Pelosi: 'I am running for Dem leader'

[Lemon law]

The question somewhat becomes, given the polls that say she is unpopular, is it really for her actions, or that fact the GOP has spent six or eight years non-stop demonizing her.

It was almost the same for Hillary Clinton when she failed to win the democratic nomination for Prez in 2008, 17 years of non stop GOP demonizing down the drain.

Well, now its McConnells and more importantly Boehner's turn in the barrel, because when GOP policies turn the American economy to crud, just like the same policies did for Hoover, Boehner hogs and Boehnervilles are likely to dominate the American vocabulary.

Will Boehner still be speaker of the house on 1/2012?

 

[spacejamz]

Craig, are you like this in real life?

If we don't start agreeing with him soon and realize that his point of view is the only truth out there, we are all going to be called idiots and then be threatened that we will be put on his ignore list.....

We should probably cue up the WWAAAAHHHHAMBULANCE....

 

[nick1985]

If we don't start agreeing with him soon and realize that his point of view is the only truth out there, we are all going to be called idiots and then be threatened that we will be put on his ignore list.....

We should probably cue up the WWAAAAHHHHAMBULANCE....

He is normally batshit, but he is in a rare form since his D's got beat up on Tuesday and his God Keith Olbermann got sacked. He is extra nuts today, he can't help it.

I can just see him Tuesday night, pacing back and forth in his living room. His fists are balled up, his face is redder than a cherry, spittle flying out of the corner of his mouth....

 

[IBMer]

No shit not everyone voted Republican. Nobody ever said that. You tried to infer that since she was re-elected, that cant possibly mean that people are sick of her. What a farce. She could be awaiting trial for triple homocide and STILL handily beat any Republican challenger. You point holds no water.

I also heard a number on CNN today during my lunch. Only 8% of independants approve of Nancy Pelosi. That should tell you something, although my gut says it wont.

I wouldn't vote for her! That doesn't make it so I am not tired of the absurdity that since the republicans won 65 percent of the senate seats and 55 of the house seats their agenda is all the American people want. Rejection is a pretty strong word. Its not a 50/50 thing.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Speaker of the House is usually from the Majority Party.

Pelosi belongs to the minority party.
Pelosi also stated 2 years ago, that she did not need Republicans to work with her. (As did Obama and Reid).

Do you really think that she will be able to get the Democrats to toe her line - even when she had control and power for committees, she apparently was unable to do so. As a minority leader, she will be equivalently spaded.

The Dems will have to work with the Repub to be able to accomplish anything from their internal agenda. (role reversal)

And with the Dems still the majority in the Senate and Obama still in the WH, the House Repubs are somewhat sheilded from blame if the Dems are unable to lead the country out of this mess over the next 2 years.

Obama knows that he will have to comprimise or he will be out on his ass in 2012. the current election should that he is going about this the wrong way. while he had the governmetn cotnrolled, the people were not satisfied with what was accomplished.

The Senate could go in 2012 also if they are not careful. One has to deliver more than hot air within this climate.

 

[dainthomas]

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.

I would agree. Maybe you don't like her approach or personality or whatever, but she got the job done as speaker. She didn't let Republicans make her their patsy like Obama did.

 

[jackstar7]

If I'm understanding this correctly, the values of those in San Francisco are not... American values?

I appreciate the mentality of "It's not popular, so it should be quiet!", but it hasn't always stopped people from trying to do what they think is right.

If "the country" gives a rat's about who is Minority leader over the next two years, I'd be amazed.

 

[Double Trouble]

No, you are invited to stop replying to my posts, for your jerk tone.

Sure thing. As soon as you stop posting drivel, I'll stop responding to it

 

[CallMeJoe]

The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.

Perhaps if Speaker Pelosi had followed through on this, her party would still hold a majority in the House.

 

[IGBT]

keep her up there. She's the face and voice of the rejected reckless agenda.

 

[Craig234]

Perhaps if Speaker Pelosi had followed through on this, her party would still hold a majority in the House.

Wrong. If she had eliminated every ounce of any 'ethical issues', the results would have been about the same, because they weren't based on that.

They were based on the ability of her opponents to demonize her with the public, and the economy, far more.

 

[her209]

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.

 

[Double Trouble]

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.

 

[nageov3t]

If I'm understanding this correctly, the values of those in San Francisco are not... American values?

I appreciate the mentality of "It's not popular, so it should be quiet!", but it hasn't always stopped people from trying to do what they think is right.

If "the country" gives a rat's about who is Minority leader over the next two years, I'd be amazed.

if it were anyone else, you'd probably be right.

but Nancy Pelosi is a well-known national figure and, to many Americans, representative of the far left.

 

[Double Trouble]

If I'm understanding this correctly, the values of those in San Francisco are not... American values?

Those in San Fran are Americans too, but the reality is that their values are not in line with 90% of the rest of the country. I'm not saying they are wrong or right, but their views are different. It doesn't make sense to take the "face" of those views (views the vast majority of the country disagrees with) and make it the face of the party nationally.

I appreciate the mentality of "It's not popular, so it should be quiet!", but it hasn't always stopped people from trying to do what they think is right.

Nobody said anything about the views having to "be quiet". Just that it isn't smart to make those unpopular views the banner face of the national party -- if you want to get votes that is.

If "the country" gives a rat's about who is Minority leader over the next two years, I'd be amazed.

That's true, her visibility as the minority leader will certainly be less, but I still think it will be a big mistake that could cost them. She's an easy target, she's despised not just by the right-wing (it doesn't matter what they think since they wouldn't vote democrat anyway), but more importantly by the independents. The dems got hammered this election because the independents that went Obama in 2008 shifted away to repub in 2010.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

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.

They have to work with each other. If the Dems screw the Reps what do you think will get through the House?

I'm betting on gridlock because the extremists on both sides won't have it any other way. I suppose I could be surprised.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Wrong. If she had eliminated every ounce of any 'ethical issues', the results would have been about the same, because they weren't based on that.
They were based on the ability of her opponents to demonize her with the public, and the economy, far more.

The bad economy coupled with the Fox News/Limbaugh propaganda war against the Democrats ensured the loss of a large number of contests this past election, but a good dose of "Open and Honest" from the party leadership could have limited them.

 

[Craig234]

if it were anyone else, you'd probably be right.

but Nancy Pelosi is a well-known national figure and, to many Americans, representative of the far left.

If you mean 'people are propagandized like sheep into demonizing her with buzzwords', you have a point.

Reminds me of a clip of Rush Limbaugh I unfortunately saw recently, where he was ranting about 'how can you compromise with liberals? You have right and wrong, how do you compromise with liberals, with wrong, with evil?' His asinine conflation like that actually does make many equate 'Pelosi' and 'Evil'.

That's a victory of propaganda and human weakness being exploited, not a political or rational opinion.

 

[Craig234]

The bad economy coupled with the Fox News/Limbaugh propaganda war against the Democrats ensured the loss of a large number of contests this past election, but a good dose of "Open and Honest" from the party leadership could have limited them.

We disagree and there's no way I know to resolve it. She DID make significant improvements, and I bet not one righty or 'moderate' here can name them.

 

[nageov3t]

If you mean 'people are propagandized like sheep into demonizing her with buzzwords', you have a point.

Reminds me of a clip of Rush Limbaugh I unfortunately saw recently, where he was ranting about 'how can you compromise with liberals? You have right and wrong, how do you compromise with liberals, with wrong, with evil?' His asinine conflation like that actually does make many equate 'Pelosi' and 'Evil'.

That's a victory of propaganda and human weakness being exploited, not a political or rational opinion.

so what?

it is what it is and she's clearly incapable of redefining herself as a non-partisan.

 

[CallMeJoe]

...That's true, her visibility as the minority leader will certainly be less, but I still think it will be a big mistake that could cost them. She's an easy target, she's despised not just by the right-wing (it doesn't matter what they think since they wouldn't vote democrat anyway), but more importantly by the independents. The dems got hammered this election because the independents that went Obama in 2008 shifted away to repub in 2010.

Visualize the 2012 Republican Congressional campaign ads:
"You the People rejected the Pelosi agenda in 2010 but my opponent voted to keep Pelosi in charge of the Democratic Party. Do you want him to help keep her in power again?"

 

[Craig234]

so what?

it is what it is and she's clearly incapable of redefining herself as a non-partisan.

The leader of a political party is never supposed to be "non-partisan". That is one of the most misused, misunderstood words in this forum, it's turned into "poopyhead".

 

[nageov3t]

The leader of a political party is never supposed to be "non-partisan". That is one of the most misused, misunderstood words in this forum, it's turned into "poopyhead".

so you're cool with another 2 years of attack ads successfully linking Nancy Pelosi and an unpopular left agenda to House candidates across the country?

 

[CallMeJoe]

so you're cool with another 2 years of attack ads successfully linking Nancy Pelosi and an unpopular left agenda to House candidates across the country?

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?

 

[Craig234]

so you're cool with another 2 years of attack ads successfully linking Nancy Pelosi and an unpopular left agenda to House candidates across the country?

The following two things are not the same:

1. "NonPartisan Leader Pelosi, do you support Democrats or Republicans to control the House in 2012?"

"Ha ha, nice try at a gotcha question, but of course I have no preference. Whatever the people prefer, is what I prefer."

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."

Why don't you read another sentence in my post, the one about how misunderstood the word 'partisan' is here?

While I actually don't 'have a problem' with the ads you mention other than being lies paid for by special interests at odds with the public interest, they're not just 'partisan'.