Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
To me, this is a very interesting analysis of Nancy Pelosi and the issue of impeachment..
I'm not expert enough to know what is really going on, or what is best, but this makes sense to me....
If you have the time and interest, the entire article is worth a read... It's not too long...
BOLD is mine...
What Nancy Pelosi Wants to Do Before Impeachment
She knows timing is everything—and she’s skilled at shaping public sentiment.
JUN 11, 2019
Steve Israel
Former Democratic congressman from New York
.....
When House Democrats convened in the room to hash out strategies on policy and politics, Pelosi would point to the portrait and remind them of a Lincoln quote: “Public sentiment is everything.” That instruction guides her today on the matter of impeachment. But it’s easily misunderstood.
For Pelosi, public sentiment doesn’t mean following public opinion, but strategically shaping it so that it’s more receptive to a strategic goal. It’s not just laying the groundwork; it’s fertilizing it. That takes message discipline, unity, and patience—all of which will be necessary as pressure to impeach President Donald Trump continues to build.
Pelosi executed a strategy to shape public sentiment immediately after President George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004, when Republicans expanded their majority by three seats. Bush was pushing for a politically risky overhaul of Social Security. Members of her caucus and outside advocacy groups pressured Pelosi to propose alternative policies. But Pelosi knew that once Democrats offered a solution, they would give Republicans something to attack rather than defend. For nearly two years, Republicans watched their favorability ratings fall, dragged down by a spate of scandals and the unpopular war in Iraq. Only a few months before the midterm election, Pelosi and the House Democratic Caucus rolled out “6 for ’06,” the legislative priorities they would pass if in the majority. Naturally, Republicans took an offensive posture, but by then it was too late. Public sentiment had ripened for a Democratic legislative agenda, the party gained 32 seats in the House, and Pelosi became speaker. Then she mobilized her majority to pass those very priorities. Two years later, in 2008, the electorate rewarded Democrats with an even larger majority. Timing was everything.
On a more mundane level, I caught Pelosi’s ire when I forgot the Lincoln mantra. It was May 2003, only two years into my 16-year tenure representing a fairly competitive district on Long Island, New York. When Republicans offered a new package of tax cuts skewed to the wealthiest, I indicated to the Democratic whip’s office that I was undecided. A few days before the vote, Pelosi hunted me down on the House floor and asked why I couldn’t oppose the measure. When I told her that many of my constituents favored it, she looked me squarely in the eye and said, “Well, educate them.”
For Pelosi, public sentiment doesn’t mean following public opinion, but strategically shaping it so that it’s more receptive to a strategic goal. It’s not just laying the groundwork; it’s fertilizing it. That takes message discipline, unity, and patience—all of which will be necessary as pressure to impeach President Donald Trump continues to build.
Pelosi executed a strategy to shape public sentiment immediately after President George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004, when Republicans expanded their majority by three seats. Bush was pushing for a politically risky overhaul of Social Security. Members of her caucus and outside advocacy groups pressured Pelosi to propose alternative policies. But Pelosi knew that once Democrats offered a solution, they would give Republicans something to attack rather than defend. For nearly two years, Republicans watched their favorability ratings fall, dragged down by a spate of scandals and the unpopular war in Iraq. Only a few months before the midterm election, Pelosi and the House Democratic Caucus rolled out “6 for ’06,” the legislative priorities they would pass if in the majority. Naturally, Republicans took an offensive posture, but by then it was too late. Public sentiment had ripened for a Democratic legislative agenda, the party gained 32 seats in the House, and Pelosi became speaker. Then she mobilized her majority to pass those very priorities. Two years later, in 2008, the electorate rewarded Democrats with an even larger majority. Timing was everything.
On a more mundane level, I caught Pelosi’s ire when I forgot the Lincoln mantra. It was May 2003, only two years into my 16-year tenure representing a fairly competitive district on Long Island, New York. When Republicans offered a new package of tax cuts skewed to the wealthiest, I indicated to the Democratic whip’s office that I was undecided. A few days before the vote, Pelosi hunted me down on the House floor and asked why I couldn’t oppose the measure. When I told her that many of my constituents favored it, she looked me squarely in the eye and said, “Well, educate them.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/nancy-pelosi-public-opinion-and-timing-matter/591385/
47 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
This one I did as this is such a big issue here at DUUUU,
I just found the article an interesting explanation of one opinion..
but I'd sure like to hear that we are doing something and not just thinking about it.
back
Here's a refresher:
And since when is the Speaker of the House the head of the DCCC?
