I can't think of a single reason why Nancy Pelosi shouldn't be the Speaker of the House next year...

[MrScorpio]

And there are plenty of reasons why she should.

[hlthe2b]

1. I agree... Damned tired of the misogyny and ageism directed toward her.

[BeyondGeography]

13. Those are mute buttons designed to shut down a legitimate conversation

51 Democratic candidates have refused to go on the record as supporting her return to the speakership. A number actively oppose her. Are they all guilty of misogyny and ageism?

[LakeArenal]

24. Thank you. She's earned her speakership

But doesn’t exempt her from criticism that isn’t always unfair or mysoginist.

It’s up to a vote that none of us but the Senate have. If they vote her out, the next will be just as trusted and supported.

[hlthe2b]

33. No one, least of all me, suggests we not criticize. But that is not what ALL of it is about.

One need only look at HOW they criticize her (in direct contrast to male leadership of similar age and time in office). It is pretty transparent among some.

[LiberalFighter]

48. Thankfully, Senators don't get to make that decision.

[LakeArenal]

69. Oops my bad. But the point remains the same.

[Control-Z]

135. Don't worry about it.

I read it and didn't even notice. Lol

[LakeArenal]

137. Thanks. Someone always ready though.

[Control-Z]

138. True that! Lol. eom

[yellowdogintexas]

75. House of Representative, not Senate nt

[LakeArenal]

81. Yes as I said my bad. But the point is the same

[Honeycombe8]

133. I see your point, but "earning" a job doesn't mean you should get it.

After all, other people have "earned" it, too. You get a job because you're excellent at it.

Just sayin'. I wish all it took was earning a job.

[hlthe2b]

30. Only 9 current members. Even given latitude for pragmatic positioning in heavy red districts,

YES, a lot of them are showing that they are or at least that they think their voters are. Not muting but calling a spade a spade. Take some time and look at how some of those you want to defend have criticized her. Ugly ugly ugly ageism, not based on policy differences. As much as I like some of those candidates, this attempt to appeal to that stereotype is just wrong.

[BeyondGeography]

39. If you were a 30- or 40-something D congressperson

you might think our seniority rules are sadly in need of updating. And then if you didn’t see Pelosi agree to what you consider to be long overdue reforms after the midterms you too could be accused of misogyny and/or ageism.

[hlthe2b]

40. Bullshit We are foolish if we don't realize how badly RW wants less experienced Dem leadership

with little clout or time spent learning how to fight back against their own nasty tactics.

We need to be smart and realize this ageism crap is not about ensuring opportunities for our more junior and upcoming leadership. It is all about making sure we are hamstrung!

[erronis]

49. +1. Thank you.

[yellowdogintexas]

76. +2 TY

[LiberalFighter]

51. That is exactly what it is about. Her knowledge and experience.

Term limits would defeat that.

[BeyondGeography]

53. Gerontocracy is bullshit

And, if you care to look, that’s what the Democrats have in the House. You don’t build durable majorities with octogenarian leadership. If that’s an ageist statement, consider me guilty.

I’m also guilty of being tired of living under Republican rule, and when we stifle the growth of talented Democrats, the likelihood of that does not decrease with time.

Or, as Linda Sanchez puts it:

"I do think we have this real breadth and depth of talent within our caucus, and I do think it's time to pass a torch to a new generation of leaders," said Linda Sanchez, the vice chair of the House Democratic caucus. "I think we have too many great members here that don't always get the opportunities they should. I would like to see that change."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/10/10/politics/democrats-age-problem/index.html

[hlthe2b]

55. what an ugly ugly ugly response.

and foolhardy.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

57. Exactly. What people here don't get is that

Republicans have been electing younger people to all offices for a couple of decades now. Their leadership is relatively young. Young Democrats look at their leadership and all they see are old people.

I seem to recall some young Democrat, more than fifty years ago, saying something about the torch being passed to a new generation . . . . Unfortunately, the generation right behind him is still holding on to the reins of power with all their might. It really is time to have new, younger people moving up the ladder.

If that's ageism, then too bad. I'm 70 myself, and I want younger politicians taking over.

[LiberalLovinLug]

115. +1000

[appalachiablue]

157. +3

K & R

[EffieBlack]

32. They're not necessarily guilty of misogyny and ageism. But they are guilty of enabling it by doing

exactly what ageist and misogynists want them to do.

[lark]

56. Im sure there is ageism and misogyny involved, although I wouldn't say it was for all of them.

I don't know them, but unless they are also dead set against Schumer for the exact same reasons, too old, been there too much, then yes it is misogyny. If the reason is "I think x would make a better speaker because of outstanding fund raising ability (to give a relevant example) that's different. Repugs demonize her because they fear her, she's a fierce fund raiser.

[Hekate]

63. Some are. Others are guilty of cowardice in the face of the RW. Others are guilty of not having ...

...a simple prepared answer to this gotcha question, such as: "Ha ha, first we have to actually take back the House. Then everybody will vote on it."

[TheFarseer]

139. Is it impossible to have legitimate criticism

of Any woman? Do you like Sarah Palin?

[hlthe2b]

141. No where have I EVER said legitimate criticism is unwarranted. The remainder of your accusation

is ridiculous at best.

[TheFarseer]

142. Good. Then we agree. Nt

[Turbineguy]

2. The republican hate machine

will be in full flow.

[SharonAnn]

44. The Republican HATE and MISOGNY machine.

[TheBlackAdder]

45. Yep. Give those GOP traitors an easy target. No matter who it is, they will manufacture rage.

[Vinca]

3. I guess the thing that bugs me is that Democrats are allowing Republicans to frame the issue.

They should have zero input on who we do or do not have as Speaker. Candidates should not answer the question.

[dalton99a]

5. +1. They should be told to fuck off

November 6th is not about Nancy Pelosi

[yellowdogintexas]

78. +2 TY

[NCTraveler]

18. I think the direction one wants the party to go...

Is very important on the campaign trail. Our candidates know they are going to be asked and these responses are prepared in a way that is tailored to their constituency. We have to get away from the national narrative. It’s what we have done for far too long.

[voteearlyvoteoften]

4. I like her

And if they hate her so much the better. She can rally our side to legislative victory.

[yellowdogintexas]

86. #1 reason: she knows how to get her caucus in line for the big votes

She was whip which is the whip's job. My old friend Jim Wright told me she would be awesome. He maintained that if we had term limits no one would ever garner the experience and seniority and reputation to know how to do their job, be effective committee members. He said it takes at least 2 terms to get comfortable and good at the job.

Do we really want a Nincompoop like Paul Ryan, even a liberal one leading our troops? He is not good at rounding his troops; if he were the Tea Party would not be splitting off or vetoing in committee because they don't like some small thing because it isn't radical enough.
Put the younger two or three term ones in as whip and assistant whip and let them learn to be effective at those jobs; members who have shown that they have the talent and skill set to be effective whips. The house turns over every 2 years. Nancy could do a bang up job setting the field up for a younger Majority Leader in one term, then do one more with that team and then go back to being a regular representative knowing she has mentored the best possible team


Like all things children, these sorts of things work from the bottom up.

This is why the right has smeared her for so long, and sadly the persons who are new to politics do not necessarily understand it.

[Control-Z]

140. Yes. Exactly!!

"...sadly the persons who are new to politics do not necessarily understand it."

I wish I could rec this.

[Fullduplexxx]

6. I dont understand the hero worshipping going on with nancy pelosi

[Recursion]

8. She led the most effective Democratic majority since FDR's days as Speaker

And has run the most disciplined minority party I've ever seen in the House. She's damn good at her job.

[Twisty]

129. Sorry, but it's not disciplined...

It looks more like complicit. They should be out there every day talking.

This is going to be all about turnout, and Trump’s core are going to show up to vote.

I see no message from the party... Better than Trump isn’t enough.

[Recursion]

130. Your concern is noted

[babylonsister]

14. How 'bout this? "Nancy Pelosi: The Most Effective Speaker of the House in History"

https://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/425315/nancy_pelosi%3A_the_most_effective_speaker_of_the_house_in_history

[drmeow]

147. I was going to post this!

This is why the Republicans don't want her to be Speaker!

I'm all for young blood but being Speaker takes experience. She should be grooming someone to take her place but I'm all for letting her start things going if we take the House.

[Wounded Bear]

15. Repubs worship heroes, Dems elect people who get shit done.

Ms Pelosi is definitely the latter.

[pazzyanne]

28. Do a little research on what she has accomplished as leader of the house

and on her ability to bring in donations to the DNC that help fund our campaigns.

[Fullduplexxx]

80. Getting house work done in the majority is easy especially when your party is all on the same page

As a minority leader there is little you can do except ask the majority party .
As for fundraising i think that is more a function of how bad the con party has become . The worse they get the more money the party receives in donations so long as the platform stays relatively the same .If a hard left with a hard line developed in the dem party nancy would be just as effective as little paulie in getting things passed and money raised.

[erronis]

52. That's ok. You worship your heroes, we'll let the Dem. House decide who they want.

[Fullduplexxx]

66. You say that as if my input into the matter would have any relevance

[Older Than I Look]

74. That's exactly what the Republicans want you to believe.

If you let them define what you can and cannot do, you won't have any relevance.

[Fullduplexxx]

83. Cons or not i have no input on who gets to be speaker except to vote

For someone who wants to replace her and even then there's no guaranty

[yellowdogintexas]

88. read my post above. nt

[spicysista]

7. She's awesome at her job.

Like you, I can't think of one reason why she shouldn't be our next speaker of the house. Here are some reasons why she should:

from https://www.democraticleader.gov/110th/

SPEAKER PELOSI AND HOUSE DEMOCRATS PASSED OVER 230 KEY MEASURES – MORE THAN 70% WITH SIGNIFICANT BIPARTISAN SUPPORT

The House had a quick, successful start (“Six for ’06” Agenda) and continued to build on that record of accomplishment throughout the Congress. Listed are selected highlights of the legislation signed into law:

INNOVATION AND JOBS

COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY LEGISLATION, which raised vehicle fuel efficiency standards (35 mpg by the year 2020) for the first time in 32 years, and making an historic commitment to American homegrown biofuels.

TAX INCENTIVES FOR CLEAN RENEWABLE ENERGY that helped create or save over 500,000 jobs.

COMPETES ACT promoted high‐tech jobs, expanded math and science education, and boosted research and innovation.

ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND STIMULUS PACKAGEwith Recovery Rebates for 130 million American middle class families to provide some help during difficult economic period.

EDUCATION

LARGEST EXPANSION OF COLLEGE AID IN SIX DECADES, cutting loan rates in half and increasing Pell Grants.

NEW GI BILLto provide free college education to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

HEAD START REAUTHORIZATION, first reform and expansion in 10 years.

FAIRNESS

MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE,first in 10 years, a $4,400 raise for 13 million Americans.

ECONOMIC RESCUSE LEGISLATION to protect Main Street from the crisis on Wall Street.

ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX REFORM protected 25 million middle‐class families from paying the AMT.

MENTAL HEALTH PARITY to end coverage discrimination against patients seeking treatment for mental illnesses.

LANDMARK LOBBY AND ETHICS REFORM, including creating of an outside, independent ethics panel.

NATIONAL SECURITY

ENACTED 9/11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS to strengthen homeland security.

LARGEST INVESTMENT IN VETERANS’ HEATH CAREin the 77‐year history of the VA.

HOUSE ACTIONS BLOCKED BY THE PRESIDENT

MANY MAJOR INITIATIVES PASSED BY THE HOUSE WERE BLOCKED BY PRESIDENT BUSH’S VETOES (11), VETO THREATS (64), OR AN HISTORIC LEVEL OF FILIBUSTERS BY SENATE REPUBLICANS

Among the bills passed by the House that were blocked by the President’s veto or obstruction by Republicans in the Senate were:
■Responsible redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq
■Children’s health insurance for 10 million children
■Fall Economic Recovery and Stimulus Effort to create jobs, build essential infrastructure, help states meet soaring health care costs, expand emergency food programs, and extend
■Unemployment Insurance benefits
■Expansion of life‐saving Stem Cell Research
■Giving Medicare the authority to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices, saving seniors hundreds of dollars a year
■Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to ensure women are paid equal pay for equal work
■Curbing excessive oil speculation
■Employee Free Choice Act to restore workers’ rights by removing obstacles that prevent workers from choosing whether or not they want to form or join a union

[Zoonart]

11. Exactly...

The right and the bots aided by the MSM are using policy divisions between Dems to destroy our leadership.

As Dems, we have got to stop allowing ourselves to be baited like this.

[JaneQPublic]

9. Just saw her on AM Joy

I agree there is no legitimate reason to replace her.

The fact that GOPers hate her is not one.

Among Dems, she is still popular despite a small drop. And among all respondents, she is more popular than McConnell and Congress as a whole.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235985/top-congressional-leaders-viewed-negatively-balance.aspx

We wouldn't have ACA and several other legislative achievements without her.

[marble falls]

10. Carve it bigly in stone - "The fact that GOPers hate her is not one. "

[JCMach1]

124. She was pretty bad this morning in the interview

Not hating, just the 411.

[safeinOhio]

12. The party of House Speakers, former wrestling coaches

do not think she is fit for the office, along with a few Dems.

You are correct Mr

[Sneederbunk]

16. Those Democrats in the House as of January 1 should decide.

[Takket]

17. This

Let’s just get the ball in the end zone before we worry about spiking it.

[leftofcool]

46. If female surburban women won't vote Democratic because of Pelosi

Then they aren't Democrats. They are Trump supporters.

[Persondem]

20. Please. Don't. Count. Chickens. nt

[KPN]

110. THIS.

#1 — win the House!

[axm]

21. We need fresh leadership

Nothing against Pelosi but it's time for new leadership for our team.

[Hekate]

84. Just out of curiosity, can you name one thing in her entire life that Nancy Pelosi has done that...

...threatens the very existence of POC? And are you also interested in getting rid of Maxine Waters so you can have some new blood? Who else would you like to see gone?

[EffieBlack]

37. "Fresh leadership"- what does that mean? And who exactly do you think is the "fresh leadership"

who should replace Nancy Pelosi? Please name names. And what exact skills and experience do you think those individuals bring that will enable them to do a better job as Speaker of the House or Minority Leader than Pelosi. Again, please be specific - not just "they have more energy" or "they'll bring new ideas"...

[RainCaster]

119. "fresh leadership" means youngsters who don't know about all the nasty things that the GOP has done

Pay no attention to that Russian behind the curtain.

[Snake Plissken]

62. Some people just aren't interested in winning elections

[kimbutgar]

22. We should just get the house back and then decide

That said I think we need Rep Pelosi as speaker because we need a knoweable tough experienced person to push back on the orange maggot.


The standard answer for any Dem when asked about Pelosi should be “we need to focus on winning back the House first.”

[MurrayDelph]

23. I can only think of one good reason

for her to not KEEP the job.

[IronLionZion]

25. I just want Dems to win

so if a competitive speaker election helps get more Dem voters to turn out this year, then that's a good thing. Pelosi will likely win that challenge anyway because of her experience and support.

By the same principle, the fact that McConnell is not being challenged could help us get more votes from people who want a change in the Senate leadership.

[tiredtoo]

26. While i have no argument with the premise of this post.

I do have a concern with making Nancy Pelosi a topic of discussion among Democrats. She has been put in the position of being a igniter of fear and anger amongst republicans. Much like Hillary was, how many people do you know that voted for trump because they did not like Hillary?
We have enough work to do just overcoming republicans and their moneyed supporters. Let us not give them more ammo.

[EffieBlack]

29. +1000

Democrats need to stop falling into the GOP trap. They say they don't like one of us and that if only we got rid of them, they'll be nicer to us and be more likely to vote Democratic. So we fall over ourselves to eat our own and say, "How you like us now?"

And they respond, "We STILL hate you and aren't going to vote for you. AND we're going to laugh at you because you keep giving us exactly what we want."

[dalton99a]

35. +1. Never let your enemy frame your narrative

[EffieBlack]

38. We're not just letting them frame our narrative-we're letting them dictate our leaders and strategy

It makes no sense whatsoever.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[Hekate]

89. Completely agree

[Ponietz]

90. +1

We can unite NOW or perish.
The Rule of Law is teetering on the edge, and this place could look like Venezuela in a decade.

[JonLP24]

31. Taking impeachment off the table

It's not my call though.

[hlthe2b]

34. She was roundly criticized for that. By me as well.

[Hekate]

91. Sounded to me like she counted the votes before she said that. There weren't enough votes. Got it?

[JonLP24]

105. Its not my call whoever gets chosen speaker will not get decided by me

We need people willing to impeach trump when Mueller hands a report when to Rosenstein and if he decides to give it to Congress. It isn't up to me though.

[aikoaiko]

41. I'm OK with Pelosi being speaker again, but I'm OK with challengers, too, because...

that is what democracy looks like.

[workinclasszero]

42. I'd love it because the GOP would be wetting their pants over it

They hate Pelosi because she was the most effective speaker ever!

We should always welcome the hatred of the GOP just like FDR did. Then you know we are standing for the people!

[Renew Deal]

43. She is a $100 Millionaire and it sends the wrong message

[leftofcool]

47. To who? Trump voters. People who vote for Gorillas?

[workinclasszero]

50. FDR was rich too

So were the Kennedy brothers.

Look at her record as the most effective speaker of the House and tell me who could take her place and be as effective?

Nancy Pelosi: ‘They Come After Me Because I’m Effective’

Pelosi is one of the most powerful women in global politics. She gets credit for securing passage of much of the legislation in the Obama legacy, including the Recovery Act, Wall Street reform and especially the Affordable Care Act.

“Nancy Pelosi has been one of the most transformational figures in the modern Democratic Party,” says Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez. Pelosi also spearheaded the takeover of the House a dozen years ago in 2006 – an achievement that has become fodder for her critics.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/nancy-pelosi-interview-696750/

[Renew Deal]

72. Anyone can be "the most effective" when they have a large majority and 60 votes in the Senate

[workinclasszero]

82. Well speaker is an elected position right?

So any house dem rep can run for it and let the chips fall where they may.

I hope it's Nancy because she has proven to be effective in the past.

[Hekate]

58. Awww, that is so cute

[yardwork]

60. How much is Putin worth?

[FakeNoose]

68. Nobody knows for sure, but he probably has north of $40 billion

Problem is, a lot of his dough is getting tied up by countries that have Magnitsky sanctions. We started it (when Obama was still POTUS) and now there are several western European allies that have done the same. What's an oligarch to do?

Why steal all those billions from the Russian people when you can't even get your hands on the stolen laundered money?

[yardwork]

92. That's my understanding as well. We need strong Democratic leadership to keep those sanctions.

[LiberalLovinLug]

118. He is purported to be the richest man in the world

Bezos is at $130 billion

Gates @ $92 billion

But Putin is closer to $200 billion according to Fortune magazine. All that stealing from his political foes and kickbacks in his rise to power. Its sad how Russian people, like the deplorables here, support someone that is literally stealing from them. All the money towards education, healthcare, jobs that could go to his own people. Yet he is still a popular figure there. May that be a warning to America. Trump and Trumpism is being normalized. Putin is what happens if Trumpism is allowed to continue past 2020. The Free Press gone, purging of intelligence services and replacement with true-believers, using those new powers to silence opposition both in Washington and on the streets.

http://fortune.com/2017/07/29/vladimir-putin-russia-jeff-bezos-bill-gates-worlds-richest-man/

[Renew Deal]

77. Red herring

[yardwork]

94. Far from it. Putin is the greatest threat to the U.S.

That's no exaggeration. Our democratic republic is hanging by a thread. We're not perfect, but we're a world better than a dictatorship would be. Nancy Pelosi is an experienced, strong leader. We need them now. This is no time for purity politics.

[Hekate]

97. Not really

[greymattermom]

54. Just say that the speaker is elected.

And we don't want to interfere with an election. Some will vote against her, maybe because of their district. No biggie. She will probably win anyway.

[Hekate]

59. Nancy P and Maxine W are great leaders

No way should we be going along with the cockamamie idea of tossing either of them overboard.

[workinclasszero]

64. Totally agree!

The GOP/fox news/hate radio crucify them daily which tells us that they are real democratic leaders, working for the PEOPLE!

[MadDAsHell]

61. Agreed! Without the significant majorities she's helped us build in the House and Senate, imagine...

...where we’d be.

[Catch2.2]

65. Yes, the reasons are...

Republicans control:
The Presidency
The Senate
The House
The majority of state Governors

...thats not a good record if you're head of the Democrat Party. She is good at a lot of things (Fundraising etc.) I just don't think she should be the face of the Democrat Party.

[Demit]

87. Pelosi is a member of the DemocratIC party.

As we members of the DemocratIC party here on DU know.

[yardwork]

96. We Democrats refer to our party as the DEMOCRATIC Party.

[barbtries]

67. Agreed.

She has a proven track record. I wish she was younger, but I'm behind her being Speaker.

[Older Than I Look]

70. I guess you're not taking the RW spin into account, huh?

[Hekate]

102. Why ever would we do that? They hate her because she is effective.You want them to pick our leaders?

Stop letting them frame every discussion.

[Older Than I Look]

117. Exactly.

But whenever I see nominal Democrats express a general dislike of Democratic leaders - especially women leaders - they tend to rattle of the same tired old RW talking points you hear on Fox News.

[calimary]

71. You won't get ANY argument outta me, MrScorpio!

I think she's great. Actually - I think she's EFFECTIVE.

She knows how to run her troops. She knows how to get bills passed. She never brought a bill to the floor for a House vote without knowing that it would pass. John Boehner made that mistake again and again and again, and when the bills failed he looked like an idiot and an incompetent and a joke and a chump.

You cannot call Nancy Pelosi any one of those things. That's what John Boehner was, as Speaker. That's not who she was - or is.

My only gripe with Nancy Pelosi was during bush/cheney, when she declared that "impeachment is off the table." BIG MISTAKE. She should NEVER have said that. She should NEVER have DONE that. There were WAR CRIMINALS in that White House. Torture is a certified WAR CRIME. And she took impeachment off the table. That's my ONLY hesitation. I hope to all that's holy that she doesn't make that same mistake again.

[Roy Rolling]

73. Stop Taking the Bait

Democrats are three months away from an election and the debate is about Nancy Pelosi?

Russian trolls give us a topic so we dutifully tear each other up? Every mention of Pelosi is a distraction. Democrats have much work to do before even having this conversation, it's a conversation first among Russian trolls looking to divide Democrats.

Don't take the bait!

[gopiscrap]

79. me too

[Trust Buster]

85. Pelosi has been the Democratic leader in the House for 15 years. (2003 - current).

She has had her opportunity. No healthy organization makes a leader a leader for life.

[Gothmog]

93. I agree with your analysis

[AdamGG]

95. I agree that she is effective at her job and a quality person, but time for a new look

I would support a PR facelift that selected a different chairperson for a "new look" Democratic Party. She's been the Democratic party leader in Congress for 15 years and of that time, they've only held the majority for 4 years.

If she was willing to do it, I would support making her whip (again) and allowing someone else to be the public facing figurehead in the Speaker position. 15 years is a pretty long run as party leader. Donald Trump gained ground by running against a demonized perception of what Democrats are. Nancy's polling is pretty grim outside of Democratic loyalists. She doesn't deserve that, but I think a new face is the smart move.

The primary goal is to win as many seats as possible down ticket in state legislatures and governorships in 2018/2020 so we can undo the gerrymandering after the 2020 census. I think Nancy has been demonized to a degree over the years that she will not help generate the largest possible wave. 15 years is a long time for anyone to hold such a high profile PR kind of job. She's probably already one of the longer serving party leaders. She's done a great job, but it's time for a new face.

[MineralMan]

98. There is no reason for us to even be debating this.

IF we win and gain a majority in the House, the Speaker will be elected by the Democratic House members. We will have no voice in the matter. Right now, the whole thing is being used to divide Democrats prior to the election. We especially don't need that at this time.

I see this all as a divisive argument that will benefit us not one single bit. After the election, if we do manage to win back a majority of seats, who becomes speaker is going to depend on those who were elected, either as returning members or new ones.

Right now, it's not even an issue, since we don't know whether Democrats will elect a majority.

I reject this discussion. It has no purpose but to divide Democrats.

[karin_sj]

99. Agree! We need experienced people as well as new blood

This Californian is proud of and supports Nancy to continue to hold the position of Speaker of the House. Now is not the time for divisiveness and major changes.

[CloudWatcher]

100. Impeachment is off the table

Last edited Sun Aug 12, 2018, 02:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Well I for one sure don't have her on a pedestal, I still can't get over these:

Bush:

Pelosi: Bush Impeachment `Off the Table’

Trump:

'I’m not going after it': Nancy Pelosi says impeaching Trump is 'off the table' if Democrats retake the House in November

Now maybe she just playing 3D-chess ... being sure we took the White House after the Bush/Cheney years, and maybe she doesn't want to give energy to the GOP base with talk of impeachment before the election, but OMG .

But even given how much I don't like her, any talk about a new speaker before we take the house back is just stupid.

[FakeNoose]

107. The Dems are playing 3D chess, while the Repugs play checkers

Have a little faith, my friend! Nancy is 3 steps ahead of them.

[CloudWatcher]

109. The GOP has a lock on the federal government

White House, both Houses of Congress, way too much of the Supreme Court, way too many federal judges. We've been playing 3D chess in a mugging. The GOP checker game is misdirection while they break all the rules.

[randr]

101. The anti Nancy bullshit is coming from the Repugs

They want us to think they might vote for a Democratic candidate that would vote against Nancy.
Fuck em; we don't need their votes, we outnumber them as always.
All we need to do is show up to vote.

[mwooldri]

104. Only one reason comes to mind...

If Nancy Pelosi doesn't want the job (if available and offered to her). I'm sure I could think of others but my mind is in a fog right now and I can only state the most obvious reason why XXX shouldn't be YYY...

[Hekate]

106. Amazing that we have a whole slew of newbies in this thread, all of whom dislike Nancy Pelosi...

Only one actually calls us the Democrat party though.

Just an observation.

[still_one]

111. What amazes me is that they seem to believe this is an issue we need to bring up before the midterms

The time to do something like this is AFTER the midterms. We should be going after the republicans and trump, and stay on that message until AFTER the election.

I have to wonder about the motivations and logic of those that believe creating divisive issues among Democrats before a critical midterm election, why they think it is a "good thing", instead of focusing on going after republicans and the trump administration.

[AdamGG]

112. It's a minority position in here, but it's not an illegitimate position

One of the people a few posts up has over 6,000 posts and pointed out that 15 years as party leader has been a long term.

I understand the loyalty to someone who has been unwavering in their leadership and I didn't see anyone in this thread saying that they "dislike" Nancy Pelosi. In addition to the job responsibilities, it's a figurehead position and some rebranding couldn't hurt at this point.

It's not fair that the right has beaten up on Nancy Pelosi, but she doesn't poll well among independents. Wanting a fresh face for the 2020 elections isn't a Republican sellout position, for me, it stems from a desire to get the best down ballot results for the Democratic candidates.

Controlling the redistricting as much as possible after the next census is going to be of huge importance.

[Hekate]

114. How does a person get to be "a party leader for 15 years"? They lead. Others can decide...

...to not follow any time they want. It's a free country that way.

How did she get to be the Congresswoman from San Francisco? Her constituents voted her in and continue to do so. They can pick someone else any time they want, and people in Idaho or Kansas can go pound sand.

How did she get to be Speaker? Her peers in the House elected her. Not us. They can choose someone else -- that is not up to us. Same with her position as Minority Leader. All along the way there are people who judge her performance and vote.

Speaker of the House of Representatives is not a national position -- the Speaker isn't supposed to be kiting all over the country building up the Party. That's the job of the head of the DNC. The Speaker is supposed to be tending to getting bills passed, and placing committee chairs. But the Minority Party doesn't get to choose the Speaker -- or committee chairs.

[AdamGG]

116. But the general public doesn't usually know who the DNC/RNC chairs are

Everyone knew Tip O'Neill/Newt Gingrich/Nancy Pelosi/Paul Ryan, etc. Rightly or wrongly, the party leaders in the House are seen nationally as the leaders of the party. Every newscast reinforces this.

I don't think Trump legitimately won the election, but partially, the fact that he did as well as he did was because some independents were voting against the perceived status quo.

Someone like Seth Moulton (he's fairly inexperienced and doesn't want the job) would affect national perceptions of the party. Maybe not by design, but in reality, it is a figurehead PR position, where when you don't hold the Presidency, the person who holds it is seen to represent the party. I think the general public perception was Reagan vs. O'Neill, Clinton vs. Gingrich, Obama vs. Boehner.

[still_one]

108. While I support Pelosi as the Democratic leader, at the same token I have no problem with anyone

challenging her for the leadership role.

What I do have a problem with is those who seem so hell bent on bringing this up as an issue BEFORE the midterms. There is plenty of time to do this AFTER the midterms.

Sorry, but Democrats are their own worst enemies.

GO AFTER THE F**KING republicans. How they are taking away your healthcare, jeopardizing jobs by starting trade-wars, instead of negotiating trade deals properly, appointing people to head departments that want to destroy those departments which puts our health, safety, and environment at risk. Isolating us from our allies, threatening to leave NATO and distancing ourselves away from our allies, while moving closer to Russia, in spite of overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our election, and undermining our Democracy, rolling back Civil Rights, Women's Rights, Workers Rights, etc. etc.

Thousands died in Puerto Rico, and they still haven't been sent the needed aid. Here in California we are been devastated by raging fires, and all this president can do is tweet his lies and garbage.

We can argue among ourselves AFTER the midterms.

There is no question the media is pushing divisive issues like this among Democrats, and some are falling right into the trap

Isn't there enough at stake right now that we can just FOCUS on going after the republicans, and the trump administration.

If we don't stop attacking each other, and go after the republicans, we are making an already uphill climb for the midterms, even steeper.

The time to do this is AFTER the midterms.

[AdamGG]

113. Good point. The thread was up, so I voiced my opinion, but you're right

[still_one]

154. That is what DU is for, to voice our opinions. I was more referring to the Democrats in Congress or

running for Congress. They need to stay on message, and that is what the republicans and the WH are doing.

[BlueWI]

148. Agreed.

This is one of numerous stir the pot threads that are dominant on this site lately.

I have been on DU since the W administration. I always found it to be a place to blow off steam during Republican administrations, learn about issues from sharp posters, go toe to toe with each other during the presidential primary season, and find solidarity afterward.

Way too much high volume posting of people's hobby horse perspectives these days.

Oh well. I'm still here. Looking forward to seeing which Democrat will oppose Scott Walker in November. Wisconsin will do its part this time to create a blue wave on election day. Hopefully we're all on the same page when it's time to volunteer, vote, and win!

[Fla Dem]

120. There is a time and place for this discussion. But not during elections.

To have this discussion now during election season, plays right into the GOP's game plan. Divide and conquer. Let's win back the House before we start campaigning for the House leadership.

All Democratic candidates running for Congress who would like to see Nancy Pelosi replaced, should have a standard answer. "Right now I'm running to win my districts seat in the House of Representative so I can support the citizens of my district. Any discussion about the House leadership of the Democratic Party is premature and will be addressed once the elections are over and we have the majority in the House."

Any other answer other than support for Nancy Pelosi, is divisive.

[Gothmog]

121. From AMJOY

Link to tweet

[CaptainTruth]

122. Although I wouldn't be disappointed if she nominated Hillary Clinton.

And no, the speaker of the house doesn't have to be a member of the house.

"The Constitution does not require the Speaker to be an elected member of the House of Representatives, although every Speaker thus far has been."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

[Algernon Moncrieff]

123. Here is one of my reasons

"Impeachment is, to me, divisive," Pelosi said. "Again, if the facts are there, if the facts are there, then this would have to be bipartisan to go forward. But if it is viewed as partisan, it will divide the country, and I just don't think that's what we should do."

Pelosi noted that there had been pressure for her as then-speaker of the House near the end of the Bush administration to impeach then-President George W. Bush for the Iraq War but that she did not move to do so.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/23/politics/nancy-pelosi-impeachment-trump/index.html

The House should have gone after the war criminals harder, and she needs to voice more forceful opinions that this administration is crooked and a Blue Wave = investigation of that corruption.

I want Adam Schiff or Ted Lieu as speaker. Nancy's opinion should still get consideration, but it's time for fresh leaders.

[Twisty]

126. I have one.

Just like she said with Bush, impeachment is off the table.

[chowder66]

127. I admire Nancy Pelosi and would love to see her be Speaker again. A couple of thoughts...

1 - Instead of pushing for new leadership maybe we should push for training the younger generation for a Speakership. Nancy should be involved with overseeing this. Maybe have some shadow her.

2 - Maybe we need to figure out why it is that Pelosi even HAS to wrangle as hard as she does to get our party members to vote for the right things/reasons. Maybe the public needs to write and call more to get these reps to do their jobs, easing it up for whoever is the Speaker. The reps who tend to lean right need to get better at selling Democratic ideas to their conservative constituents. I'm tired of them claiming they are Democrats and then walking away from the party when it's time to vote on something the party truly is against.


A final thought; I think the sudden uptick in anti-Pelosi rhetoric is to put doubt into the minds of those few Dem's who are on the fence or could be put on the fence about Kavanaugh. I may be wrong but the timing seems to coincide with that huge catastrophic decision.

[bitterross]

131. Best Reason to KEEP her is they don't want her.

Actually, I think she does a good job of managing her caucus. The fact that they really do not want her there is a good reason to keep her too though.

[The Liberal Lion]

132. I think Nancy did a wonderful job as Speaker

and I was proud of the work she did when she was. That being said I am in the "replace" camp. It has nothing to do with her age, as I think Schummer has to go too, but rather her methods. These times aren't the right times for Nancy. She isn't up for the fight. When Dems reclaim the House and if they somehow get the Senate back, do you really think, now that they have taken over the GOP, that the nazis are going to take a back seat. The greatest victory accomplished by the illegal occupation of the orange ass in our White House was/is the legitimization of the fringe far right aspects of the electorate and power structure in the US. What was once a laughingstock and as well an embarrassment to modern America now has a seat at the table openly and flagrantly. These people aren't just going to go away when the Dems at least recapture the House, they are going to become even more brash in their methods and oratory. When the Dems recapture the House we need a soldier, a fighter, a person with steel in her back and fire in her veins not a compromiser and an appeaser. Look at Nancy's treatment of Auntie Maxine. That alone tells me she is not up for the ongoing fight that has yet to be fought with vigor. Nancy has done wonderful things in the name of liberalism, and for that she is a treasure, but for now I have little confidence that this is a fight she is capable of leading successfully.

[Honeycombe8]

134. It's not up to you or me.

But I can see reasons she should not be. Although the world won't end if she is.

She thinks she's dealing with a government. She still thinks people should refrain from going low...on one's best behavior is the deed for the day.

Times have changed. It's not a government she's dealing with. It's a mafia with a mob boss. With traitorous people thrown in the mix. Being polite won't cut it. And whatever you do, do NOT say the "I" word, she said.

Criticizing one of her own, Maxine Waters, played straight into the hands of the Russian mafia in Congress. Putting a stamp of approval on their criticism. She just doesn't understand what she's dealing with.

But it's not up to me. Or you.

[Volaris]

136. The only good one I can think of is that the dem majority should nominate Hillary Clinton.

That would be the first step toward actual moral justice in this mess.

[jmowreader]

143. I can only think of one reason why she might not want to be

And that's because there are people in our caucus who would piss the GOP off worse, and would do as good a job.

Civil rights hero John Lewis (D-GA) would be excellent. Mrs. Pelosi would be a very good House Majority Leader.

[BlueStater]

144. Is it ageist to want someone just a *little* younger?

She's almost 78 and a half years old.

[dlk]

145. Pelosi is Outstanding at her Job & Deserves the Speakership

[Spartacus101]

146. The Working Class and The Poor...

...used to be the backbone of this party. If she can come out swinging, audibly, loudly, and persistently for THEM, and remember where the party has it's roots, fine!

I must say I am getting rather fed up with the cocktail set...well, FDR's don't come along very often. <sigh> Instead of "Impeachment is off the table," I'd like to hear something like the old FDR "...and I welcome their hatred," or something like it once in a while.
n/t

[jimlup]

149. So this shaming of character has been working for the righties

and they've succeeded in putting the same thing that happened to Hillary on Pelosi.

They seem to be able to do it to powerful women. Unfortunately, it seems to work for them. Perhaps our society just isn't as progressive as we'd like to imagine. I just don't know.

[ehrnst]

150. Not up to anyone but her fellow Dem reps, but I agree. (nt)

[zipplewrath]

151. Because we're not in the Majority?

Typically, the speakership goes to the party in the majority. Democrats aren't in the majority. Truth is, as much as we want it, and as good a chance as we have, it is FAR from certain that we will get a majority. IF we do get one in November, it will be slim, so she'll have to appeal to effectively ALL of the democrats, including the new ones. More than one speaker has ended their leadership when a slew of new members were elected. New members frequently want new leadership.

[nvme]

152. I am going to be excoriated

Last edited Mon Aug 13, 2018, 11:43 AM - Edit history (1)

Most recently, when the we didn't let the government shut down. Pelosi, as a leader of the party, compromised with Drumpf, and he did not stick to the agreement of dealing with immigration. Any idiot knows he (drumpf) would not act in good faith, yet they chose allow him to kick that issue away. Oh yeah, the other elephant in the room. We lost the majority under her leadership. Yes she raises money from Democratic donors, but they would have given anyways. I am not arguing about her age or sex. I think we need to look within our ranks and find someone to lead. I am ultra liberal and I do appreciate her accomplishments, but it is insane to keep doing the same thing over again and expect something different to happen. If nothing changes then nothing changes!

[AdamGG]

155. Agree 100%

She lost the majority eight years ago and polls lower among everyone other than solid Democrats than she did then. She could go back to being Whip and maintain a number of her job functions.

[JustAnotherGen]

153. #metoo

In a really bad bad scenario - next Speaker of the House could be the President.

I want someone with Nancy's wisdom, tenacity, tenure, knowledge, experience, and most important -RELATIONSHIPS in that role.

If anything I've learned from the Trump Travesty - never say never.

And in that frame of mind - I want someone who can hold their own AND really work with Abe, Merkel, Macron, Trudeau, etc. etc. Anyone of those folks would break down crying in tears of relief if the 45/140 Fiasco gets to that point.

[AdamGG]

156. That would be awesome, but Trump & Pence would have to be impeached simultaneously

Otherwise, there would probably be time for a Gerald Ford replacement VP to slip in and then they'd become President.

[JustAnotherGen]

158. Even better

Trump Strokes out as the Senate votes to impeach Pence - who in a weird scenario (since he's been flying under the radar in ALL of this) is caught on tape speaking directly to Putin to give the orders at Trump's request?

I just asked you for a Red Ryder BB gun!

If you say no and kick me down the slide I swear to god - I swear to God! I'm calling Ralphie!