The whole Pelosi thing.

She is a huge fundraiser. I think the biggest in the party. She can do whatever she wants. And will. My problem with the Pelosi / Schumer wing is that they play the game too well.

The hatred towards her is over the top and a lot of it boils down to ageism and sexism. I hope she’s the speaker of the house she’s earned it.

[quote="Cameron"]

steveschneider wrote:The hatred towards her is over the top and a lot of it boils down to ageism and sexism. I hope she’s the speaker of the house she’s earne

Earned it how?

Architect of the midterm strategy and show me a dem that raises more money than her. Everyone calling for her ouster hasn’t proposed an alternative and they have no good reason for her to leave other than “we need a fresh new face”.

Also Obamacare which many say wouldn’t have gotten done without her.

Regardless, I told you guys in a different thread and I’ll tell you here too. Make her speaker because the crazy conservative propaganda machines fucking hate her. Let them. Let em focus on her, let them make their conspiracy theories and their baseless lies. It’s what they do. They’re going to do it about some democrat, it might as well be one... and this is key... that isn’t running for President. Let her draw their heat away from others for as long as she can. Everyday they spend obsessing over Nancy pelosi is one day they don’t spend obsessing over someone more important.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Also Obamacare which many say wouldn’t have gotten done without her.

Regardless, I told you guys in a different thread and I’ll tell you here too. Make her speaker because the crazy conservative propaganda machines fucking hate her. Let them. Let em focus on her, let them make their conspiracy theories and their baseless lies. It’s what they do. They’re going to do it about some democrat, it might as well be one... and this is key... that isn’t running for President. Let her draw their heat away from others for as long as she can. Everyday they spend obsessing over Nancy pelosi is one day they don’t spend obsessing over someone more important.

Yep and Obamacare. More Dems have some balls and stand up for her.

[tw]1063563224077889536[/tw]

I'm good with her as speaker. Didn't realize she raised about 300+ million for all Democrats. There are some new Dems that promised to not support her, but hopefully they come to their senses soon and realize that is how the Republicans get things done or get stuck.

Didn't she also lose the house in spectacular fashion?  I'm over the old money bags fund raiser BS.  It's whats wrong with DC.  Also one could make a pretty easy argument that she didnt deliver anything this cycle anymore than the R's lost it with the dumb fuck in the oval office and how the map set up on incumbent R's.

kingstonlake wrote:Didn't she also lose the house in spectacular fashion?  I'm over the old money bags fund raiser BS.  It's whats wrong with DC.  Also one could make a pretty easy argument that she didnt deliver anything this cycle anymore than the R's lost it with the dumb fuck in the oval office and how the map set up on incumbent R's.

I agree with you but I read a while back the candidate that raises the most money has the best odds at winning. I don’t blame Nancy pekosi I blame the public for always voting for the worst people to run the country.

kingstonlake wrote:Didn't she also lose the house in spectacular fashion?

  Also one could make a pretty easy argument that she didnt deliver anything this cycle anymore than the R's lost it 

Reconcile these two statements please

1) she lost it in spectacular fashion
2) she did nothing to win it

You don’t get to play both sides of that.

I seriously would like to hear someone argue against “just let her be the boogeyman that conservative cowards are focused on.” I don’t really have any strong feelings about her either way, but keeping her there makes a lot of sense to me.

Keep in mind you’re gonna have to deal with that conservative propaganda machine somehow. They’re going to be claiming that someone is trying to turn the country into Venezuela while also eating baby livers. It might as well be her. She can take it.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Didn't she also lose the house in spectacular fashion?

  Also one could make a pretty easy argument that she didnt deliver anything this cycle anymore than the R's lost it 

Reconcile these two statements please

1) she lost it in spectacular fashion
2) she did nothing to win it

You don’t get to play both sides of that.

They were two different election cycles Travis.

kingstonlake wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Reconcile these two statements please

1) she lost it in spectacular fashion
2) she did nothing to win it

You don’t get to play both sides of that.

They were two different election cycles Travis.

I’m aware. Wouldn’t it be a lot more likely that the party in power just doesn’t do well than she lost one and didn’t do anything for the other?

Really what I’m saying is that she didn’t have that much of an impact on either. I don’t think you can claim she had a massive (or spectacular as you put it) impact on either without acknowledging the other in the same light. Either she lost one and won the other or she didn’t matter for both. But again, her ability to win the house is very very far away from my argument.

This could turn into a dumpster fire if Dems aren't careful.  On one hand she raises tons of money from her expertise of being a typical politician. On the other the "wave" was elected while basically being openly unsupportive of her and it resonated with voters. Now as a newly elected congressperson you're gonna tell constituents you're just gonna tow the line now that you're in? Dangerous game.....

kingstonlake wrote:This could turn into a dumpster fire if Dems aren't careful.  On one hand she raises tons of money from her expertise of being a typical politician. On the other the "wave" was elected while basically being openly unsupportive of her and it resonated with voters. Now as a newly elected congressperson you're gonna tell constituents you're just gonna tow the line now that you're in? Dangerous game.....

Then she needs to step up and stop being a politician and start being a statesman in her old age. For the good of the party and her country. But she won’t. Because she’s a power hungry politician.

Pelosi is 79 years old and as Fudge (D-OH) said it’s good to give Pelosi credit for gaining Congressional seats in the 2018 midterms but Pelosi doesn’t want to talk about the elections where she was in leadership and the Democrats lost seats.

kingstonlake wrote:This could turn into a dumpster fire if Dems aren't careful.  On one hand she raises tons of money from her expertise of being a typical politician. On the other the "wave" was elected while basically being openly unsupportive of her and it resonated with voters. Now as a newly elected congressperson you're gonna tell constituents you're just gonna tow the line now that you're in? Dangerous game.....

Most people don’t even know why they don’t like her. That’s the power of the rnc and Fox News attach machine.

Steve, politics to me is like coaches in college and pro football. Some real great old coaches keep on getting moved around to other teams and they maybe stay too long. And sometimes it works too. But there are some great young coaches who the system just doesn’t let step up. It’s a turn off to many people when they just see the same ol same ol. Trick is getting people excited and to the polls.

GRR Spartan wrote:Pelosi is 79 years old and as Fudge (D-OH) said it’s good to give Pelosi credit for gaining Congressional seats in the 2018 midterms but Pelosi doesn’t want to talk about the elections where she was in leadership and the Democrats lost seats.

They didn't just lose they got slaughtered. It was pelosi's job to see that coming. As big a douchebag as Trump is Democrat gains were not larger than Republican gains in 2010. That is concerning. Democrats better recognize the demographic that's out there and get their people out to vote when 2020 comes. And that is part of pelosi's job if she gets the roll. She better deliver or like I said it turns into a dumpster fire

DWags wrote:Steve, politics to me is like coaches in college and pro football. Some real great old coaches keep on getting moved around to other teams and they maybe stay too long. And sometimes it works too. But there are some great young coaches who the system just doesn’t let step up. It’s a turn off to many people when they just see the same ol same ol. Trick is getting people excited and to the polls.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I guess this is like the UofM fan base saying Izzo is no longer the geeen giant and he needs to retire. I think most people have formed their opinion on Pelosi based on the rnc and fox attack machine. Has she made mistakes, yes but she’s the best option. The anti Pelosi Dems don’t even have a suggestion for who else should take it. Bottom line she’s going to get it and I’m fine with it.

She has been an effective Democrat leader. No question.

She also raises lots of money for both sides + the visceral hate for her from some on the right is second to only Hillary.

They should have replaced her after they didn't pick up enough seats in 2012. The Dem house leadership is really fucking old and for some reason they don't do term limits.

It is kind of amazing how rich she got by being in Congress though.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:She has been an effective Democrat leader. No question.

She also raises lots of money for both sides + the visceral hate for her from some on the right is second to only Hillary.

They should have replaced her after they didn't pick up enough seats in 2012. The Dem house leadership is really fucking old and for some reason they don't do term limits.

It is kind of amazing how rich she got by being in Congress though.

What if I told you that they do term limits every two years??  

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:She has been an effective Democrat leader. No question.

She also raises lots of money for both sides + the visceral hate for her from some on the right is second to only Hillary.

They should have replaced her after they didn't pick up enough seats in 2012. The Dem house leadership is really fucking old and for some reason they don't do term limits.

It is kind of amazing how rich she got by being in Congress though.

What if I told you that they do term limits every two years??  

I'd be really surprised since the Democrat house caucus and committee chair system (unlike GOP) doesn't do them.

That's what I was referring to

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
What if I told you that they do term limits every two years??  

I'd be really surprised since the Democrat house caucus and committee chair system (unlike GOP) doesn't do them.

That's what I was referring to

Republicans do not have a term limit for speaker of the house.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

I'd be really surprised since the Democrat house caucus and committee chair system (unlike GOP) doesn't do them.

That's what I was referring to

Republicans do not have a term limit for speaker of the house.

No need since they cycle through them so damn fast.

The dems should see if Barrack Hussein Obama wants the job.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Republicans do not have a term limit for speaker of the house.

No need since they cycle through them so damn fast.

The dems should see if Barrack Hussein Obama wants the job.

His wife should have run

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Republicans do not have a term limit for speaker of the house.

No need since they cycle through them so damn fast.

The dems should see if Barrack Hussein Obama wants the job.

Totally agree. That’s why John Boehner was speaker for *checks notes* exactly as long as Nancy pelosi was. Oh and also Paul ryan.

Travis, Bill Maher mentioned a strategy similar to yours on Real Time the other night. Great minds think alike!

steveschneider wrote:Travis, Bill Maher mentioned a strategy similar to yours on Real Time the other night. Great minds think alike!

Did you personally call bill Maher and let him know he’s a sack of shit after you watched his show or no

steveschneider wrote:Travis, Bill Maher mentioned a strategy similar to yours on Real Time the other night. Great minds think alike!

Interesting

DWags wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:
No need since they cycle through them so damn fast.

The dems should see if Barrack Hussein Obama wants the job.

His wife should have run

She still could.

You don't have to be a Congress critter to he elected Speaker

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Republicans do not have a term limit for speaker of the house.

No need since they cycle through them so damn fast.

The dems should see if Barrack Hussein Obama wants the job.

Why can’t folks stop bringing up a two term President?

Seeing Stacey Abrams name floated out there. Let’s see if it gains any traction.

love me some Nancy Pelosi..

mainly for no other reason than she drives the right wing misogynists absolutely insane.

Cameron wrote:

DWags wrote:Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

Progressives take it up the rear again.

Quoted from Political Hodge Podge thread.

Tell me again how great Pelosi is and how much she deserves the speakership.

I'm not thrilled with Pelosi, but I also don't mind that she is there. She is there for a function. 1) She knows how to be the speaker. 2) She isnt' going to run for President, but she can be Trumps enemy in congress who he lashes out at, protecting those who do run for President. 3) Nothing is going to pass for the next 2 years, and certainly not any progressive reforms that would also require Senate approval, so BFD. 4) This is probably thought of as protecting districts that tend to swing back and forth, rather than placate progressive districts that will vote D no matter what.