Washington (CNN)The Ukraine revelations triggered a dramatic sea change on impeachment, as scores of Democrats stampeded to publicly declare their support for an impeachment inquiry.

All, that is, but nine.

So who are these nine holdouts? And more tellingly, where do they hail from and what do their districts tell us about why they might be holding their fire?

    Geographically, they are spread out across the country, each from a different state.

    But a CNN analysis of US Census data and election results found several revealing traits shared among those Democrats still undecided.

    Among them:

    Trump country

    • Eight out of nine holdouts come from districts Donald Trump won in 2016, and a majority are from districts Mitt Romney also carried in 2012.
    • Not only are those eight from Trump-won districts, but they’re all among the top 15 largest margins of Trump victory of any seat currently held by a Democrat.

    (CNN continues to count Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas as a holdout because she’s offered only conditional support for impeachment; her Dallas-area district is an outlier here, it’s one of the safest Democratic seats in the country and she didn’t even draw a Republican opponent in 2018.)

    Slim margins

    • Five out of nine won in last November’s midterms by fewer than two points.
    • Six out of nine are from districts that flipped from Republican to Democratic control in the midterms.

    Demographics

    • Eight out of nine holdouts come from districts with fewer four-year college graduates than the national average.
    • Seven out of nine come from districts with a lower economic output, as measured by GDP, than the national average.
    • Six out of nine come from districts with proportionally whiter populations than the national average.

    In their own words

    Below, as compiled by CNN’s Chris Cillizza, are the stated reasons for resisting impeachment for each of the Democrats hailing from Trump-won districts.

    * Rep. Jared Golden (Maine): According to the Bangor Daily News, Golden said this at a recent constituent meeting: “We didn’t get one question about impeachment, about Mueller, about ‘the squad’ (four minority women members of the House of Representatives), about socialism versus Donald Trump — none of this BS that I think drives the silent majority of Americans absolutely insane.” He later said in a statement: “I will have more to say in the coming days as I continue to carefully weigh the information we received this week and consider what I believe to be the best next steps for the House.”

    * Rep. Collin Peterson (Minnesota): In a statement, Peterson said: “If anyone thinks a partisan impeachment process would constrain President Trump, they are fooling themselves. Without significant bipartisan support, impeachment proceedings will be a lengthy and divisive action with no resolution.”

    * Rep. Jeff Van Drew (New Jersey): Here’s what Van Drew told The Washington Post: “I wish we waited a little longer. I wish we looked at it a little more — continuing the investigation, continuing the hearings that we’ve had. I just didn’t want to go down the impeachment route.”

    * Rep. Xochitl Torres Small (New Mexico): In a statement, she said this: “Through the coming weeks and months, I will act to support and defend our Constitution by insisting on a transparent process that fully informs the American people and restores trust and faith in our system. This is a threat to our national security, and it must be taken seriously.”

    * Rep. Anthony Brindisi (New York): “I’m not rushing to judgment on anything. I’m not responding to pressure from social media, I have a job to do, that’s to uphold the constitution, and I intend to do that,” Brindisi told CNYCentral.

    * Rep. Kendra Horn (Oklahoma): From Horn’s office: “She believes Congress and the American people deserve to know all of the facts before jumping to conclusions. The whistleblower law calls for a process to determine what happened and when. The Congresswoman believes this process should be conducted in a detailed, methodical, and responsible manner before any Congressional inquiry is initiated.”

      * Rep. Joe Cunningham (South Carolina): “We need to be careful not to get ahead of the evidence and be as deliberate and judicious as possible during this process, while following the facts where they lead,” Cunningham told the Charleston Post and Courier.

      * Rep. Ron Kind (Wisconsin): Kind said the whistleblower allegations are “very concerning” but didn’t mention impeachment in his statement. Back in May, at an event in Wisconsin, Kind explained his thinking this way: “Whether it elevates to the level where you have bipartisan support to pursue impeachment proceedings, that question really needs to be directed toward my Republican colleagues, who all seem to be circling the wagons and protecting this president from any type of oversight or any type of scrutiny.”

      Source: http://edition.cnn.com/

       

      Recommended For You



      Like it? Share with your friends!

      0 Comments

      Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

      This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.