Nancy Pelosi

Political and religious discussions go here. Tread lightly.
Post Reply
Gashouse
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4902
Joined: June 15 06, 6:11 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by Gashouse »

I'm not anti-Pelosi as much as I'm anti-current Congressional leadership. Put in new leadership for both parties in both chambers and maybe, just maybe, Congress won't suck so much.
User avatar
Radbird
There's someone in my head but it's not me
Posts: 44538
Joined: April 18 06, 5:08 pm
Location: Clowns to the left of me. Jokers to the right. Here I am.

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by Radbird »

I think it would be foolish to put someone inexperienced in the Speaker's chair right off the bat. Pelosi knows the game, how to get things set up and organized. There likely aren't that many Democratic House members who have been on the majority side before. I'm sure she recognizes the torch will need to be passed in the not-too-distant future and will take steps to prepare for that.
User avatar
mikechamp
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 7174
Joined: April 17 06, 5:05 pm
Location: Southwestern Illinois

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by mikechamp »

Radbird wrote:I think it would be foolish to put someone inexperienced in the Speaker's chair right off the bat. Pelosi knows the game, how to get things set up and organized. There likely aren't that many Democratic House members who have been on the majority side before. I'm sure she recognizes the torch will need to be passed in the not-too-distant future and will take steps to prepare for that.
I would concur with this.

Also, last night on CNN, Van Jones was lamenting that the campaigns run by Gillum, Abrams & Beto didn't succeed. He posited that the Democratic Party might not yet be ready to embrace such a progressive agenda. (Ocasio's election contradicts that to some degree.) If he is correct, then someone other than an experienced member of Congress like Pelosi might not be the right choice.

Finally, and I doubt this is true, but there might be some political math going on. Pelosi and Schumer are already reviled by Trump supporters. If a new Speaker were anointed, then that's a new prominent Democrat that gets turned into a villain. Maybe they want to limit the reviled to 2, and not put someone else/new under the glare of the spotlight.
User avatar
MAGA
All-Star
Posts: 1323
Joined: November 10 16, 10:22 am

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by MAGA »

mikechamp wrote:
Radbird wrote:I think it would be foolish to put someone inexperienced in the Speaker's chair right off the bat. Pelosi knows the game, how to get things set up and organized. There likely aren't that many Democratic House members who have been on the majority side before. I'm sure she recognizes the torch will need to be passed in the not-too-distant future and will take steps to prepare for that.
I would concur with this.

Also, last night on CNN, Van Jones was lamenting that the campaigns run by Gillum, Abrams & Beto didn't succeed. He posited that the Democratic Party might not yet be ready to embrace such a progressive agenda. (Ocasio's election contradicts that to some degree.) If he is correct, then someone other than an experienced member of Congress like Pelosi might not be the right choice.

Finally, and I doubt this is true, but there might be some political math going on. Pelosi and Schumer are already reviled by Trump supporters. If a new Speaker were anointed, then that's a new prominent Democrat that gets turned into a villain. Maybe they want to limit the reviled to 2, and not put someone else/new under the glare of the spotlight.
Ocasio is a meme. No offense to her. But I don't think the intricacies of her politics had very much to do with her winning anything. She's attractive, young, and really just hit all the right buttons at the right time.
User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 28679
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: extremely online

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by thrill »

I don't want AOC as speaker because it does her a huge disservice and the national party won't embrace her agenda, but this:
MAGA wrote: Ocasio is a meme. No offense to her. But I don't think the intricacies of her politics had very much to do with her winning anything. She's attractive, young, and really just hit all the right buttons at the right time.
is rich coming from you. You're in love with the least qualified politician in American history; a reality television personality who became President. His lack of a politically sound policy is was a feature, not a bug, for people like you.
User avatar
MAGA
All-Star
Posts: 1323
Joined: November 10 16, 10:22 am

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by MAGA »

thrill wrote:I don't want AOC as speaker because it does her a huge disservice and the national party won't embrace her agenda, but this:
MAGA wrote: Ocasio is a meme. No offense to her. But I don't think the intricacies of her politics had very much to do with her winning anything. She's attractive, young, and really just hit all the right buttons at the right time.
is rich coming from you. You're in love with the least qualified politician in American history; a reality television personality who became President. His lack of a politically sound policy is was a feature, not a bug, for people like you.
The irony wasn’t lost on me. Trump is the prototype
User avatar
pioneer98
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20599
Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
Location: Low A Minors

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by pioneer98 »

MAGA wrote:
mikechamp wrote:
Radbird wrote:I think it would be foolish to put someone inexperienced in the Speaker's chair right off the bat. Pelosi knows the game, how to get things set up and organized. There likely aren't that many Democratic House members who have been on the majority side before. I'm sure she recognizes the torch will need to be passed in the not-too-distant future and will take steps to prepare for that.
I would concur with this.

Also, last night on CNN, Van Jones was lamenting that the campaigns run by Gillum, Abrams & Beto didn't succeed. He posited that the Democratic Party might not yet be ready to embrace such a progressive agenda. (Ocasio's election contradicts that to some degree.) If he is correct, then someone other than an experienced member of Congress like Pelosi might not be the right choice.

Finally, and I doubt this is true, but there might be some political math going on. Pelosi and Schumer are already reviled by Trump supporters. If a new Speaker were anointed, then that's a new prominent Democrat that gets turned into a villain. Maybe they want to limit the reviled to 2, and not put someone else/new under the glare of the spotlight.
Ocasio is a meme. No offense to her. But I don't think the intricacies of her politics had very much to do with her winning anything. She's attractive, young, and really just hit all the right buttons at the right time.

The net effect of these progressive groups like DSA and Our Revolution is they have pulled the Democrats to the left. So even the Dems that were not calling themselves "socialists" like Ocasio are more progressive now than Democrats that ran 2, 4, 6, 8 years ago. JD Scholten ran in one of the reddest districts in the country, said he'd favor Medicare for All, and barely lost. And there were several candidates endorsed by groups like Our Revolution besides Ocasio that won, they just didn't get the same media coverage because they didn't stun some long time incumbent like she did. Go to like state levels and there are many more progressives that won. This election really replenished the Democrats' "bench", which was very shallow.

I am not surprised that Abrams and Beto lost. Those are bright red states, and they made a very good showing. Gillum is the most disappointing one since polls had him up by like 2%. Sadly the polls were wrong. And he also barely lost.

Also, gerrymandering likely prevented Democrats from winning another 10 to 20 seats in the House, according to someone on 538.
User avatar
pioneer98
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20599
Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
Location: Low A Minors

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by pioneer98 »

The reason progressives don't like Pelosi is because the first word out of her mouth after this big win was "bipartisanship". We need to stop these fascists in their tracks, not compromise with them. Democrats should block every single terrible bill Republicans want to push through. That's what Republicans would do if roles were reversed, and what they did do from 2010 to 2016.
User avatar
Popeye_Card
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
Posts: 27280
Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by Popeye_Card »

pioneer98 wrote:The reason progressives don't like Pelosi is because the first word out of her mouth after this big win was "bipartisanship". We need to stop these fascists in their tracks, not compromise with them. Democrats should block every single terrible bill Republicans want to push through. That's what Republicans would do if roles were reversed, and what they did do from 2010 to 2016.
So you would rather push a progressive agenda which has very little chance of getting through the house, and no chance of getting through the senate than to attempt bipartisan bills that could do some good in the meantime?

The "party of no" era sucked for everyone. I'd rather not go back.
User avatar
33anda3rd
Replies Authoritatively
Posts: 8312
Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Nancy Pelosi

Post by 33anda3rd »

Freed Roger wrote:
vinsanity wrote:
I think Pelosi is a good option simply because she's done the job in the past and done it quite well. Even positing that most speakers are disliked, she seems to have been the most successful of the last 20 years. I think she knows the machinations of DC and politics well enough to play the game. She may be good fodder to run against in 2020 but that could be countered with a good, charismatic candidate. Like a Julian Castro.
33anda3rd wrote: I'm ok with Pelosi as speaker. She's experienced, she's got a lot done when Speaker in the past.
There's the issue of Trump and his minions trashing her and using her as a punching bag, and that can seem like a reason to stay away from Pelosi, but that is a double-edged sword. One of the takeaways from last night and the last two years is the momentum of women in politics. Last night we saw suburban educated females turn from Trump to the Dems per exit polls. Trashing a smart, successful grandmother might motivate rural red voters or some angry lonely guy in a cubicle masturbating to a poster of Yadier Molina, but it will also further alienate smart, successful mothers/grandmothers/daughters in the suburbs and cities.
Not sure if you guys were part of this:
I recall several GRBers that had debates on direction dems should take. From DNC party chair, and definition of liberalism, and neo liberalism, and other liberal infighting that, frankly, made mine eyes gloss over considering the position dems were/are in relative to GOP.

Am kind of surprised you guys are ok with status quo Pelosi being the face of the dem success these midterms, and chief negotiator /opposition/obstructionist to Trump GOP.

I've concurred, the demonization of her by the right is nonsense. And yep, whoever has the speaker role will have a target on them. It may not be a good career path for all politicians.

And help us out here in the Red states like MO. Momentum of the democrat female votes may be enough that Pelosi won't hurt things in places like Chicago, but will do little to help flip more seats in 2020. Defeating the Anti-Pelosi Dems message isn't going to help efforts to make MO at least somewhat purple anytime soon.

Pelosi continuing as speaker plays directly into Trump's tiny hands. The ex-military guy from MA makes more and more sense.
Whoever it is should have a solid district for re-election purposes, to withstand any fallout from the speaker role.
You bring up a lot of great points. I don't care too much who the Speaker is, I'm ok with Pelosi and I'm ok with (insert name of Democrat in Congress here). The alt-right/Trump/GOP focal point of the next election won't be Pelosi and the Dems. It will be whoever is running at the top of the Democrat's ticket for President. So I think that the next six months will be a lot of Trump bad-mouthing her, but then he will turn to the Democrats in the POTUS race as well as any responsible GOPer who runs in the primary against him--hopefully that will happen and it will be a Bernie-esque Republican capable of dinging the armor of Trump, who will certainly get through the primary.

As far as Missouri, I don't think it's about Pelosi. It's about turnout. There's no such thing as a blue state outside New England, there are only red states that have big enough blue cities to turn the state blue--take away about 8 CA counties and it's red, take away Chicago and IL is red, take away Denver and Boulder and CO is red, and so on. The population of MO is 6.1MM, give or take. St. Louis City + County is roughly 1.3 million, Jackson County is 700K and Boone County is another 180K. That's over a third of the state, around Kansas City, Columbia and St. Louis. Those three areas can turn the state. Get them engaged, energized and turning out in big numbers and Missouri goes closer to purple, regardless of who the Speaker is.
Post Reply