republicans left in Democratic districts, since they have done so much Gerrymandering.

I'm sure there'll be some.

 

[Chomsky]

I expect two or three Democrats are going to vote against the resolution, which is absolutely disgusting in its cowardice.

Whether any of the Republicans in the suburbs of Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania who hung on for dear life in 2018 get onboard remains to be seen.

Well, this is purely a political event. So, politics is of the utmost import.

 

[Anagram]

I'm sure there'll be some.

Brian Fitzpatrick, John Katko, and Will Hurd are the only Republicans in districts that voted for Clinton. Although that's less a product of gerrymandering than the fact that Democrats did very well last year. That's also why there are a great deal of Democrats in crossover districts.

 

[Chomsky]

Brian Fitzpatrick, John Katko, and Will Hurd are the only Republicans in districts that voted for Clinton. Although that's less a product of gerrymandering than the fact that Democrats did very well last year. That's also why there are a great deal of Democrats in crossover districts.

That is the danger effect when you have a large win. The danger is the pendulum effect, as the districts drift a bit back towards stasis. Trump felt that in 2018. Obama, in 2010.

 

[mrjurrs]

might not have full Dem support on Thursdays vote





how many votes does Nancy need? I think Congress is missing 4 because of resignations so does she need 216?

House Dem Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

What's his reason? He's more concerned with being reelected than doing his Constitutional duty. I can't believe that anyone can vote against the inquiry. The inquiry is not impeachment. Any politician that doesn't see a need for investigation is lying to his constituents. The House could bring one article, failure to uphold his oath of office, and every House Republican would have to lie to themselves to vote against it.

 

[Trump]

What's his reason? He's more concerned with being reelected than doing his Constitutional duty. I can't believe that anyone can vote against the inquiry. The inquiry is not impeachment. Any politician that doesn't see a need for investigation is lying to his constituents. The House could bring one article, failure to uphold his oath of office, and every House Republican would have to lie to themselves to vote against it.

some Dems may have heard Durham has evidence that will blow open RussiaHoax.

Maybe some Dems don't believe what Pelosi is telling them about UkraineGate.....because they can read the transcript themselves

Why would any smart Dem risk putting political career on the line for corrupt motives would be my guess.

 

[PLizzy]

some Dems may have heard Durham has evidence that will blow open RussiaHoax.

:lol:

This is your brain on FOX kids.

 

[PLizzy]

Brian Fitzpatrick, John Katko, and Will Hurd are the only Republicans in districts that voted for Clinton. Although that's less a product of gerrymandering than the fact that Democrats did very well last year. That's also why there are a great deal of Democrats in crossover districts.

I doubt we'll see any Republican defectors.

Most are simply too afraid of Trump and know they'll be primaried, so if any cross the party line it will be a shock.

 

[Anagram]

I doubt we'll see any Republican defectors.

Most are simply too afraid of Trump and know they'll be primaried, so if any cross the party line it will be a shock.

I doubt we'll see any that are running for re-election. But the ones who have already announced retirement, (I called out Hurd, Shimkus, and Rooney in my first post), are who interest me.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

correct...its "Impeachment Inquiry" vote....silly word game Pelosi's playing. She even says it's not necessary ....go figure.

The Senate and The President have Pelosi chasing her tail

1. Don’t fret, Congress will absolutely impeach Trump.
2. Factually, no vote is necessary.
3. I have to admit a lack of confidence in Pelosi generally, but in this case she appears to be the one who’s making the Republicans run in circles like their heads are on fire.

 

[trouble13]

might not have full Dem support on Thursdays vote





how many votes does Nancy need? I think Congress is missing 4 because of resignations so does she need 216?

House Dem Jeff Van Drew Signals He's Not Voting for Pelosi's Impeachment Bill

Im not convinced they will call the vote. I will believe it when I see it. Its interesting they annouced it will be on Thursday. Why? If its a done deal and they have what they need whats the delay about?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk