Are you prepared to parse nuance?
First of all, there's no compelling evidence of collusion with Russia. Yes, Russia interfered in the election. Undisputable. Yes, there are contacts between the Trump campaign and various Russians, but Presidential campaigns often have contacts, and Trump in particular is an international businessman (of sorts), so you need more than a few coincidences to claim 'conspiracy'.
HOWEVER, I think the obstruction of justice charge has more weight and deserves consideration. Trump ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to order Rod Rosenstein to remove Mueller from the investigation. That is a President trying to interfere with an investigation into himself. That's unacceptable. And if you're a Republican who disagrees I would ask if you'd be okay with President Sanders or Warren or Obama or whomever doing the same? Because you know you wouldn't be. Nor SHOULD YOU.
So if I were a congressman, and I were asked to vote to impeach or remove Trump on the basis of obstruction, I would. But understand that I have a zero tolerance policy on that stuff. I was ALSO in favor of impeaching and removing Clinton when he obstructed justice, engaged in witness tampering and lied under oath multiple times. That Democrats weren't then, but are now is just hypocrisy of the highest order...as it is for Republicans who favored Clinton's impeachment but oppose impeaching Trump.
HOWEVER, if I were a juror being asked to convict Trump of obstruction of justice, I would NOT. The reason is that obstruction is an INTENT based crime. I don't believe Trump acted for the purpose of obstructing. I believe he acted because he's a 6-year old child who cannot tolerate things not going his way. He wanted Mueller stopped because it was negative and critical of him.
So why then, you might ask, do I favor impeaching him for a crime I would not convict him of? The answer is that impeachment and removal from office are fundamentally POLITICAL acts, not LEGAL. We often talk about impeachment and removal from office as if they were like trials. The 'high crimes and misdemeanors' line in the constitution leads us to think that way, as has the way impeachment is usually conducted. But it's NOT a trial. It's a political judgement, which is why it's in the hands of the political branch of the legislature, not the SCOTUS.
And at the end of the day, politically, I find a President trying to meddle in an investigation of himself to be unacceptable...even if he's just an idiot who didn't understand his actions.
Like I said, nuance parsing.