To the editor: The most germane question I’ve heard regarding the recent impeachment trial is “If this isn’t impeachable, what is?”

But the explanation is quite clear. I was a deputy campaign manager for a city councilman in New York City during the 2001 elections. If there was a bloc of voters we knew would vote in lockstep, they received special attention. We’re talking blocs in the hundreds and low thousands. But that was more than enough to demand promises from our candidate. And they got them, mostly.

Trump’s base is somewhere around those 74 million voters. Sure it’s spread out around the country, and not every voter is a MAGA type, but it’s an enormous number in the world of voters. The passion of these voters does not seem to be directed toward any policy of note. Were Trump to have turned 180 degrees and promoted climate change action, they would have followed him blindly. With perhaps the exception of the Second Amendment, he could’ve had his way with any policy in any direction he so chose. This begs the question: Why didn’t he embrace the environment? His followers would have gone with him. And he would’ve dragged enough Democrats over that he would’ve won in a landslide — a true landslide.

These blocs of voters demand obeisance and results. Add on the fervor of an indignant, aggrieved and potentially violent MAGA voter, and it is of zero surprise that these Republican representatives and senators would toss their morals and values so quickly onto the ash heap of history in an effort to maintain or improve their political standing. Blind ambition mixed with fear is a nasty cocktail.

Timothy Eustis, Great Barrington