Just so you know, if Pelosi goes, she gets replaced with a centrist.

[DanTex]

Pelosi is from the progressive wing of the party. She also happens to be an extremely capable leader.

There's some fantasy going around in far-left circles that Pelosi is a milquetoast centrist, and that her replacement would be a Jeremy Corbyn style "true socialist". Like most far-left fantasies, this is totally detached from reality.

The next person in line for the leadership is Steny Hoyer. Hoyer is an actual centrist. Not an anyone-right-of-Karl-Marx-is-a-sellout type of centrist, but a centrist in US political reality.

It is true that the GOP likes to demonize Pelosi and link her to Dems in purple/red districts. This is because she is (correctly) perceived as a liberal. But this problem is not going to be solved by replacing her with an American Jeremy Corbyn. That would actually make for an easier GOP target.

I like Pelosi and think she has done a great job. At the same time, if strategically it is better to have someone else in that role, I'm OK with that too. What matters is winning elections. But let's not pretend that somehow the Dems' problems will be fixed by replacing Pelosi with a far-leftist. First, this isn't going to happen, if she goes, she will be replaced by someone less progressive. And second, if she did get replaced by a far-leftist, that wouldn't help the Dems' electoral prospects, it would hurt them.

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. The alleged progressives who are trying to push out Pelosi or want PURITY tests on all

candidates have no fucking clue what a liberal is and just how liberal and productive people like Pelosi and Hillary have been in their careers.

I dont know what will teach them, if anything.

They bought this lie from you know who last year that their candidates MUST be for $15 MW or OUT THEY GO, as one example.

In this one example there are many reasons why a seasoned, LIBERAL politician would say "Hey, I know, if we go for $12 we will actually get it, if we go for $15 we wont, which do you want?"

The damage done last year and now by this new "progressive" movement is playing into the hands of the party that are fascists and are supported by Putin.

[EffieBlack]

86. Not to mention they don't know jack squat about how to get things done in Congress

[JHan]

2. Ossoff chases Handel in a red district that should never have been competitive...

...but the meme over the past couple of days is "massive failure" and "pelosi needs to go" instead of rallying.

In-fucking-credible.

[EL34x4]

41. Obviously, Democrats thought the district was competitive...

...or we wouldn't have spent $30 million trying to win it.

[JHan]

42. 50 state strategies cost money.

[Demsrule86]

51. It was worth a shot...but it was always the GOP's to lose.

The DCCC took criticism for not helping with other special elections. I think it was a waste of DCCC money...I gave but I had little hope.

[LanternWaste]

53. Your premise does not seem to address

Your premise does not seem to address the "massive failure" and "pelosi needs to go." Those being the main points of the post you were in fact, responding to.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

3. It won't be Hoyer

Or if it is we have bigger problems than I thought.

[DanTex]

5. Then who? What scenario are all the far-left anti-Pelosi people envisioning?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

8. Preferably somebody who doesn't remember JFK getting shot

I figure Schiff is probably the next to ascend, I'm not his biggest fan but we need to stop kissing the rings of octogenarians just for the sake of respecting the hierarchy.

[SFnomad]

10. And we also shouldn't be writing octogenarians off ... just because n/t

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

12. Crude as it may be, we need to excite young Democrat voters about the House

I have met too many otherwise passionate young people who:

1. Don't know who their Congressman is.
2. Don't know whether their Congressman is a Democrat or a Republican.
3. Don't know when the next midterm election is.

We need congressional leadership and local candidates that will fire them up like Obama did, not just paying blind deference to people who have been squatting in noncompetitive seats for decades.

[SFnomad]

13. Yes, let's get some new blood in there to fire people up ...

At the same time, we can ...

• Lose experienced people that have taken careers to build bridges with colleges and can accomplish things because of it
• Give more power to lobbyists, because whoever is spending the most money in an election (or spent on them) is most likely to win. And once they win because of those lobbyists, they "own" them, else those lobbyists will move on to the next candidate in the next election
• Contribute to gridlock ... as it's the newer, younger members that are typically more partisan, we've seen that over about the last decade or two

People like Pelosi are still there because their constituents like them and she can get things accomplished. But as a minority leader, she (or anyone else in that position) will be limited as to what they can do.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

24. I will gladly make that sacrifice if we can win and hold the house

We need the person on the right in this cartoon to vote in midterm elections, nothing else matters at this point. Neither Nancy Pelosi or any of the other geriatrics are going to deliver that.

[certainot]

50. the guy on the left has 300 clones on 1000 radio stations and

that's why trump was even close. they will always be there but after reagan killed the fairness doctrine 30 years ago they put those guys on every corner and stump in the country screaming away and the left just walked by. so in 40 states with 80 senators because no one got in their face in real time, tens of millions of apathetic and too busy to pay attention
voters believe them.

we even let 88 major universities endorse them

it might help if springsteen or green day or jello biafra were running buy the real question should be how did hillary's emails become more important than global warming and "how the fuck did bush/palin/trump even get close enough?"

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

60. So it's hopeless?

I would rather we engage our base than disengage their's. Even if their engagement is the passive absorption of bullshit.

Liberal talk radio is a dead-end. We don't need voices of authority, we're suspicious of them - even sympathetic ones. Everyone listened to Air America for two days and then never again.

[certainot]

66. you're telling me 95% of americans who would listen to talk radio prefer the lies, racism, misogyny

and stupid of rw radio? they have a monopoly propaganda operation and they protest it. it's worth trillions in global warming denial, war, supremes, deregulation, tax breaks, and republican pols/presidents

air am was sabotaged, and liberal talk still is.

there is no "market solution" for the problem until after americans fix it with protests and boycotts and reduce rw radio to its true market demand - a couple hundred stations in the fever swamps. mom and pop truth can't compete with wall mart of lying until the left's orgs pull their ipods out of their asses and stop wasting our donations, getting beaten by a few hundred assholes on 1000 radio stations merely because they prefer to give them a free speech free ride.

we could start by telling our 'liberal' universities to reread their mission statements so they can't broadcast sports on, and endorse, that crap anymore.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

72. Uhh... yeah. Actually I do believe that.

[certainot]

74. so you're saying only racist idiots would turn on the loudest clearest stations

with news, traffic, weather, sports while they're driving or working, when there's a major news event going on, when there's an emergency, etc....

and if they had another equally loud station next to it on the dial that was giving them facts and real news instead of lies, and real comedy and wit instead of 'laughs' based on pointing at others' misfortunes, and someone telling them trump was a ignorant jerk instead of a great man, they'd make the wrong choice 95% of the time?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

75. You're describing an awfully specific group of people

"95% of americans who would listen to talk radio" is like saying "95% of americans who use chewing tobacco" or 95% of americans who own electric vehicles". I think the number of people who have the attention span and inclination to listen to Rush Limbaugh ramble nonsense for any length of time is probably fairly static.

I know a lot of people who were really excited about Air America, or at least Al Franken - but within a week their dials had shifted back to KCRW or KROQ because in the absence of the need for a voice of authority, which liberals just don't have the appeal wore off quickly.

It isn't 1940, you don't need AM radio to reach people, my car left the factory without the radio antenna attached. I didn't notice, my father (then 82) had to point it out to me that my radio didn't work.

[certainot]

76. it dominates 40 states with 80 senators

in most parts of the country there are no free easy alternatives for politics while driving or working

when things are happening, people interested in politics can turn that shit on. then they tell others around them who are too busy or apathetic that hillary can't be trusted, she's a security risk, she killed people at benghazi on purpose, corporations are people, global warming is a hoax, canadians come across the border to avoid medical care there, etc.

democrats need to pull their ipods out of theirears and realize low tech talk radio is kicking their internet ass.

trump's team studied it in 2014. most of the russian trolling piggybacked it and wouldn't have gone anywhere without months and years of unchallenged repetition. there would be no fox without talk radio.

ignoring talk radio is the biggest political mistake in history

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

82. This is a product nobody wants, you can't force it into their ears

Messaging to middle America is something we are disastrously bad at, but giving Janeane Garofalo equal time on Patriot AM in Hooterville isn't going to change anyone's mind.

[certainot]

97. you're being silly with the generalizations. live in a big city?

most blue towns and cities and counties of the US have NO liberal talk radio. the idea that limbaugh/trump ignorance and lies dominate the country because that's what americans want is a rw talking point, an insult to americans, and a lousy excuse for doing nothing.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

104. I don't think Los Angeles has had mainstream liberal talk radio for many years

I'm not even really sure the extent to which Pacifica is a going concern.

I understand your frustration, but I don't think the existence of liberal talk radio or equal time would change anything.

[certainot]

105. it would but it's ridiculous and a waste of time to think it's possible at this point

it wont get better until the dumbass progressive orgs recognize they're getting repeatedly beaten by a few hundred think tank-scripted liars getting a free speech free ride

[EffieBlack]

87. What's the point of winning the House if, once we win it, we end up with a Speaker who doesn't know

squat about how to make things happen. We don't need a fresh new face as the Leader - we need an experienced hand who knows how to get shit done.

And, based on the conversations on DU, it seems that the response some progressives want the party to give to the idiot GOP base's vow to do whatever it takes to get rid of Pelosi . . . is to get rid of Pelosi.

Lord, please save us from some of our.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

89. I will take my chances on the theoretical speaker figuring it out

rather than waiting for this strategy, if there is one at all, to play out.

[EffieBlack]

94. Yes, by all means. Let's toss out one of the most effective Speakers in history so a "theoretical

speaker" can take over and figure out a new strategy.

Brilliant strategy.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

95. emphasis on "history"

We have no way back from the wilderness except hoping that Trump is so disastrous that Republicans will abandon him, which is sort of like wishing that a baby will make an alcoholic and unemployed father more sober and industrious.

[BeyondGeography]

52. I wonder how many great CA and NY Reps. we've missed out on

because so many of these folks NEVER let go. I was on a plane with Nita Lowey two weeks ago; 80 years old and looking every day of it. My area is filled with talented Democrats who take a back seat for life because of these folks. And then when the calls come to replace them, it's, "think of all the experience we're losing!" Please.

[EffieBlack]

96. You know these are elected positions, right?

Nancy Pelosi didn't seize power from an unwilling caucus and refuse to let go. The caucus voted for her and continues to vote for her - probably because they know better than the average Joe what a Speaker and Minority Leader are supposed to do and they know how effective Pelosi is at doing it.

But, by all means - continue to insist that we get "new blood" that is more palatable to Republicans.

[BeyondGeography]

101. These are non competitive seats that anyone with a pulse can win

And too many people hold onto them for too long; both parties. It's basically a Congress full of old people who are further and further removed from most of the public.

http://blog.quorum.us/the-115th-congress-is-among-the-oldest-in-history-1

[EffieBlack]

106. Tell that to Tim Ryan

He got his ass handed to him by the Democratic Caucus when he tried to boot Pelosi out.

[bettyellen]

18. This is more "anti-establishment" bullshit, a continuation of his nonsense that Trump pushed that

Outsiders are somehow morally superior and working relationships are somehow scandalous. Nonsense.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

21. It isn't about "outsiders" or being "anti-establishment"

It is about our leadership in the house that is completely incapable of delivering midterm voters.

Politics isn't a touring nostalgia act. If you want to start a cult to worship Nancy Pelosi, start a cult to worship Nancy Pelosi - just don't do it in Congress.

I know it is crude, but we need leadership and candidates that people will become much more invested in.

[JHan]

44. They're going to have to be massively charismatic then because my generation..

was nurtured to distrust politics , the system , and encouraged to not be politically engaged.

Grassroots activism - away from Washington - as well as social media awareness and understanding we're in an information war with the republicans are the things to grapple with.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

61. Man... I had the craziest dream!

There was this guy named Barak Obama, this black dude from Hawaii and he was president for eight years!

[JHan]

62. Yes, as President.

You won't get an Obama every time - what happened subsequently in 2010 -etc?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

63. Leaders are out there

But they won't emerge if they have nothing to look forward to other than serving twenty years in congress as the same leadership just ages in place.

[JHan]

65. I agree, but I'm also recognizing the fatalism towards public services that exists out there..

it's a cultural thing and it suits the conservative mindset that government is bad.

we have to fight this kind of thinking- it's more than just getting a charismatic leader ( or leaders) but also creating better memes, challenging the way our leaders and our ideas are framed by the opposition. George Lakoff comes close to analyzing what we have to do in terms of language and communication. I don't think we need to wait on another Obama for this to happen, we just have to understand the terrain we're fighting on and I don't think we do.

[Fresh_Start]

54. why the hell do you expect the leadership in the house to deliver midterm voters

it should be the local democratic organization and local democrats who do that...

it is NOT the job of the house leadership to do that.
the house leadership job is to pass or block legislation

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

59. Because that is how ever parliament like body on earth works

You will note the word "leader" appears in both "House Majority Leader" and "House Minority Leader".

The Republicans don't appear similarly confused by this.

[Fresh_Start]

64. you haven't provided anything other than your opinion

is there a job description
do you have evidence that the GOP House leadership is taking an active role to turn out midterm voter?


Note that its "HOUSE majority leader" and "HOUSE minority leader" ....its not "MIDTERM election leader".

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

71. An opinion is more than what you're offering

Which appears to be holding up the leadership as passive and effete in the face of indifference and Republican supremacy.

[EffieBlack]

90. The House of Representatives is not Parliament.

And I have well noted the word "leader." It means leader of the House Democratic Caucus. Not Leader of Democrats. They are responsible for the legislative strategy, not the external political strategy and activity.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

92. So, where do I go to vote for the House leaders?

I sure hope I am not a victim of voter suppression.

[EffieBlack]

88. It's not the Speaker/minority leader's job to deliver mid-term voters

It's to get shit done in the House to give the Caucus members something to run on.

Nancy Pelosi delivered. And the Caucus members responded by going into their Districts and running away from Obama and ObamaCare and pretending they didn't even know Nancy Pelosi. And the constituents bought it and voted them out and put Republicans in their place.

These Members lost their races because they were scared of their own shadows and refused to stand for anything. That is NOT Nancy Pelosi's fault.

It's fascinating to me to see progressives insist that we need to be bolder and truer to our progressive principles and then demand that one of the politicians who really does that has no right to be in leadership because she's an unpopular lightning rod for conservatives who hate her because she's too liberal.

Pure idiocy.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

91. Wow, I just had another crazy trippy dream

There was this guy named Newt Gingrich...

[certainot]

49. and 4 - don't know even if they ARE active have no clue they will be totally undone by

by a few hundred lying blowhards on a 1000 good old low tech radio stations getting piggybacked by putin - and will soon lose net neutrality

and obama may have fired them up but they believed the bullshit that obama COULD give them single payer, close gitmo, etc while ignoring the right's most important weapon as it beat the crap out of their reps. so then they didn't vote in 2010- and so on....

and how many of those are students going to the 88 universities that broadcast sports on 257 limbaugh stations while they sell club gitmo coffee mugs and help those stations bring in advertisers to broadcast, for eg on limbaugh today, 'comedy' bits about spanking kids being great cardio vascular exercise, making fun of "shattered testicles" in soccer ("i thought it was a sissy's game" says soccer mom....), global warming is still a hoax, attacking pelosi, obama clinton, comey, the trump/russia story is a hoax, etc. oh yeah, and the one deep state item that is the basis for all this is the golden shower fake dossier. totally made up, totally phony, etc ..... that's all in the 15 minutes i just heard while writing this before turning it off (sponsored by ziprecruiter, etc)

the quickest way to get the dem party to go 10 pts left is to stop ignoring talk radio, the only medium with NO counterpart on the left and the dominant free easy medium in 40 states with 80 senators. the medium used to enforce who and what is acceptable politically in the US, who advances in primaries, and what legislation advances. limbaugh and sons are the biggest political correctness cops in every state, while they whine about political correctness and get validated by people like bill maher, who's got a great show but like most liberals is talk radio-blind and when he blames fox should be blaming talk radio.

and while young and old liberals complain about money in politics they might want to consider this simple math: at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 5 = $75,000/wk x 1200 stations rw talk radio is worth $18MIL/day or 390MIL$ /month or 4.68 BIL$/ year FREE for coordinated global warming denial, pro republican free market deregulation and wall st think tank propaganda, swiftboating, and the hate and fear used to get people to vote republican.

and about $1BIL of that is endorsed by 88 major universities - sports teams

[Me.]

78. So They Have To Be Inspired?

How about looking out for their best interests as an inspiration, civic duty as an adult, caring for and responsible enough for the world they live in to participate?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

83. If you know how to do that with the status quo, please bring it to the floor

But the "wait for them to get outraged enough to vote" strategy doesn't seem to be working.

The general public doesn't care who's "turn" it is to run for president, the general public doesn't care just how much some geriatric deserves to hang on to their seat. You either connect with them or you don't, an institution with approval ratings that make the airline and cable industries look like Toyota is not in a good position to dig in their heels and insist all is well.

[Me.]

98. My Point Is I Don't Think I Should Have To

I expect them to act responsibly, like grown ups and vote and vote in their own best interests.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

99. Okay, but for the time being

any suggestions on what pills I should be taking to vanquish Trump, McConnell and Ryan from my head?

[Me.]

100. Come Now, There Are Many Way To Manage Pain

We are all seeking them out

[MineralMan]

4. Those who want to shove Pelosi aside are not our allies.

They're working against us.

[jcmaine72]

6. +1

[Johnny2X2X]

11. That is such BS!!!

So Nancy Pelosi is the absolute line in the sand? We can't even debate replacing her?

This is a website centered on the Democratic Party, yet we aren't even allowed to question the leadership of our party.

The Party is in shambles, absolute shambles, denying that is not working for the Democratic Party. Pelosi is despised by Middle America, that is a fact. Doesn't mean I don't like her, but Donald Trump is about 10 points more favorable than her in National Polls. We laugh at the Reps for tying themselves to Trump and his dismal 37% approval rating when we're sticking with Nancy Pelosi as the face of our party when she has a 28% favorable rating. Heck, and that's up for her, she was at 25% for most of the election year.

Pelosi's leadership is not as effective when she's so disliked. Not saying she isn't a great person or a great Congresswoman, but egad, she is an utter failure as the face of our party. Do people realize Paul freaking Ryan is more popular than Pelosi? And Dems aren't running against Ryan, they're running against Trump who is way more popular than Pelosi (who Reps love to run against).

Posts like these are getting deleted. There is zero soul searching allowed. Do you see the state the Party is in? The country is screwed without our party being at least a strong opponent, but we just keep getting steam rolled and anyone who questions why is being labeled as an insurgent.

It's like we don't even pay attention to what the Reps say about the Dems that is working so well. When they are talking about the Washington establishment who are getting rich, (BS or not), the face they are pointing to is Pelosi over and over, and it's working. They painted Pelosi as everything that is wrong with government and it worked.

WE NEED TO CHANGE AS A PARTY OR WE WILL LOSE IN 2018!!!

[SFnomad]

14. What is BS is stating that there is "zero soul searching allowed"

Soul searching is fine ... but,

• Blaming the state of the Democratic Party on Pelosi not being "liberal enough" is crap.
• Calling Secretary Clinton the "Republican Wing of the Democratic Party" is crap.
• Blaming the state of the Democratic Party on these people not being "young enough" or "energizing enough" is crap.

I could go on, but you should get the idea.

[Johnny2X2X]

20. I have no doubt my post, like others I've written will be deleted after jury

This is what we are doing on this site. Anyone questioning Pelosi is getting shouted down and in many cases their posts are getting banned.

Nancy Pelosi is the most effective weapon the Republicans have in elections, period. She's the face of the "Liberal Washington Elite" to tens of millions of middle class voters. I know it's BS, you know it's BS, but that doesn't change the fact that tens of millions of Americans will still vote against the idea of Nancy Pelosi in 2018.

We need a new face, we need a new spokesperson. We need to at least have a change at the top so the average swing voter can look at our party and at least start listening to them, Pelosi prevents that.

To use a sports analogy, it's like the manager of a baseball team whose team finished last in the division, for a season or two there can be a ton of excuses and they get to keep their job if those excuses hold some water, but after several losing seasons in a row the manager gets replaced whether they had excuses or not.

Why is Nancy Pelosi the only person capable of leading our party in the House?

[MineralMan]

23. Do you know how the House chooses its leadership?

It appears that you do not. Nancy Pelosi was elected as Minority Leader by the Democrats in the House. Each of the Democrats who voted for her was elected in his or her own district by the voters in that district. The elected Democrats IN the House choose their OWN leader.

That's how it works. We elect people to Congress and they select their own leadership. What method would you prefer be used?

[Johnny2X2X]

26. You are arguing totally beside the point

Yes, we are the Democratic Voters, if we decide that our leaders should vote for a different Speaker, they just might. But that discussion isn't even being allowed here. Pelosi is infallible apparently. And above all, she bares no responsibility for the disaster that has happened to our party in the last several elections.

I'm a big supporter of Pelosi as a person and a Congresswoman, but I just think the face of the party might need to be changed. Even suggesting that has caused this site to shout down dozens who dare to suggest it's even a possibility to replace Pelosi.

[MineralMan]

27. Why do you say that discussion is not allowed here.

Your posts are here. Nobody has removed them. You are, in fact, having that discussion, and I am participating in it.

Nobody has been shouted down. Disagreement is not shouting someone down. It is simply disagreement.

You say that "the face of the party might need to be changed," but you offer no information on what those changes should look like. Before there is change, there must be a plan for that change. So, let's here how you'd like to change "the face of the party."

Pelosi will be replaced when her Democratic colleagues in the House decide to replace her, or when she stops running for her seat. They can replace her anytime they wish. They do not wish to do that. In fact, if she ran right now for her majority leader position, she would win handily.

So, again, how do you suggest the "face of the party" be changed, and why do you want it to be changed in that way? Please take all the time you want, and use as many words as you find necessary.

[Johnny2X2X]

29. Posts have been removed in other thread

And I've already detailed exactly why I feel Pelosi needs to be replaced as the face of the party. Sometimes, change for the sake of change is actually a good thing when it comes to branding. Nancy Pelosi is our brand, our brand is not selling, re-brand. Simple as that. Doesn't mean Pelosi won't still be a big part of things for us, it just means that every time we have a response to the GOP it won't be Nancy Pelosi from the House that we trot out to offer a rebuttal. We're trotting out someone with a 28% approval rating weekly, but that's not all of it, the reason she is ineffective is because she embodies to swing voters everything the Repukes say the Democratic Party is. Wildly wealthy Washington Insider who has been in Washington for 30 years. We're the Democratic Party, we speak for working people, yet we choose someone worth $100 Million whose entire career has been spent in Washington to represent the whole party. It's not smart. It's surprising that Pelosi herself isn't the first person to see that.

[MineralMan]

30. Have your posts been removed? Actually, I hadn't noticed

posts being removed in other threads. Perhaps you can link to those threads, so I can go and see them.

In any case, you are posting freely in this thread. I don't alert on posts that are replies to me. Ever. I don't think anyone else has alerted on your replies, either.

So, if you want me to see posts that have been removed, you'll have to give me links to threads.

[Johnny2X2X]

39. Here's one

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9237697

And I'm not the only one.

[JHan]

43. delusions of persecution.

Who knows why your post got hidden , I can't see it- your posts to MineralMan are still up so what's the complaint again?

[SFnomad]

67. Pelosi isn't the only person capable of leading our party ... but why are you

in such a rush to throw someone who is capable overboard?

And please, get over your persecution complex. If your post gets deleted, it's because you broke the rules.

As Democrats, we have to put on our big boy pants and quit making decisions because the Republicans will be mean to us.

And if you think we could replace Pelosi with someone the Republicans won't try to demonize, you're living in a fantasy world.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

16. Her leadership is QUITE effective...

And has been. The majority of those who dislike her are Republicans. Why would we replace one of our own because Republicans don't like her?

Cry me a fucking river.

[LenaBaby61]

84. "Her leadership is QUITE effective..."

Yes, it has been. I live in California and I've seen her being very effective up close and personal.

Also, I've seen some saying that Dems have to get certain kinds of candidates to bring out young people to vote. I understand that in the abstract--get a person who will give a person good reasons to get them out to vote etc. However, IF young folks can't be bothered to read/keep up on things that potentially may affect their everyday lives in good and especially bad ways, then oh well, poor, uninformed and suffering THEM

I can say that I'm proud to know many younger people (2 of whom are my nieces in their 30's) who are well-read, intelligent and who keep up with current events, and who KNOW what time it is, and who don't need to be stimulated to vote because the newest Dem is an exciting hunk. Not saying that there is anything wrong with a person in political office who HAPPENS to be younger & attractive and who IS a competent, knows the issues AND who is exciting.

BUT, If Dems go down the road thinking that they NEED pretty, sexy, models or handsome hunks to run for elective office because of their appearance and because of the "excitement" they can bring, and because young voters will LOVE them, then we as a party are DONE.

California went down that road with "exciting" Ahnold, voting him in as Governor after recalling Gray Davis. I had friends whose DEM relatives and their friends who voted for that ass just because "He was really good in the terminator," and because he was "Ahnold." They also fell for the anti-Gray Davis propaganda Ahnold and thuglicans here were pushing. Ahnold flat out fucked Cali up. Left us in a smoking, hot MESS. We suffered LONG after that wide-foot fool left the governorship, and people saw that they made a HUGE mistake replacing Gray Davis with him after all. Yeah, no shit. NO Davis wasn't perfect, but he was a hell of a lot better than Ahnold. He just wasn't as "exciting" though And as per, another Dem had to ride into California to fix the horrible governing of thuglicans AGAIN. Yep, OLD Gov. Moon Beam had to come BACK to straighten out the smoking, pile of shit that was Ahnold and thuglicans.

Lastly, Mitch McConnell is NO prize to look at AND he's 75. But he gets HIS agenda across AND doesn't give one fuck about what Dems think of HIM. ALL credit to thuglicans who KNOW how to frame a narrative. Dems, not so much. Yertle doesn't even care about his own red-state constituents unless they're part of that 1% he loves & are part of HIS family/friends etc. The rubes in his state are slowly catching on to the fact that THEY will be destroyed if this death bill passes, meaning many will lost their health care. But he wants it passed. Oh well. Also, I'll be damned if thuglicans throw HIS ass under the bus just because we Dems loath him and think he's an a moral POS. Look at the death care bill he's pushing. Dems are up nights fretting over this tRump/GOP death care bill, while at the same time calling for Pelosi to leave her post in the Dem party because she's too liberal. SOME think it's her fault because Ossoff lost to an R in a ruby red district that hadn't elected a Dem there since the 1970's

Back to Pelosi being too OLD, and a liability because thuglicans don't like her liberalism and demonize her--of course because she's a woman of course. Well, OLD Mitch the MAN sure isn't having a problem being called old is he? He's is secure in his post, AND that murderer will sleep very well tonight after release of his death care bill today. Hell, most thuglicans sleep well at night. Meanwhile, Dems want Pelosi replaced because she's old and because Ossoff lost and because thuglicans hate her liberalism.

[bettyellen]

19. Guaranteed we'll hear variations of this about Harris, Warren and Booker too.

Care to share your feelings about them?

[JustAnotherGen]

31. I believe we will

And any Out of State 'purity' progressive who fucks with our Senator Booker (he's mine) needs to indeed have their voices totally crushed. Every time I read 'national message' it makes me bonkers.

I heard the congressman from Ohio who challenged Pelosi last year on Morning Joe while driving into work this morning. He had some good things and bad things to say about what his approach would be -


But his 'working class' message will not work in my district. It won't. The white folks out here would be taking a severe pay cut if they made $15 an hour. You can't win this thing with a canned national message for 'working class voters' in many part of the I-95 corridor from DC up to New England.

It. Will. Fail.

[JustAnotherGen]

28. Have you joined your county democratic committee?

Are you attending regular meetings? We also have a borough committee for my tiny 4500 person town. I attend both. That's how you make changes.

Register as a Democratic.
Attend.
Get on the nominating and endorsements committee.
Lead from within.
Open your home up to a district Action group or an Indivisible meeting.


I guess because of where I live (blue dot in a bright red district in the North East) I don't see this 'shambles'. This is a HUGE year in NJ and we don't have time for any nonsense. From Governor down to borough council we have a lot of work cut out for us. We've also got Leonard Lance on the run, and Booker and Menendez carrying water for us.

I'm just not seeing the 'shambles'. I predict NJ is going to be an absolute blood bath for Republicans this year - and I think Virginia has a few tricks up its sleeves too. How about before we go down the path of 'we are abject failure's folks let us completely repudiate and give Trump Co a voting 'figurative' punch in the nose first?

We are gonna get evil - and that's a good thing. Sooooo evil no other state/district can copy us -but we see it working in the way Lance voted and how he had to compromise (you take this one and I'll take another) with the 11th District Republican.

A national 'platform' won't work in a place where people smile sunnily at the convenience store at each other and say it's a 'nice fucking day isn't it?!?'. <--- And it's really really positive too!

[George II]

40. Excellent points, thank you (too bad you have to state the obvious)

I've been a member of my local Democratic Party for 15 years, an officer for almost all of that time.

Thankfully some of us don't sit at a computer all day whining about how bad we are, we go out and try to rectify the "bad".

You folks are in a great position in NJ to finally turn things around down there - like your characterization of a "blood bath for republicans". Let's hope you're right.

PS - I just saw Bob Casey (PA Senator) on CNN - he says Pelosi should stay and he's tired of whining Democrats. When told that Democrats have lost "four straight special elections", he laughed and said "four republican districts, big deal!"

[JustAnotherGen]

107. Well

I just think if people were engaged the borough, town, city level - they wouldn't feel like this is hopeless.

[musette_sf]

93. +1

[George II]

38. If she's not stepping down and the House Democrats aren't going to replace her....

...what's the point in "debating" this? What is to be accomplished except to further divide the Democratic Party?

[AngryAmish]

22. They are dancing to Russia's tune.

[musette_sf]

45. + 1 n/t

[oasis]

7. P.O.B. for me.

Pelosi Or Bust.

[ananda]

9. My dream speaker would be Adam Schiff.

But I like Pelosi, and don't expect her to step down.

[MineralMan]

25. Adam Schiff voted for Nancy Pelosi to be

Minority Leader. She can't be the Speaker, though, right now. That position is elected by the majority party. We are not the majority party in the House. More's the pity.

[mcar]

15. Great analysis

[yardwork]

17. Excellent post. There's a lot of uninformed opinion going around.

Russian infiltration of left wing social media has been very effective. In the absence of actual knowledge about how the U.S. system works, propaganda is taking hold.

[MineralMan]

32. You make an excellent point.

One of the things I have noticed in many posts is faulty information about our system of government works. It seems that some people believe things can be done that are actually impossible in our system. Often, when presented with that information, those people simply double down on their proposition, despite its impossibility.

If a person doesn't know how it works, that person can't possibly discern what is possible from what is not. That's one of the most difficult problems to solve, even here on DU, which is made up of people who are much more politically savvy than the average person.

How much less does the general public know about how our government works? It's scary.

[geek tragedy]

33. Generally, people who want Pelosi to step down also want Steny out as well

They've got close to 160 years on this planet between them. Party needs to rebrand, and part of rebranding is out with the old, in with the new.

[SCantiGOP]

34. You are exactly right, DanTex

But expect to catch a whole lot of crap here about your post.

[stonecutter357]

35. K&R

[IronLionZion]

36. I support Pelosi, but we should also get some messaging for rust belt voters

since that is what Tim Ryan would bring to the table. I wish Dems from different regions and philosophies would work together more and come up with some short simple winning soundbites like the other party does. Well, I suppose there aren't many centrist Republicans left since that party has swung hard right in recent years.

[dogandturtlemom]

37. Pelosi is a liberal

If you are questioning Pelosi's creeds, you are drinking the GOP tea of fake news that is traveling the net and Facebook. This is what the rascals want you to do! Weaken the strong. Look at the treatment of strong women in the senate, like Kamala Harris. McCain is absolutely freaked by her. Look at the PAC ads against GA 6, demonizing Pelosi and us progressives in California who are leading the way into a better future. Stay calm, as Naomi Klein says, and prepare for worse to come. 😙

[blue-wave]

46. This bickering

must stop. I understand we will never all agree 100% of the time, but we cannot be divided at this place in time. We have a house and senate to win back in 2018 and a country to save at the same time. To those who have a hard time seeing the big picture, please try harder! There is more at stake than finding someone who parrots every view you hold.

I am a democrat. If the democratic nominee in 2016 was Bernie, I would have strongly supported and voted for him. It did not happen that way. I strongly supported Hillary to the best of my ability while voting as early as I could for her on election day. Speaker Pelosi, you have my vote. Let's win this thing!

[Honeycombe8]

47. The House Dem Leader's most important job is to rally votes for/against bills.

I'm not so sure it matters that much whether the House Dem leader is centrist, moderate, or progressive.

[Fresh_Start]

55. +1000000

the house leadership is responsible for leadership in the house. and that by itself is a huge job

its not the house leadership in the GOP who delivered the midterm voters....its the GOP propaganda arms

[INdemo]

48. No No No...we need to move on to a younger generation, that was the whole

Point.Nacny Pelosi feeds the Democratic voters a lot of crumbs and then tells us everything is great. Hoyer on the other hand,agreed,would be terrible and in a way he would be close to having another Republican whip.
We need someone like Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif,and others like him, to take over as the Democratic leader in Congress

[Fresh_Start]

58. no no no...we don't need to move on to a younger generation...

since there is nothing intrinsically better about the younger generation

we might want or need new leadership....
but leadership is not annointed it is earned
when there are younger generation individuals who have delivered repeatedly then they should get the leadership

its not like anyone is preventing the younger generation from doing something absolutely breathtaking in order to win a leadership role

Pelosi has delivered even if she had to break heads to do so
I frequently thought it should be called PelosiCare not ObamaCare because I completely believe that Pelosi was more instrumental than Obama

[and I am in awe of Obama]

[Trial_By_Fire]

56. Two votes determine Pelosi's fate...

Few facts first:

1. Pelosi does not run or is responsible for a candidate's campaign, nor did she trash Ossoff. The republicans and russians did.
2. Only a few Democratic Reps are calling for Pelosi to step down.
3. The House Dem Leader is voted upon by all Dem members of the House, so if they want a change then the entire Dem House votes.
and 4. Congress members are voted into office by their constituents. If they want Pelosi 'out', then the constituents vote them out.

I believe that the Dem House members and a majority of Dem Americans APPROVE of Pelosi.

This entire Pelosi thing is to just another ploy to divert people's attention away from what the repuks are doing to this country.

[INdemo]

73. Of course she is not rresponsible for a candidates campaign..

we need the young generation of the Democratic party to step up into the leadership rolls.

"DNC Chairman Tom Perez suggests Democrats could 'take 50 seats' in House"
Well to that I say we aren't going to win seats if the best we can do for Candidates is a Country Singer with a tax burden issue with the IRS...referring the the Democratic Candidate we had in Montana.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

57. tim ryan was antichoice until last year. he is no progressive champion

[herding cats]

68. What I find funny about this whole thing is some of the people supporting it...

Are the same ones who scream distraction at the top of the lungs when something diverts from their perceived agenda.

Gather around for a not so breaking bit of news. There is absolutely zero chance Pelosi is stepping down, which is great news since we need her, there's also absolutely no chance she'd be voted out of either her seat or leadership roll. This whole thing is a disturbing distraction to detract from people focusing on HEALTHCARE. Sorry to raise my voice, but this really is a foolish distraction to allow ourselves to be drawn into, especially now.

I'd say focus and call your senators, get your butts to a local protest and organize. Do what we have to do to stop them gutting Medicaid in the name of tax cts for the wealthy while we still can, but I know it will fall on deaf ears where that message is most needed.

I'm literally watching the same technique that was used between 2008 and 2010 be brought out, dusted, off and used again. Odd that there's another census around the corner, huh? I'd almost think this was done by design to keep the Democratic Party gerrymandered into a perpetual state of minority if I were a thinking person.

[LiberalLovinLug]

69. "Pelosi is from the progressive wing of the party"

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

70. Whether Nancy stays or goes

(and I hope she stays) is not up to those of us not living in her district. If her constituents want her gone, they have a means to do that. Otherwise, all this speculation and predicting and such is just so much wasted ink, so to speak.........

[broadcaster90210]

77. E X A C T L Y!!!

Think it through ppl. Think it through.

[elfin]

79. I like and admire her - therefor she is doomed.

Never fails. If I like a tv show - it is gone.

Think I may have to go Repub. so that they get beaten.

[McCamy Taylor]

80. If Trump is imeached after 2018, Pelosi would be president. So, business wants to replace

her will a more business friendly politician.

[Thinkingabout]

81. There is a need to attract lots of Independents to the DNC, it would result in many more votes for

Democrats and less for Republicans. Going too far left will not attract the independents and also would not attract many of the centrist of the Republican party. Of course the republicans are going to disparage Pelosi or any leader in her position, this is their way of trying to knock down their opposition.

We do not need the disparaging attacks on Nancy Pelosi either, she has been elected and re-elected and she continues to be elected by the members of the House. Work as hard on attracting others into the DNC. DWS was disparaged terribly and we have Trump as a result of infighting, some may be happy Hillary was not elected and this is a terrible result with having Trump as president.

[EffieBlack]

85. And let's not forget that, in order to be effective, the leader has to be very "establishment"

They have to have built up strong relationships and respect within the Democratic Caucus and across the aisle over the years. They have to have a full understanding of and in-depth experience with the various machinations of House procedures, rules, practices, traditions, etc. They have to know how to whip votes - a very unique and special skill.

In short, they have to be about as "Establishment" as they come. A "fresh new face" might look pretty, but they'd be a disaster if they haven't been around the block in the House many times - and by the time anyone gets the kind of experience one needs to be an effective Speaker or Minority Leader, they probably aren't fresh or new anymore.

[Loki Liesmith]

102. I don't care whether she stays or goes

But a centrist doesn't bother me either.

[napi21]

103. I still think they rail against her because they're jealous! The only WISH they had a speaker

who could be as successful as Nancy was! Six months under this new Tsar and they haven't been able to paw ANY actual legislation! By thin time in Nancy's time as Speaker when BO was Prez, they passed quite a few bills that were signed into law.

TOO BAD, AHs, nobody in your Party has the abilities of Nancy, no matter how hard you look!