Pelosi: 'I am running for Dem leader'

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
my phrasing might have been a bit inarticulate as you seem fixated on the p-word... after the rejection that the Democratic House just received, you'd think they'd want their public face to be someone less divisive (and whose public image, rightly or wrongly, isn't already set in stone in the minds of Americans)

electing her as minority leader seems like the equivalent of the republicans electing Dick Cheney as RNC chairman right after the 2008 election.
 

thepd7

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2005
9,423
0
0
My guess is that all those Blue Dog Dems that would have opposed her lost on Tuesday.

Seems like, although you would think if you lost that many seats in the house it would be a wake up call to act differently.

She's not 'the drag'. Anyone who replaces her will either have the same problem, or be a bad leader. It's about the power of the 'right-wing noise machine'.

It's a bit of a self-fulling prophecy - "she sucks!" is the attack, people fall for it and say "she lacks a good image so she has to go".

Yes, let's bring back the Republicans, who are so good.

So you are saying the only reason the Democrats lost control of the house is Republican Propoganda? Do democrats not understand TV or Social Networking? I'm very confused. You are either saying democrats are morons who can't run a campaign like republicans or that for some magical reason America only watches Fox News.


Loki, thanks for adding meaningful and thoughtful discussion to the topic.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I'm very glad to see her return to the leadership of the Dems after the 2010 elections and be the face of the minority party.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
So you are saying the only reason the Democrats lost control of the house is Republican Propoganda? Do democrats not understand TV or Social Networking? I'm very confused. You are either saying democrats are morons who can't run a campaign like republicans or that for some magical reason America only watches Fox News.

Instead of answering you directly, to answer you in your baiting tone:

So you are saying that a gigantic propaganda industry, backed by billionares with huge budgets, with a mission of ideological warfare, using propaganda companies (aka think tanks) like Cato and Heritage, and massive media infrastructure, to sell the American people on lies over decades, does not change public opinion, that every citizens simply and easily ignores the product of this industry?

The 'counterparts' on the left, burdened by a much more honest agenda, pale in comparison to the funding and ruthlessness of the right's machine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
It's up to the Democrats in the House to decide if they want to be tied to Representative Pelosi two years hence.

I must agree with Craig that it's the height of absurdity to expect one of the leaders of a political party to be non-partisan; can a non-partisan party leader be anything but an oxymoron?

It's not if she's partisan but if she is capable of compromise. She has two options either accept the dems need to give and take or decide on "principled" gridlock. She'll have to follow the wishes of the dems, not tell them what she wants. I'm not sure if she can play second fiddle. The reps have clearly gained ground but their overall minority position limits what they can do. The Dems have the advantage but it's not at all clear what they'll do. Obama is fairly transparent. He'll talk bipartisanship until he gets a feel for the new dynamic. Now we'll see more of the politician.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
My guess is that all those Blue Dog Dems that would have opposed her lost on Tuesday.

This. Those Democrats who had been pretending to be conservative will be gone in January, leaving mostly those Democrat Congresscritters who need not pretend to be other than foaming moonbat crazy left to achieve reelection, that chicken soup for the political soul. Pelosi is a natural to lead them.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Why would the Dems allow such a hated and polarizing person to be minority leader? I have nothing against her but I think they need someone else. I'm sick of the righties whining about her.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Pardon me, I still think the Haybasusa analyis is defective. From 1994 to the election of 11/2006, democrats were totally irrelevant in the House. By 11/2006 it was totally apparent that GOP polocies were a stinking turd as the GOP lost control of the House and the Senate. But still, GWB as sitting Prez still had 2 years to go before the American electorate ole heave ho.

Pelosi and the dems had two choices after the election of 11/2006. Either they could adopt the Newt Gingrich 1998 strategy of throwing the entire American government into gridlock, the dem way or the highway, and instead choose to minimize what GWB could do in a democratic caretaker government. Secure in the knowledge that keeping a fuctioning American government the dems would surely take over 100% in 11/2008 was better than collapsing the entire American government. That way. when the dems took over, there would be a government left to save and build upon after 11/2008.

The sad failure was that no one ever antisipated how badly GOP policies would damage the American economy as the financial melt down hit like a bombshell on 9/2008cementing a giant dem win in the election of 11/2008.

Thereafter Pelosi failed to lead, and instead of leading she pandered when she and Reis should have lead.

And because she and Reid did not lead, what worked in 11/2006 turned to shit in
11/2008. For the next 2 years the dems in the Senate may mean something, but no matter who the dems in the house pick as fearless leader, for the next 2 years the dems will be totally irrelevant in the house.

In MHO, this whole Pelosi thread is about as relevant as deciding who reaggranged the deck chairs on the the Titanic.

Pelosi could of woulda maybe avoided the iceberg, she did not, and that is now history.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Why would the Dems allow such a hated and polarizing person to be minority leader? I have nothing against her but I think they need someone else. I'm sick of the righties whining about her.

I'm tired or righties whining about high taxes on the rich, and programs for the poor, and peace movements. Give them no taxes on the rich, no programs for the poor, and war.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Pardon me, I still think the Haybasusa analyis is defective. From 1994 to the election of 11/2006, democrats were totally irrelevant in the House. By 11/2006 it was totally apparent that GOP polocies were a stinking turd as the GOP lost control of the House and the Senate. But still, GWB as sitting Prez still had 2 years to go before the American electorate ole heave ho.

Pelosi and the dems had two choices after the election of 11/2006. Either they could adopt the Newt Gingrich 1998 strategy of throwing the entire American government into gridlock, the dem way or the highway, and instead choose to minimize what GWB could do in a democratic caretaker government. Secure in the knowledge that keeping a fuctioning American government the dems would surely take over 100% in 11/2008 was better than collapsing the entire American government. That way. when the dems took over, there would be a government left to save and build upon after 11/2008.

The sad failure was that no one ever antisipated how badly GOP policies would damage the American economy as the financial melt down hit like a bombshell on 9/2008cementing a giant dem win in the election of 11/2008.

Thereafter Pelosi failed to lead, and instead of leading she pandered when she and Reis should have lead.

And because she and Reid did not lead, what worked in 11/2006 turned to shit in
11/2008. For the next 2 years the dems in the Senate may mean something, but no matter who the dems in the house pick as fearless leader, for the next 2 years the dems will be totally irrelevant in the house.

In MHO, this whole Pelosi thread is about as relevant as deciding who reaggranged the deck chairs on the the Titanic.

Pelosi could of woulda maybe avoided the iceberg, she did not, and that is now history.

My G-d, there're TWO Craigs!
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Republican America haters != voters that are sick and tired of her crap...

I know comprehension is not your strong suit... but 8% of independents have a favorable view of her.

I see some folks have a hard time viewing the situation from a pragmatic perspective instead of that of an ideologue. It breaks down like this:

1) Pelosi represents a particular district. Right or wrong does not matter, she represents their wishes, but their wishes often conflict with those of the majority of American voters.
2) Pelosi is reviled by both the right and, more importantly, by independents. Craig thinks it's the evil republican / fox / Koch machine smearing her, others think it's her own stupidity. Either way it doesn't matter, the fact is that she's very much disliked by a group of voters (independents) that you absolutely need to win elections.
3) She's been made to be the embodiment of far left policies and successfully portrayed as someone who can't compromise. True or not is irrelevant, as is the "why".

Given those 3 facts, I would think it very foolish to put her back in place as the face of the party going forward... but my opinion doesn't matter. We'll see what the house dems do.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Lets see what happens now that the R's are the big winners in the house.

After all its all about policy and not propaganda, Now the GOP has again been given an opportunity to lead, where will the GOP be in 11/2012 if their policies turn to shit.

Regardless if I am a 1/2 a Craig or 3x a Craig, I still predict GOP policies will be an unmitigated disaster for the American economy. GOP propaganda can only go so far,
reality will always rule in the end.

Kicking a dead horse in Pelosi is only reveling in past GOP glories, and now, gasp, the GOP has to lead or fail.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Lets see what happens now that the R's are the big winners in the house.

After all its all about policy and not propaganda, Now the GOP has again been given an opportunity to lead, where will the GOP be in 11/2012 if their policies turn to shit.

Regardless if I am a 1/2 a Craig or 3x a Craig, I still predict GOP policies will be an unmitigated disaster for the American economy. GOP propaganda can only go so far,
reality will always rule in the end.

Kicking a dead horse in Pelosi is only reveling in past GOP glories, and now, gasp, the GOP has to lead or fail.

Uh, with a small margin in the house, no control of the senate and no control of the white house, how exactly do you think the R's are going to be able to do any policy making? They are basically going to have to either 1) obstruct and make sure nothing gets done, or 2) compromise and work with the democrats to try and get things done. Either way, there's no way GOP policies can be an "unmitigated disaster" for the American economy. If there's an unmitigated disaster, it's on the dems. You can blame the repubs for obstructionism, but you can't blame them for bad policies over the next two years since they still have no power.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
don't you understand?

the Republicans control 1/3 of the policy-making arm of the government... clearly the Democrats just handed them the keys to the bus.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
WHy should she quit or give up? Bush and republicans took the same heat for their actions as leader, and now republicans are back on top. Why? Well one thing.. they never admit failure or take blame. And it woked. Pelosi is a tought, smart lady. And when republican promisses prove to be total failure come 2012, Pelosi is just the right person democrats should want in there. A lot of hot air and hype has worked well for republicans this cycle, but their bucket of solutions they carry under their arm is completely empty. Letsssss just see how things look, come 2012.
How extending the Bush tax cuts thing goes i.e. unemployment figures, and where republicans target spending cuts, that is if they do that at all. They sure were not into cutting when GW was in there.
We've all been here before during Reagan and both Bush's. We know how this ends up.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
WHy should she quit or give up?
despite being an effective speaker, she's a drag on the national party and historically, pretty much no Speaker of the House ever ran for Minority Leader after their party lost control of the house under their watch.

the only exception I can think of off the top of my head is Sam Rayburn, who was the longest serving Speaker in our country's history.
 

nyker96

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2005
5,630
2
81
Her politics aside, she's got some guts to come back and take this job. I think Dem weakness is their softness, I mean look at the Republicans, going extreme is rewarded.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
The so called "blue dogs" have been rejected. Cut by half.
Pelosi actually got more done in her short time than any other.
Child healthcare. Credit card reform. Equal pay advancement for women.
Healthcare AND the public option. It wasn’t her fault some democrats
believed pretending to be republican-ish was a good thing. Including
the current president. I doubt Hillary would have been so clueless if she had been in there as president. Pelosi will get what she wants, especially now.
Pelosi would be one hell of a president too !!! Republicans wouldnt know what hit them...
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
The so called "blue dogs" have been rejected. Cut by half.
Pelosi actually got more done in her short time than any other.
Child healthcare. Credit card reform. Equal pay advancement for women.
Healthcare AND the public option. It wasn’t her fault some democrats
believed pretending to be republican-ish was a good thing. Including
the current president. I doubt Hillary would have been so clueless if she had been in there as president. Pelosi will get what she wants, especially now.
Pelosi would be one hell of a president too !!! Republicans wouldnt know what hit them...

Only 8% if independents approve of her.


rofl
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,205
10,865
136
It's not if she's partisan but if she is capable of compromise. She has two options either accept the dems need to give and take or decide on "principled" gridlock. She'll have to follow the wishes of the dems, not tell them what she wants. I'm not sure if she can play second fiddle. The reps have clearly gained ground but their overall minority position limits what they can do. The Dems have the advantage but it's not at all clear what they'll do. Obama is fairly transparent. He'll talk bipartisanship until he gets a feel for the new dynamic. Now we'll see more of the politician.

She's as capable of compromise as the Republicans lol.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
The Dems will have to work with the Repub to be able to accomplish anything from their internal agenda. (role reversal)
Actually, since Dems still control the Senate and the Presidency, its the Republicans that need to work with the Dems in the other two branches to accomplish anything from their agenda.
I think the point he's making is that essentially the Repubs still have no chance of having "their agenda" (whatever that might be at this point, I sure as heck don't know) passed. However, they are somewhat insulated from the wrath of the voters if government doesn't achieve anything, because the Dems are still for the most part "in control". Thus, the onus is going to be on the Dems to compromise with the republicans or face the wrath of an even angrier electorate in 2012.

You nailed it perfectly.

If the Dems can not deliver what the American people expect; they will still be held accountable.

Obama is in the WH and the Dems still control the Senate. It may be a slim control, but the numbers are there. No matter what the excusers' say; the public counts the totals only.

Anything the Repubs want, has to be accommodated with the Senate Dems and blessed by Obama. That leaves the Dems holding the bag - those two have the last say.

Repubs can point out all the legislation they want with all the proper words - but if it does not get through and the system is still a failure, the voters will go after those that control the system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Scotteq

Diamond Member
Apr 10, 2008
5,276
5
0
2. "Nancy Pelosi is a Satanist who is the secret cause of many cases of SIDS, as she sneaks into houses at night to smother babies."


..she sneaks!?!? :confused:


;) :p

More seriously Craig: A little Hyperbole never hurt, but enough is enough.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
electing her as minority leader seems like the equivalent of the republicans electing Dick Cheney as RNC chairman right after the 2008 election.

I don't know aout that it seems to me if he would have wanted that job he probably could have gotten it.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Pelosi has been an outstanding speaker, period. She should remain the leader.

The House has passed all kinds of good things, and was the strongest branch of Democrats out of Obama, Reid and Pelosi.

The fact she is attacked by the right, and some Americans fall for that, isn't a reason to remove her. The right doesn't get to pick the Democrats' leaders.

The right doesn't get to pick. So Pelosi gets the nod and tells the reps to screw off. The reps now have the numerical and perhaps just as important, procedural control where bills are introduced and funded. Neither side yields and we have gridlock. That's my prediction. Everyone keeps their principles and nothing gets done.