No offense meant, Goo, but I really wish you would stop mischaracterizing the arguments of those like me who disagree with you. No one has said "do nothing and hope". As I have stated previously, I fully support further hearings and investigations into Trump, his conduct before and after becoming president. Lay it all out for the public - you don't need impeachment to do that. Provide all the evidence and arguments for the fact that Trump is corrupt and unfit to be president. But actual process of impeachment is all consuming - it will suck the air out of debate about anything else and will distract from what the Democratic campaign agenda really needs to be.
This article captures some of my thoughts on the issue:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... on/591652/
This is my fear:Frank echoed that thought. “What Pelosi starts with,” he said, “is, We’re not getting rid of Donald Trump, so what is the effect of a very partisan impeachment? The outcome would be as partisan as it was in the Clinton case, and I think that motivates Nancy … I think Pelosi realizes there are better issues that can dominate” Democrats’ offensive against Trump, such as the economy and health care. She also likely realizes, Frank told me, “that impeachment will be a problem for Democratic candidates—not everywhere, but in districts that are in the middle.”
1) Impeachment will distract from other better policy oriented arguments that the Democrats can make
2) Impeachment will be seen as partisan and will come to characterize the Democrats in the next election
3) Impeachment will encourage Trump supporters, who already have a big chip on their shoulder, to come out and vote for him - they love feeling persecuted, remember Hillary's "deplorables' remark?
4) Trump won't be convicted, he'll claim vindication, and significant numbers of the low information public will largely accept it
Disagree with the above - fine. Just don't attribute false arguments to those that disagree with you.