Pelosi: 'I am running for Dem leader'

[spacejamz]

Just when you think it is safe to get back in the water...Guess she didn't get the memo that the voters are sick and tired of her crap...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/05/5414095-pelosi-i-am-running-for-dem-leader

 

[her209]

Sounds like she's already got the votes...

 

[matt0611]

I wonder if their will be any strong democrat opposition to this. I predict that there will be.

No matter what you think of Pelosi, she is not well favored in the eyes of america right now.
It would be a terrible move to keep her. I actually think it helps the republicans keep the majority in 2012 if she is the minority leader.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

She needs to go, there's no redeeming her in the eyes of the average voter.

 

[her209]

I wonder if their will be any strong democrat opposition to this. I predict that there will be.

My guess is that all those Blue Dog Dems that would have opposed her lost on Tuesday.

 

[IBMer]

Just when you think it is safe to get back in the water...Guess she didn't get the memo that the voters are sick and tired of her crap...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/05/5414095-pelosi-i-am-running-for-dem-leader

Not that I like the women, but you're kind of missing something... Did she get voted out? Are there no democrats in the House?

 

[spacejamz]

Not that I like the women, but you're kind of missing something... Did she get voted out? Are there no democrats in the House?

I think you are kinda of missing something...

House Speakers often step aside after losing their party loses the majority. The last speaker to stay on as minority leader was Republican Joe Martin in 1955, according to msnbc.com's Tom Curry.

 

[spidey07]

I heard my Dem congress critter this morning in an interview say he wouldn't support her, and he was one of her lapdogs. His point is her strengths aren't suited to minority leader where you have to be the face and voice of the party. Her strengths were in arm twisting and dealing.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Staying on as minority leader now is going to help keep her minority leader in 2012.

 

[IBMer]

But you said the message was rejected. So in that she should not have been re-elected correct? And if the democrats message was rejected, there should be no democrats in the house correct?

 

[matt0611]

But you said the message was rejected. So in that she should not have been re-elected correct? And if the democrats message was rejected, there should be no democrats in the house correct?

Her message was rejected by the vast majority of america. Pelosi's district is San Francisco. That seat will always be D.
Pelosi could murder someone and she would still be elected.

 

[spacejamz]

But you said the message was rejected. So in that she should not have been re-elected correct? And if the democrats message was rejected, there should be no democrats in the house correct?

Go back and read your headlines from Wed morning...if you still somehow feel that the Democrat's message was not rejected, then you should go look up the word 'denial'. I really can't make it any clearer than this.

Your question regarding her re-election in her district speaks wonders on how much value you actually add to any 'discussion' you are in here.

 

[IBMer]

Go back and read your headlines from Wed morning...if you still somehow feel that the Democrat's message was not rejected, then you should go look up the word 'denial'. I really can't make it any clearer than this.

Your question regarding her re-election in her district speaks wonders on how much value you actually add to any 'discussion' you are in here.

I just feel reject is a strong word for what happened. If 80 percent of the house and senate were now republican, reject is the right way to phrase it. With what happened on Tuesday, I'd phrase it more like that the Republican message is more widely accepted. Why are people harping with victors and losers and not worring about the other percentage that believes differently and how they can find the common ground?

 

[Scotteq]

*sigh*


The Majority and Minority leaders are put there to be hardasses and drive agenda issues.


I find it hard to believe that anyone currently holding office in the Democratic Party could do this as well as Pelosi. You may not like her. But that's because she's a hardass who gets things done. Exactly the kind of person you want in that position.

She's a shoe~in for it.

 

[Lemon law]

The R's have extracted much mileage out of Pelosi, but in the next congress does it matter at all in terms of whom the democratic minority leader of the house is?

As it is, in 2007 when the dems took back the house after 12 short years of Republican majority, Pelosi, IMHO, was a democratic disaster. All Pelosi was good at was in being a compromise bridge between blue dog democrats, dino democrats, and the liberal wing of the democratic party. As a result, even with a solid majority on her side, Pelosi could not get legislation through, and that is not leadership.

But 20 20 hindsight, if the dems had picked strong leaders in the house and Senate, someone in the Sam Rayburn mold, the R's would have had very good reasons to howl, but the dems would have won the election of 11/2010 because they got positive things done.

But I agree with the R's this time, we need to get rid of Pelosi as dem house leader. And Reid as Senate majority leader also. I don't think the R's will like the new democratic leadership any better, but if the dems don't get organized and soon, the R's are really going to have this country totally screwed up.

As for the blue dog and dino democrats, they are the ones who mostly lost their elections, as they found out pandering to conservatism didn't work.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

I wonder if their will be any strong democrat opposition to this. I predict that there will be.

No matter what you think of Pelosi, she is not well favored in the eyes of america right now.
It would be a terrible move to keep her. I actually think it helps the republicans keep the majority in 2012 if she is the minority leader.

Yeah I think you are 100% correct.

 

[Craig234]

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.

 

[Craig234]

The R's have extracted much mileage out of Pelosi, but in the next congress does it matter at all in terms of whom the democratic minority leader of the house is?

As it is, in 2007 when the dems took back the house after 12 short years of Republican majority, Pelosi, IMHO, was a democratic disaster. All Pelosi was good at was in being a compromise bridge between blue dog democrats, dino democrats, and the liberal wing of the democratic party. As a result, even with a solid majority on her side, Pelosi could not get legislation through, and that is not leadership.

But 20 20 hindsight, if the dems had picked strong leaders in the house and Senate, someone in the Sam Rayburn mold, the R's would have had very good reasons to howl, but the dems would have won the election of 11/2010 because they got positive things done.

Um, the House DID get positive things done - often with an over-compromising President - it was in the Senate where they were blocked by Republicans.

 

[Craig234]

I wonder if their will be any strong democrat opposition to this. I predict that there will be.

No matter what you think of Pelosi, she is not well favored in the eyes of america right now.
It would be a terrible move to keep her. I actually think it helps the republicans keep the majority in 2012 if she is the minority leader.

The way to deal with the right demonizing a good Democratic leader is to defend the leader, not to fire everyone they attack until you find the Democrat who they don't attack.

"Please welcome the new House Speaker, Rep. Joe Liebermann!"

Or what was that guy's name in 2000, Zell Miller?

The problem here is with the right's excessive media machine ability to demonize, not with Pelosi, who has done great.

I note than there has been about zero specific criticism of Pelosi in the last 100 attack posts about her. It's all 'character assassination.'

But some say 'oh no, the attacks worked, so get rid of her'.

There would be a point where the attacks were so effective, that could become a reason - but it would mean any Democrat could be so attacked.

By the time that's the problem, the Democrats are going to be so weak as a party they have much bigger problems.

The fact that *Pelosi* is the one attacked with such horrible people as Boehner and McConnel in power - we could write a book on their serious flaws - shows the issue. Why aren't they the 'ones who need to go'? Because the corrupt machine is working for them, and their 'screw the country, get back power' obstructionism approach.

 

[Double Trouble]

*sigh*


The Majority and Minority leaders are put there to be hardasses and drive agenda issues.


I find it hard to believe that anyone currently holding office in the Democratic Party could do this as well as Pelosi. You may not like her. But that's because she's a hardass who gets things done. Exactly the kind of person you want in that position.

She's a shoe~in for it.

I'm not so sure. Time will tell, but I suspect she's not going to get the vote from her own party.

No matter how effective she is or what she has/has not done, the reality is that anyone can see that she has been very effectively painted by the republicans as the face of all that is wrong with DC. She is "bad DC" personified, much like Cheney became "neocon personified". Allowing her to be the leader of the house dems would allow the republicans to get great mileage out of her again in 2012, just like they did this year. I can't even count how many times I saw pelosi in adds here in Ohio, and Ohio was pretty much a clean sweep top to bottom for the repubs.

 

[nick1985]

But you said the message was rejected. So in that she should not have been re-elected correct?

Uh, you really think that since a Democrat got re-elected in San Francisco, that means their message was not rejected by the nation?


HUH??

 

[Scotteq]

Double: I could see where such a decision could be made. I tend to doubt the Dems would take that tack, though, since the Conservative/Dems were the ones who ate most of the losses this election. That would tend to affirm there's little public sympathy for politicians who take a middle of the road approach.

 

[IBMer]

Uh, you really think that since a Democrat got re-elected in San Francisco, that means their message was not rejected by the nation?


HUH??

Only 65 percent of the senate seats went Republican, and only 55 percent of the house went republican. Are you saying that the other percentage of Americans don't exist?

 

[nick1985]

Only 65 percent of the senate seats went Republican, and only 55 percent of the house went republican. Are you saying that the other percentage of Americans don't exist?

Are you really under the guise that its possible for a Democrat to lose a seat from San Fransisco to a Republican? Please tell me that you dont believe that.

 

[spacejamz]

The problem here is with the right's excessive media machine ability to demonize, not with Pelosi.

Are you fvking kidding us??? What is scary is that you actually believe this BS you spew out here....

There is a reason why US public opinion of her is in the crapper, but then again, you and your buddy Obama think we are too stupid to think for ourselves so you find someone to blame...