If we leave out Eisenhower, every single president in my lifetime who was elected to a second term has gotten into serious trouble in their second term. Nixon was impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power and resigned as soon as it became apparent that he did not have the votes in the Senate even from his own party to escape conviction. Reagan faced a significant scandal with Iran-Contra but was probably saved from any serious calls for impeachment by his approaching Alzheimer's. Clinton was impeached over a real but petty scandal, and tried unsuccessfully in the Senate. And George W. Bush ran into major problems with Hurricane Katrina and the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression, crises that made him extremely unpopular but were mostly not judged to be impeachable offenses.
With a pattern like that, going back more than 40 years, it's no wonder that the political opposition to President Obama evidently thinks it must be about time for the current administration to stumble and fall. Only one problem. They are lacking a critical element, something the chairman of the Republican Party had to remind his constituents was missing. Reince Preibus said yesterday that: "You don't call for impeachment until you have evidence." What a concept. Evidence.
The chairman of the Republican Party says they don't have any evidence yet. In other words, if you ask the chairman of the Republican Party about the case for impeaching the president, his answer is "we don't have a case."
Does this mean President Obama will be the first president in history that the opposition tries to hound out of office without any evidence that he has done anything wrong? Or will cooler heads in the Republican Party finally prevail and end all this loose talk?