The New York Times astutely observes that the rules for the impeachment trial could seriously hurt the four presidential candidates who are subject to them.
"*The rules for senators at the trial are firm: six days a week in the Senate chamber, no cellphones, no talking.
It’s hard to overstate how big a problem this is for the candidates serving as jurors.*"
While Senators Warren, Sanders, Klobuchar, and Bennet are forced to sit still on the hill, Mr. Biden and Mr. Buttigieg will be out on the trail. In Iowa.
Smart move on McConnell’s part, says I. Dirty move, too (whatever the actual justification). What does the Straight Dope think will come of this?
I don’t feel any of these four candidates are going to have a difficult time putting a positive spin on this. Their narrative will be that while some candidates were out making speeches, they were hard at work trying to remove Trump from office.
Rallies will be held wherever candidate senators can expose themselves on oversize video screens. Their voices will strongly resound from speaker systems, same as if they were there in person. Staffers will swarm about. I dunno if souvenirs will be distributed - how can they compete if Bloomberg and Steyer quietly pass out drinks at their events?
Meanwhile this POTUS will attend his own rallies. He won’t even need to give supporters free fentanyl - they’re already hooked on him. Expect him to headline Really Big Shows to distract attention from the trial he won’t attend. And then a sudden crisis erupts. Danger! Danger! Presidential Action Time!
Senators, the vulnerable GOPs and candidate Dems alike, will forcibly remain in session, trying to appear to be paying attention. All will be thinking of something else, mostly their own political survival. That’s their only standard.
Looks like big boon for Biden. He can use this, and the recent Warren-Bernie spat, to put all the more distance between him and his closest two rivals.
I don’t buy the argument that campaigning makes any difference. Two weeks out of the frenzy isn’t going to hurt anyone.
“Gee, I kind of like Senator Warren, but she hasn’t been in Iowa for two weeks, perhaps I shall shift to Biden.” I don’t see that happening.
Except being there in person creates headlines, video clips and news. Those are all critically important, especially in a close race.
For example: I’m torn between three candidates. However, when I read a positive news story or watch a campaign event with one of them, I’ll admit I start thinking “Yep, that’s the one. They’ve probably got my vote…” But then I’ll read or see something from one of the other two candidates I like, and I go “OK, that’s the one I’m gonna likely vote for.” The less I read or hear about one of those three candidates, the less inspired I feel to vote for them.
This could be a real problem in close races, especially for Warren, but even Sanders. But I suspect it could really, really help Biden, Pete and Bloomberg.
Come on. Of course campaigning makes a difference. But they’ll still be able to do some, use surrogates and pump advertising. There’s also the opportunity for some serious grandstanding during the trial, lol.
I’m not sure why people have this impression. AIUI, if there’s any grandstanding it’ll have to come from the House managers or from the defense lawyers, but it can’t come from a Senator.
The Senators are jurors; they sit and listen. I don’t believe they can ask questions, make statements or call objections, and if they’re called to vote on things like allowed evidence or witnesses, these will be yes or no votes without floor debate. And at the end, each Senator gets one of two choices as a statement: “Guilty” or “Not Guilty”.
