General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsResponse to brooklynite (Original post)
Eliot Rosewater This message was self-deleted by its author.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)I think THIS is far more important. Jeffries is 48 with years of good experience and has been talked about among his colleagues as an eventual possible speaker or other top leadership position -- because he stands out among and to his colleagues as leadership material.
How is it that the media, obligingly pushing stuff like Kathleen Rice's attention seeking, couldn't inform the public that Jeffries even existed until his Democratic colleagues forced some to admit it this afternoon?
Is it that it would spoil their pumping up and sensationalizing of a "battle of the shiny new v hoary old" theme? Btw, I just heard this 48-year-old member with several years experience in congress described as "new" on MSNBC.
Another, btw? He beat Barbara Lee, who contested for the position. Who's SHE? Oh, just another eminent but anonymous member of congress who didn't badmouth Nancy Pelosi.
brooklynite
(94,352 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Regarding Rice, "She said the Democrats needed someone who could promote change, focus on the future and shake up the status quo. Earlier this month, Rice suggested that that person could be Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), whom she said had her complete support. Right now, Tim Ryan is the one person whos starting those tough conversations that so many of us wanted our entire caucus to have, Rice said in a statement.
Tim Ryan, really? Uhuh. Rice is in that mostly conservative "problem solvers" group that masquerades as genuinely bipartisan. She's been endorsed in more than one election, including this one, by Republican officials back home. She had a very weak, amateur opponent in the Democratic primary, but he did point out that he was running in part because "Rice is a Republican who changed parties because of the district we are in." He sounds rather loose and amateurish in his accusations of having no values except getting elected, etc., but I checked and she was a Republican before 2005.
Me.
(35,454 posts)"imploring" Comrade Trump to keep his promises regarding GM in Ohio and is an avowed corporatist
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)imagined he had well, did he? No, Tim, 5 mismatched face cards don't beat a royal flush.
Me.
(35,454 posts)by my count with 40 seat and a deal made with so-called problem solvers she has the numbers she needs with 1 to spare
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)who is trying to hamstring Democratic house power. At least she seemed to say she was with the Problem Solvers as she supported their actions.
She's gotten elected and reelected by pleasing Republican leaders at home (who endorsed her over the Republican candidate) but is probably not destined for high position in the strongly liberal-dominated Democratic caucus. She is ranking member of the Homeland Security subcommittee on counterterrorism and intelligence
Me.
(35,454 posts)and is very ambitious but would probably do better as the Con she once was but probably couldn't get elected as such. I have a real problem to those who are so blatantly dishonest. From what I've read she's not real popular with the caucus at large.
brush
(53,743 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,347 posts)brush
(53,743 posts)She doesn't look that much younger than soon-to-be-Speaker Pelosi.
brooklynite
(94,352 posts)She's never proposed herself as an alternative.
brush
(53,743 posts)clamoring for younger leadership
brooklynite
(94,352 posts)brush
(53,743 posts)turn it down if their name was put forward if Pelosi was deposed.
OnDoutside
(19,948 posts)they're being monitored by the people.
Renew Deal
(81,846 posts)OnDoutside
(19,948 posts)had an effect. If these 'problem solvers' are the pocket of healthcare companies, I see it as imperative that they be kept under pressure.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)says Mike DeBonis of the Washington Post. WHAT fight? Pelosi doesn't even have a credible challenger. The media continues to pretend opposition to her is a major story.
LiberalFighter
(50,783 posts)Here is the thing. That group are clueless about organizing. If they wanted to accomplish their goals they would need to get more people on board before trying to convince someone make a change. If they are about 10% of caucus they need to wait until they are closer to 40% with some that might want to join them. They apparently didn't have the ideas or the ability to present those ideas to change the minds.