Damn, Pelosi!

[bigtree]

The Hill? @thehill

Pelosi raises $26 million for Dems in record fundraising haul: http://hill.cm/G7P4Cu9

[tazkcmo]

1. That's it.

26 million? Repeal and replace this slacker!!!
















sarcasm

[Caliman73]

34. Agreed!!

She is much too much of an embarrassment for Democrats. No one will ever supp...oh wait nevermind

Pelosi has been in the game for a long time. She has made some mistakes, but we need to stop believing the right wing hype about her. We can have a discussion or debate about what we agree with or disagree with, but a lot of the "Nancy hate" is just about what right wingers have slandered her with. "San Francisco values", what, you mean being open minded? Wanting decent social services to protect the vulnerable?

[Gothmog]

2. Yeah for Nancy Pelosi

[mountain grammy]

3. Nasty woman!

I have a sweatshirt that says that.

[bigtree]

5. PerSISTA!

...

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

43. [phone]

[DesertRat]

4. Awesome!

[Fla Dem]

6. Give 'em Hell, Nancy!

[mcar]

7. Seems mighty "fresh" to me

A great Democrat!

[nolabear]

8. Let her and her detractors know. She deserves support!

I don't know if I could take the abuse that woman gets and work like she does.

[lebkr]

10. I'm thinking

this is the reason we've been seeing anti-Pelosi articles. She's too effective!

[maddiemom]

12. Agree!

Can't help but wonder where these campaigns against the most successful DemocratIC leaders really come from.

[BadgerMom]

9. She's an accomplished, amazing leader!

It's little surprise the opposition hopes to sow dissent about her. We're not fooled!

[JustAnotherGen]

11. This is why I don't understand

The minority cry to remove her as Minority leader. It makes no sense when you see a number like this. I was one of the donors by the way.

[zipplewrath]

21. Well, let me help you understand

Mind you, I don't particularly think that replacing her would change anything at all. I'm not one of those who is suggesting replacing her. However, one can't help but notice that the party is in the worst shape it's been since reconstruction and that she's been one of the leaders of the party for a good chunk of that time. If she were a head coach, she'd be fired by now. If she were a CEO, she'd have been replaced. That doesn't mean it would be right, often these "changes in leadership" don't bring about the improvements sought. None the less, it would seem that SOMETHING has to change, or the party will be in serious trouble. And I don't just mean at the federal level. We're in serious hurt at the state level many places as well, and long term that has to change. And it isn't about any single candidate, any single leader, or any single election. This is a trend that has been headed the wrong way for a long time and has to stop.

[lapucelle]

31. Pelosi's job is to lead her caucus in the House of Representatives.

She is stunningly effective in that role, as the past six weeks have shown. Here is a description of the historical role of the House Minority Leader.

The minority leader serves as floor leader of the "loyal opposition," and is the minority counterpart to the Speaker. Although many of the basic leadership responsibilities of the minority and majority leaders are similar, the minority leader speaks for minority party and its policies and works to protect the minority party's rights.

Here's another description:

The minority leader is responsible for (1) developing the minority position, (2) negotiating with the majority party, (3) directing minority caucus activities on the chamber floor and (4) leading debate for the minority.

If she were a head coach or a CEO, I don't very much that she "would have been fired by now". She is much too good at the job her colleagues ELECTED her to do earlier this year.

"Something" has to change! I know, let's remove one of the most effective Congressional leaders in recent history! That oughta work.

No wonder the Republicans are leading a smear campaign against her.

http://history.house.gov/People/Office/Minority-Leaders/

[zipplewrath]

32. She WAS majority leader

As I said, I don't really belong to the "replace her" club. Never the less, one of the jobs you didn't mention was to maintain a majority, and she failed at that. Another one is to regain the majority. She's failed at that too. Now, I'll readily admit that I don't think anyone else would have particularly done much better. It's why I'm not in that club. But one can understand how some people have become frustrated in general with the party and looking for places where changes can be made. Doesn't mean the places they find are necessarily going to have any real effect.

[Caliman73]

35. I think WE failed at that.

I do not like trite sayings because like memes, they are usually simplistic and inaccurate, but the saying "Democrats fall in love...." appears to be accurate enough at times. A lot of people stayed home in 2010 and that cost us significantly. Republicans poured money into local races and got the right to draw boundaries which they took full advantage of, leaving Democrats an uphill climb.

It is not a politician's job to "inspire" or "excite" the base. Although I as much as anyone, like when a person is passionate and articulate about their message, it is our job as citizens to understand the differences in policy between the candidates and the Parties. It is our job to motivate ourselves to both choose our candidates wisely, and then hold their feet to the fire to receive representation. We in America rely way too much on looking at "how a politician makes us feel" rather than on what they are trying to accomplish and how they are going about it.

[zipplewrath]

42. She takes the paycheck

I understand your point. But she takes the check so to speak so she accepts the responsibilities that come with the job and among them is to help build the party and to maintain majorities. She controls the DCCC. She's one of the "Super Delegates". Results matter.

[lapucelle]

37. Why are you blaming Nancy Pelosi?

She may have been a congressional leader, but she was not the head of the party in 2010. Why are you laying the "failure to maintain a majority" on her? Many would say that it was the abandonment of Howard Dean's 50 state strategy that led to the losses.

Everyone in Democratic leadership has a duty to help get other Democrats elected. That's why Pelosi (among others) is raising money. If people are looking for "places where changes can be made", why are they starting with her?

I live in a red district of a blue state, but we have a Democratic congresswoman. Many of us worked very hard at the local level to make that happen. If you are not represented by a Democrat, roll up your sleeves and get to work. GOTV in local, off year and midterm elections. Those things will help much more than picking a random scapegoat who is an effective leader, duly elected by her colleagues in the caucus by secret ballot and who is also feared and respected by the Republican opposition.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111701038.html

https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/dean-steps-down-as-dnc-chair/

[zipplewrath]

40. I'm not exactly

As I said, I don't really think anyone else could have done better. Never the less, it was "on her watch". And yes, there are others with whom she can share responsibility.

I can't really claim to know why they are "starting with her". I'm not even sure you can claim that this is where anyone "started". Some might claim it "started" with Hillary. There was also efforts to replace Reid that never materialized. There has been a continuous series of attempts to generate new leadership within the party with the thought that it would reverse the national and regional fortunes of the party. I can understand the point of view without agreeing with it.

[lapucelle]

45. Actually, It was on President Obama's watch that Democrats

lost the majority. He was the head the party for those eight years. He appointed the DNC chair-people; they served at his invitation and pleasure. While President Obama may have received advice concerning those decisions, he was ultimately the one who made them.

You keep talking about "getting rid of" congressional leaders like Pelosi and the former Senator Reid. They are elected by the members of their caucuses. If you don't like the leadership, you need to contact your Democratic senator and your Democratic congressman and let them know. There is no other mechanism for Democrats not serving in Congress to change caucus leadership than making their voices heard to the people who represent them.

If you don't have Democrats representing your state and district in Congress, there is very little you can do, short of working harder to elect them.

http://www.newsweek.com/why-tim-kaine-so-low-key-dnc-chair-80993

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-226100

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-226100

[zipplewrath]

48. Well, I don't

As I've said repeatedly, I don't actually think there is much value in replacing Pelosi right now.

But as I also said, there is plenty of shared responsibility in how we got to where we are. Several leaders of the party can share it. To no small extent Obama has left us in the shape we are. Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Gates and Shultz all filled roles that could have been used to create the next generation of leaders.

[George II]

57. Exactly - her job it to unify the Democratic caucus, which she's done better than most.

[JustAnotherGen]

50. Well wait until after

November 7, 2017.

Seriously.

I'm active in NJ and the party is coming out for us. I understand it's the same in VA.

Come back here November 8th in the morning. I think you will see the shift.

They are also giving us room to be "local" in our approach. That's the difference.

I'm all for a 50 state monetary strategy. But the messaging that will work in Youngstown Ohio will not work in the NJ 7th.

People need to acknowledge that regional differences exist. This past election was "we" and "we have to". Nope! Youngstown OH has to do this, Atlanta GA has to do that, and Raritan NJ has to do something else.

[zipplewrath]

58. I hope

We'll see. People can be stubborn.

[JNelson6563]

61. That is because of gerrymandering as well as

shocking though it is, there are still too many out there sitting back and waiting for "The Democrats" to come and make it happen! Come to my town, my county, my state, produce a beautiful slate of perfect candidates, fundraise, GOTV and organize and then WIN! And until The Democrats can make that happen I stand off to the side, crinkling my nose at The Democrats.

Yeah, there's still waaaaaaay too much of that.

[zipplewrath]

66. That explains some of it

Doesn't have alot to do with presidential or senatorial politics. It is a problem for state legislatures, not so much for governors.

But as both of the final candidates for DNC chairman expressed, there's been far too much emphasis on policy driven by major donors, and not nearly enough policy driven by voters.

[angrychair]

13. The money is great

But the DNC message cannot be "have you seen the other guy" it has to resonate with people.

More importantly, that money needs to be used on candidates that citizens actually want to vote for on Election Day or it doesn't matter. (That IS NOT a 2016 reference, it is a "we need people to be engaged and vote" reference)

Stay involved in local politics! Your governor and state legislatures matter even more than Congress. This midterm matters more than ANY in my very long life.

If republicans maintain or grow their majorities than we are permanently out in the cold.


VOTE!

[NurseJackie]

14. Nancy Pelosi totally ROCKS!! She's one of us... A TRUE DEMOCRAT!

Democrats are the BEST!!

She knows what it means to be a DEMOCRAT!!

She makes me proud to be a DEMOCRAT!!

GO DEMOCRATS!!

[Dorn]

15. Do we learn nothing? HRC had more $ then DT

Fat good that did us.

[Locrian]

16. exactly - when is it only "he/she has more money" a good thing? - n/t

[LanternWaste]

23. The specific alternative you would advocate...?

The specific alternative you would advocate for this particular fundraising need would then be precisely what?

[uponit7771]

44. DT Had Russia and 2 trillion of its GDP, that should be included in loss analysis every time

[Plucketeer]

17. Disclosing the number of donors

and the average donation amount might add to the luster.

[NJCher]

39. that was my question

I'll wait to be impressed until that information is released.

If it's donations by corporations, it's no accomplishment. After all, there are only two parties in the country, so where else is the money going to go?



Cher

[Nitram]

18. Pelosi is one of the strongest and smartest leaders in the country.

[NastyRiffraff]

19. Nancy Pelosi is a DEMOCRATIC hero!

She's smart, hard working, and a PERSISTENT leader of the DEMOCRATIC Party!

[MrPurple]

20. I hope they have serious ground level registration drives going on

in swing districts/states, registering voters every day. That's where the money should be going.

[appleannie1943]

22. You GO GIRL

[sandensea]

24. Bless her heart.

Her 15 years of leadership have had some very dramatic highs and lows. I think it's time for another exhilarating high.

[NCcoast]

25. I'll celebrate when Nancy starts pushing for publicly funded elections

Making elections all about fundraising plays to the strengths of Republicans and leaves Democrats sucking left hind tit forever.

[gratuitous]

29. With Republican majorities in both houses of Congress

I'd say that publicly funded elections are about as likely as Ivanka getting fired by her daddy.

Got any suggestions grounded in reality?

[NCcoast]

47. I'm sorry, I believe Nancy Pelosi has been in office for a long time.

Are you aware of her ever having pushed for publicly funded elections? Maybe if Nancy and Chuck stood for something half the voting populace wouldn't sit the election out, and those that do vote might stop declaring themselves independents. We're up against a party of Snidely Whiplashes and we can't win. Stop cheering for losers.

[gratuitous]

49. Let me know when your herd of unicorns comes stampeding in

Pelosi is playing the game by the rules in place. If the rules change, then tactics can change. But right now, it's money, money, money, and has been ever since Buckley v. Valeo was decided by the Supreme Court. Overturning that Supreme Court decision requires an amendment to the Constitution. If you have a strategy for that, I'm sure all of us are all ears.

[BainsBane]

68. Who has?

I've seen it mentioned, but never a serious proposal.
I've since seen the issue of campaign finance law abandoned completely. The clock has deninitely turned back on the issue, in part because of Trump's election and in part because politicians who once supported it managed to become very wealthy from campaign donations.

I say we start by making it illegal for politicians to pay themselves from campaign funds. Then at least they wouldn't have such a direct, personal financial benefit from the current system.

[BainsBane]

67. That would be great.

Last edited Wed Aug 2, 2017, 04:25 AM - Edit history (1)

It requires a constitutional amendment, of course. Why are you waiting for Nancy to do it? You could start in your own state, or start an online campaign to organize people around the issue.

Meanwhile, some who once advocated changing campaign finance law have abandoned it under the pretense that any candidate can raise limitless funds through small donors.

As a general matter, treating politics as a concierge service isn't consistent with self-government; nor is it effective. You could do what Americans have traditionally done when they wanted a change in law: work on the issue themselves, build support and then ask to meet with your congressperson. Sitting back and bring angry because no one had done it for you is guaranteed to fail.

You could raise the issue at a local Democratic meeting or with a local indivisible group. I'd support it.

[lunasun]

26. One reason her co workers elected her again to lead after the election last November

[stonecutter357]

27. K&R

[oasis]

28. I'mWithHer

[Gothmog]

30. I stand with Nancy Pelosi

[IronLionZion]

33. She is such a boss, and I donated

but I really hope our party is doing good thins with this money in making sure our people can vote. So I've told them they need to do better at fighting voter suppression and make sure our voters have the proper ID and registration and are able to vote in elections.

Voter turnout is where we win elections. It worked with Obama, who also had long coat tails to win congressional and senate seats.

[seta1950]

36. Leader Pelosi

SHE'S THE BEST.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

38. Yay!!!!

She's powerful!

If she were a guy, she'd be on the cover of Newsweek, and all, all the time.

[Hekate]

41. Nancy Rocks!

[HenryWallace]

46. Still confused at what the problem is...

If you identify Money in Politics as one of the core systemic problems with American Politics then her "haul" might not be so laudable!

Lets stick with performance shall we; the candidates she has recruited and the strategy the DCCC has employed have lead to electoral disaster for the Democratic Party!

She should not be forced to step aside; she has earned the right to be where she is. That said, one would have hoped she would have come to that decision for the good of the Party.

I cannot think of a more important time in my lifetime where "change" is an operational imperative!

[lapucelle]

51. Nancy Pelosi is not in her position by an "earned right".

She was elected by a 2:1 margin by her colleagues in the House Democratic caucus. Anyone who has a problem with it should contact their Democratic congressman and make their feelings known. Representatives answer to the constituency that elected them.

Anyone who is not represented in their district by a Democrat needs to work harder to get one elected.

I worked hard to elect a Democrat in my predominantly red district, and I stand with Nancy.

[ehrnst]

55. Money is not the issue - being ruled by it is.

And her peers put her in that position. They alone have the insight as to who is and isn't the best person to lead.

There is another maxim that applies here: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

[Progressive dog]

60. Democratic candidates are not chosen by Nancy Pelosi

They are chosen in caucuses or primaries by Democratic voters in their districts. That's how Nancy Pelosi became a member of the House of Representatives.
Nancy Pelosi was chosen to be leader by her peers, the ones who won election to the house. They think she should be majority leader. I do too.

[BainsBane]

69. She doesn't head the DCCC

This is the head of the DCCC. https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9399860
Why arent you calling for him to step down? He recruits candidates. He allocates resources, and he is laying down for the critics who want to see equal rights abandoned. He's repeating their nonsensical rhetoric that the "economic interests of working people" can be achieved by abandoning abortion rights, completely ignoring the fact that doing so results in sharp increases in poverty for women and children. Could that be why we see so much misdirection toward a Pelosi, who has executed flawlessly her job of holding the Dem caucus together?

You aren't the arbiter of what's good for the party, and you can hardly claim to know that her leaving the position would be good for the party without knowing her replacement. New is not always better. Surely Trump is evidence of that.

I'm beyond tired of hearing the contentless mantra of change. The country got change with Trump. How is that working out? Change for the sake of change results in idiocy. what we need is good thoughtful policy and principled positions on issues.

When Obama's advisors proposed that change slogan to him in 2008, he didn't like it. He rightly said it was vapid. But damn if it hasn't persisted, only to become less substantive by the day.

[Curtis]

52. At this point

Anyone could raise a TON of money for Democrats. I'm not taking anything away from Pelosi. I'm just stating clearly that with Trump in the White House it is easy for the opposition to email in the cash.

I will be happy when Pelosi starts talking impeachment. I'm still fuming from her taking it off the table with Bush/Cheney. She knew it was a great fund raising tool and a great thing to campaign against. I fear she will do the same thing this time around and allow Trump to remain in office.

[Honeycombe8]

54. She dooed it! Got the moolah for the future take-back! nt

[Progressive dog]

59. Thank you Nancy Pelosi

You are a real Democrat.

[cbreezen]

62. As a 52 year old gal...

I'm stuck in the middle. I love Nancy, but I'm waiting for the young. Quit complaining about the present... find a young woman who's up for this!

[lordsummerisle]

63. k&r n/t

[rocktivity]

64. She's had quite a bit of help

from Prez Duh Donald and the Rethuglicans...


rocktivity

[calimary]

65. She's STILL the Greatest!

Nancy Pelosi knew how to run the House of Reps. She never brought a bill up for a vote without knowing exactly how it would turn out. She's put all the men since - to SHAME.