Seth Moulton on impeachment this morning: "Leaders don't follow polls. Polls follow leaders."

[mtnsnake]

On MSNBC this morning, Moulton said he has been strongly in support of impeaching Trump since 2017, not only for upholding the Constitution, but because he feels it's the right thing to do and because this country is facing a historical moral dilemma and it needs to be done at this time.

When the interviewer told him that some of the polls don't overwhelmingly support the idea of impeaching Trump at this time, Moulton responded, "Leaders don't follow polls. Polls follow leaders.

[Hortensis]

1. This blue dog's constituents should "impeach" him

in favor of Lisa Peterson, who's running on a progressive liberal platform to unset him -- and good riddance. And the same for the rest of the so-called #FiveWhiteMen.

It'll be poetic retribution after this dog tried to oust the only woman among 12 top party leaders and called for Pelosi -- and her alone -- to agree to term limit herself. Permanently unforgivable, no matter how hard he tries to resurrect himself in a new image.

[Me.]

2. I Counldn't Agree More

and he should take that fake, frozen smile off his face, it's repulsive

[Hortensis]

6. :) Read most of his male colleagues aren't crazy about him either.

Inappropriate conceit and ambition in someone who lacks the accomplishments of others have a way of doing that. But he's also raising a lot of funds to get more conservatives elected into the Democratic caucus, with the obvious plan of becoming a power center courtesy of those who owe him (McConnell style).

I think it was freshman Abigail Spanberger who I read Moulton donated to and who subsequently voted against Pelosi; if not her, it was another of the female freshman who "pledged" to oppose Pelosi before they were elected. Don't know who how many other conservatives were elected into our Democratic caucus by contributions from conservatives funneled through him.

But he needs to go.

Btw, I looked it up the other day, and the conservative blue dog caucus increased from 18 to 27 conservatives as part of the blue wave. Compared to new totals of 95 liberals in the Progressive Caucus and 101 liberals in the more moderate liberal New Democrats Caucus.

[Me.]

9. It Was She

and it made me angry even with all the blah, blah, blah about being in a conservative district. I wonder how she feels now, as I haven't seen any recent interviews with her lately as the squad has taken all focus and all the air out of the room.

[Hortensis]

15. Ah! Quiet is not always good. Speaking of watching our backs,

I read that another far-left group, Roots Action, plans to try to take out Derek Kilmer from WA, who's being spoken of for our next speaker, and Cheri Bustos, who as new chairwoman of the DCCC is fully involved in electing more Democrats to the house in 2020 and supporting incumbents targeted by LW dissidents and Republicans.

Others among our most valuable can-do people are also being targeted. And when it comes to trying to primary some of those most valuable people, the far left and RW are too frequently on the same page.

[Me.]

16. I'm Not So Sure

all these self-appointed groups will be as successful as they think. Their agenda often becomes apparent and scares people off especially if they are content with the representation they are receiving. The JDs for example, have been 'outed' and are not in danger of receiving a lot of acclaim. And people become suspicious when it's reported that they too are millionaires and own shares in billion-dollar companies and that the people they are running are have been recruited. In addition, perhaps a plethora of these groups means they are all in competition with each other and will cancel each other out...

I'm going to keep an eye out for Roots Action.

[Hortensis]

19. I agree. :) We've already seen decline from what never rose

to success, with large numbers of failures and very few people elected, in spite of attempting to take credit for larger numbers. And they've lost their big advantage of surprising complacent incumbents and voters who didn't see it coming. We've also done away with all those caucuses where newcomers can swarm in out of nowhere and overwhelm the usual participants. Bless their hearts...

I have no idea if there's much more to RootsAction than hot air and attempts at attention, or who's funding them, just ran across them when I wanted to read more about Derek Kilmer. Googling did reveal echoing calls to primary him from a few sites.

More notable, though, was an obvious hit job on Kilmer in the right-leaning The Hill, clearly aimed at deceiving Democratic voters. It dishonestly portrayed Kilmer and his liberal New Democrat coalition as "centrists" and business-oriented "capitalists" and claimed they were thus allied with the blue dogs against the Progressive Caucus, when the opposite is the truth. Both main caucuses are solidly liberal and progressive and have far stronger ideological elements in common with each other than with the conservative faction. Many candidates are endorsed by both.

I noticed, btw, that Politico correctly identified him and the New Democrats as overall center-left, as in solidly liberal but tending more toward the center of the R-L political spectrum than most other liberals.

[mtnsnake]

3. Impeach Moulton for the reason you're stating is absolutely RIDICULOUS.

How dare anyone vote against Pelosi. LOL!!!

[Hortensis]

4. Do you feel they were right then in saying that if the

caucus wants a woman speaker it has a bunch of others who would do just as well?

The immediate outrage this all caused indicates that kind of ugly and blatant misogyny wasn't missed back home. In fact, it was seen across the nation as an intolerable insult to not just all women but particularly to the very remarkable one who was elevated by her almost entirely male colleagues to the highest position ever held by a female.

[mtnsnake]

5. So you seriously think Moulton should be impeached for voting against Nancy Pelosi

to remain as Speaker? The notion is laughable to say the least.

[Hortensis]

8. No, of course not. His district should primary him, though.

For cause.

Please understand this viewpoint: Half of all Americans are women. Half of virtually all demographic groups are women, every color, every ethnicity, every religion. And ousting Pelosi at this critical time, with no replacement of comparable ability currently available, would have done serious harm. It's just plain stupid and wrong to elect men who have a problem with empowering and empowered women.

Those belong in the Republican white male party.

Speaking of, it's also just plain stupid for Democrats to elect someone who's trying to get more conservatives elected into the Democratic caucus. You might ask yourself just where these big donations Moulton has been using to help elect more and more of them have been coming from. And why and for what purpose. And whether this is something you want to be supporting.

[Me.]

11. He Didn't Just Vote Against Her

He and Tim Ryan ran a very public, divisive campaign against her being speaker,

[Hortensis]

12. Oh, yes. And what if they had succeeded?

Pelosi is greatly admired by most of her colleagues. They're supposed to choose who they want to lead them every 2 years, but that challenge -- with NO valid competition for the seat -- was a surprise. And a dangerous one in a dangerous era that potentially would have greatly benefited the Republican leadership. As it is, even in losing they were the sole beneficiaries.

[Me.]

14. Exactly

And that poor judgment is now telling against both he and Ryan as they run for president. As for his effort to get more conservatives in the caucus, it seems to me that it's both a waste of time and money. In my view, the party isn't about conservatism, that has always been the Recon approach to all things. It doesn't make sense in the Democratic party where a mix of moderates/liberals have always been more effective and able to work together. Also, it doesn't seem so now but the country, as a whole, is actually becoming more liberal/progressive.

[Hortensis]

17. :) I've enjoying seeing both of them doing so poorly.

I wish I thought infiltrating and packing our caucuses with more conservatives would be a wasted effort, though. I so agree conservatives couldn't actually take over the liberal party of our liberal democracy, any more than the delusional dissidents on the far left could. Right now, after strong growth, the blue dogs are still only a little over 11% of our house, so outnumbered almost 9:1 by liberals. But more of them might be able to frequently stymie and dilute liberal actions and have more opportunity to cause big trouble like Moulton's group did, and RW megadonors would be happy to fund it.

After all, the far left's counterparts on the right, in the arch-extremist Freedom Caucus, have been able to cause the rest of the Republicans tremendous ongoing trouble with less than 40 members.

We're very different, of course. Hard to imagine most Democratic constituencies would put up for long with that kind of troublemaking and being surprised at what their reps turned into.

[Me.]

18. You're Right About Them Putting A Spike In The Wheel

That's why, here and now, we need Speaker Pelosi.

[Autumn]

7. He's right. When leaders lead the people will follow them. nt

[Hortensis]

10. Very scary thought, but dreadfully true.

Trump is proof that leaders need not be good, only charismatic and about to stir the passions of people yearning to be lead.

I'm not among those, btw, I prefer to lead myself and expect the people I vote for to serve the people.

[Autumn]

13. I don't think it's scary at all. I'm a Democrats and an intelligent woman. I would never

follow anyone, Democrat or otherwise like Trump. He has always been open about what he is but people thought it was just a show and he wasn't really like that.

[Hortensis]

20. Of course. But don't forget we also have a left-wing populist

movement, and populist leaders do not gain power by appealing to intelligence. Quite the contrary. The appeal is to antagonism and resentment and specifically requires disconnecting from constraints of truth and intelligence. Also independence of thought.

[Autumn]

21. We have a left-wing populist movement disconnected from truth and intelligence here? Do tell

me more Trump is a populist but is in no way a left-wing populist. Warren and Sanders are often called populists by the Cons but I take their opinion for the crock of shit it is because both are nothing more than Liberal politicians who think that the people in our country deserve just as much an even playing field as corporations and wealthy people do.

[Hortensis]

22. Yes, the word is greatly misused, often far from innocently,

including applying it inappropriately to good people as part of defusing its meaning. It does not mean "of the people." That's the representative democracies populism is so often employed against. But you gave a really outstanding example of someone it does apply to big time and who is busy demonstrating the destructive potential of his populist movement all too well.

[Autumn]

23. Bernie doesn't have a destructive populist movement. But nice try.

He speaks for and represents those of us who are not center-right Democrats.