I really did think she would leave, but the most effective leader in the Democratic Party may just hang around for a while longer.
High-level Democratic sources in the House tell ABC News Pelosi is seriously considering staying in Congress and running for the position of minority leader.
Pelosi is methodically calling every Democratic House member who won on Tuesday, as well as many who lost, sources tell ABC News. In the process, she is weighing her options and gauging her support.
Some of Pelosi’s closest allies are encouraging her to stay and to lead the Democratic effort to win back their majority. Those encouraging her are arguing, in part, that she can unify the progressives in the caucus, and more importantly, that nobody in the House can raise money for the next campaign better than Pelosi.
This doesn’t totally break precedent, Sam Rayburn stuck around after losing the Speaker’s gavel in 1947 and 1953, and he eventually got it back both times.
The only people who don’t want her back are some scattered Blue Dogs who don’t like the way she passes actual legislation and gets things done. Heath Shuler wants to run for Minority Leader against her, and Jim Matheson (D-UT) thinks she should step down. But the Blue Dogs are decimated after this cycle, and can’t really dictate the actions of the caucus.
The second interview Pelosi gave after the election was to Ryan Grim of the Huffington Post, which says quite a bit there. She said she has received a positive response from members who want her to stay on.
From a progressive standpoint, it’s best to have Pelosi still on board. She’s the most liberal of all the leadership, and the most effective. Practically the entire Democratic agenda was passed in the House in the last two years; the Senate was the roadblock. And nobody raises money like Pelosi, adding over $50 million for Democratic candidates this cycle. Anyone who thinks Heath Shuler will get votes from the caucus over that mountain of cash is dreaming.
Pelosi rightly noted that the lack of jobs cost her the Speaker’s gavel.
In her estimation, the jobless problem swamped their accomplishments. “We believe that there’s a big distinction between Democrats and Republicans, but nine and a half percent unemployment is just such an eclipsing phenomenon that no message really can come through unless it’s a message that says, ‘Here’s your job,’” she said. “From our standpoint, we have saved the country from eight and a half million jobs lost, from 14 and a half percent unemployment and the rest. But you don’t get any credit for what you prevented from happening.”
Pelosi also gave Grim a sense of her priorities in the lame duck session: tax cuts for the middle class (she said the President still does not want to extend the rates for those over $250,000, but I’ll believe that when I see it), the one-time $250 benefit for Social Security recipients, and bills on child nutrition and food safety. The Senate has already passed that child nutrition bill, but paid for it with cuts to the food stamp program. That’s what has derailed it in the House thus far, as 100 rank and file Democrats rejected the bill.
The netroots, led by Daily Kos, already has a petition up asking Pelosi to return.
UPDATE: Americans United has a Thank You Speaker Pelosi site up as well.




115 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
No wonder the wingnuts dislike her so much. As for the Blue Dogs? Sucks to be you.
You’re awfully generous this morning.
Personally, I never got the Pelosi hatred. When compared to most of the other Dems like Hoyer for example, she’s downright Progressive.
I got a kick out of Shuler posturing though. Good luck on kicking Pelosi out with one third the number blue dogs as progressives in Congress there Heath.
Hate to spoil the “Pelosi party” here and at the Orange Satan, but will some please ask her this simple question, why did she take impeachment “off the table?”
I don’t agree with her doing that, though her caucus could have pressured her into putting it back on the table. I’ve never been a single issue voter though and I did point out that in comparison with most other Democrats in Congress, she’s relatively progressive. I’m not here to praise Pelosi as you seem to imply but I’m not here to mindlessly and reflexively bash her either. You should know by now that I don’t behave reflexively.
Of all the high-profile Democrats in Washington, D.C., Pelosi is, by far, the least bad. She’s far from perfect–as ghostof911 pointed out, she took impeachment off the table–but she’s an order of magnitude better than mossbacks like Bayh, Hoyer, the Blue Dogs, and the New Democrats.
The true answer to that question is also the true answer to the rest of our questions;
Why is ‘up’, ‘down’?
Why is ‘never ending war’ ‘the struggle for peace’?
Why is ‘enabling monopolies’ ‘support for free markets’?
Why don’t our representatives represent us?
You already know the answer, let me know when you find anyone inside the beltway who will put honest voice to it.
Because she has a sense of governing. To continue round robins of impeachments is no less destructive to governing than anything the GOP comes up with.
I for one hope she does stay on and am curious as to the effectiveness of a more cohesive liberal minority. However I have to say I have no idea how she remains so serene as the identified Democratic scapegoat. It has to be at some price.
I guess you have to ask what you want. A post over on HP notes there are hardly any dems left in the south. (I think 16 out of 105) those are all the blue dogs who were trying to hold on but were wiped out in the election. Good, I guess? They blame a lot of their trouble on Pelosi for making them vote on liberal causes, which are not acceptable in many parts (all I think) of the south. Now that is where a third party could work I guess. Doesn’t seem to matter much to us?
The dems don’t need to trouble themselves about bringing impeachment. The repugs will handle that for them. They just have to decide how they will vote.
My only question is: is she going to bring up the Catfood Commission’s cuts in the lame duck session?
As far as the D Party goes, why not keep Pelosi. Couldn’t hurt. She’s not the woman I thought she was, but the D’s could do worse.
Because the last time anyone tried to impeach a sitting president it backfired badly on the impeachers. See also: Elections, 1998.
However, what usually is ignored are the reasons it backfired with Clinton. Those are: a) the economy was roaring along as it hadn’t since the 1960s, which meant that the American public would have needed a really compelling reason to dump him, and b) getting hummers from a cute staffer didn’t count as a compelling reason.
Would the American public have seen impeaching Bush over Iraq as justifiable? Maybe not, particularly if — as what I suspect would have happened — Joe Lieberman was rolled out for the cameras to denounce Democratic partisanship and the criminalization of policy choices.
In many parts of the South, Pelosi’s forcing them to commit on “liberal” causes wouldn’t have made any difference. Running as a “conservative Dem” against a “conservative Repub” isn’t a good winning strategy in the long-term. Just ask Blanche Lincoln how that worked out (yes, I know she was a Senator, but the principle is identical).
I hope she stays
There’s too much reflexive thinking going around, indeed.
See here for why impeachment was never on the table WRT Bush.
Agree.
The whole idea of Democrats having to behave as Republicans in “tough districts” is simplistic and discredited. Ever since Rahm Emanuel adopted that strategy as head of the DCCC, it has proven to be a loser over and over. Republicans aren’t going to vote for anybody who calls themselves a “Democrat” Period, full stop. No matter how they act or vote, they aren’t going to do it. Many Democrats won’t vote for a blue dog exactly because of policy choices, which leaves independents, (vapid, low information voters for the most part), who vote for whomever they think most people are voting for, just to be on the “winning” side. It’s telling that the Progressives in Texas such as Lloydd Doggett and Charlie Gonzalez won Tuesday, while blue dogs like Chet Edwards and Ciro Rodriquez lost…BADLY. When you don’t make a clear distinction, people will vote Republican by default. They KNOW where they stand.
Reading this amazing tribute one might be tempted to forget that nearly the entire Democratic agenda passed in the House was a bunch of crap and so derided by most FDL commenters, and that the US is more than ever going to hell in a hand-basket both domestically and internationally, as well as economically, financially and morally.
Doesn’t the Congressional leadership bear any responsibility for this, especially after the recent repudiation of the Dem agenda?
The most effective leader she could not deliver the Public Opption.I’ve never heard her bring up how NAFTA was the foundation of job loss in the USA.Never did anything about Job loss.
Pelis? Effective? Those two words do NOT belong in the same sentence, unless one considers that the only thing she has been effective at is enabling the worst policies of the Bush-Cheney years and now the worst policies of Obama. That’s nothing to brag about, by the way.
I agree with you
Will Pelosi even entertain the catfood commission ideas
everybody in washington dc, apparently thinks the catfood commission number 1 goal is to cut and gut Social Security
how many DEMS are going to follow the white house on this idea?
currently the president is going S Korea, India, to do his NAFTA program like his buddy Clinton, in the middle of a Depression
Obama is the only person that heard on Tuesday americans want more of their Jobs sent off shore.
NO, it’s time to just(ly) Leave DEM! (Pullosi Punch’s OUT; Judy Reid should Be RELIEVED!! Obamavilla-in FORECLOSURE: 2012!!!).
I always knew impeaching the wanking chimp would be problematic. Taking it off the table was a good strategic choice but a poor tactical one. The threat of impeachment could have and should have been left in place IMO. Then if information came along to support it through investigation, their hands wouldn’t be tied.
you miss it I guess
the blue dogs got wipe out, after they destroyed most of progressive ideas in all the bills
also there is the big issue the MSM keeps ignoring that 47% of Dems want the guy in white house primaried
It’s not only one issue that Pelosi has been on the wrong side of. It’s torture (she knew about it early on yet still let Bush and Cheney off the hook for it), refused to enforce Congressional subpoenas, refused to organize her caucus to vote against the Military Commissions Act, allowed the FISA bill that allows telecommunications companies get away with having spied on American citizens with no judicial process whatsoever, allowed a gutted and ineffective cap-and-trade bill to pass the House even though it does nothing but reward polluters, let the public option die…
I could go on, but I trust you get the point. Pelosi is a disaster for Democrats and the rest of America.
Oh you mean other than passing jobs bill after jobs bill and help for the unemployed over and over. Not to mention a very strong financial reform package, only to see them all languish and/or get butchered in the Senate? Other than those things you mean?
Is this like where establishment media critics attack Daily Kos front-pagers for things written by diarists?
Yup.
I’m not here to defend Pelosi but I’m not going to reflexively attack her either like so many on this thread seem determined to do. Nor am I going to allow you to mindlessly attack me as a Pelosi surrogate.
Good day FDL.
So you believe a sitting executive should be allowed to break any and all laws and get away with it. Charming. Unfortunately for those who believe in unfettered, unaccountable executive power, the Constitution demands impeachment of lawless executives and other government officials. No politician has the right to decide which laws are enforced and which are ignored.
Horse puckey, and you know it.
Clinton’s impeachment did not backfire in the slightest. The Republicans were able to use that to weaken Clinton politically, and make him even more subservient to the GOP’s hard right agenda. Impeachment also got Al Gore to distance himself from a president who was still largely popular with the public, thus ensuring a much closer race in 2000 than should have been — more than enough for the Bush-Cheney campaign to rig it to their benefit, with the aid of the Supreme Court.
Besides which, the Constitution does not say that a president may only be impeached when it is politically safe. It demands that a president be impeached and removed for committing high crimes and misdemeanors, and no politician has the right to shirk his or her Constitutional duty. That is why the Democrats are back in the minority and the Republicans are once again officially in charge. Ignore history — and spin it — to your party’s detriment.
If Obama and the Dems had worked as hard for the original stimulus plan as they did for the Baucus-WellPoint HCR bill (including using reconciliation to pass it), employment would be below 7% and Pelosi wouldn’t have lost the gavel. Just doing that — and NOT doing the corporate-sponsored HCR — would have kept the Democrats in control.
But since the whole point of letting the health-care industry write the HCR bill was so that they’d cough up tens of millions for the Democrats and not for Republicans this election cycle. Guess what? The industry reneged on that deal.
It’s definitely a better idea to keep the hammer in hand. It’s better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. Throwing it out the window altogether did not seem to me the wisest thing to do.
I agree with you Nancy Pelosi passed a lot of bill to only see them die in the SENATE.
The WHITE HOUSE never gave her any support or help
The White House pulled the rug out from under Nancy a lot
Pelosi is terrible. You poor people. You have to get in bed with this woman. Shame on you.
In politics it’s almost never enough to be right. Impeachment was totally pie-in-the-sky. Speaker Pelosi rightly took impeachment off the table in order to keep the focus on the elections.
You people…..
Leave Obama alone.
Have you no shame?
I’m thrilled that she’s planning to stay. We do not have enough women in congress, as it is, and we especially do not have enough women as powerful as Nancy Pelosi in either chamber. We still need her presence.
I wish you people would stop calling independent names. Labeling us as “vapid” and “low-information” is not only insulting, it’s demonstrably false. As was pointed out at the Mediocre Orange Hype,
The simple fact of the matter is that Democrats offered only empty promises to the voters that they then proceeded to renege on at every opportunity, all the while insulting our intelligence and threatening us to vote for them.
We voters know more about what’s going on than you give us credit for, and your imperious attitudes and insulting demeanor about our thinking is a major reason why you Democrats keep losing elections despite how horrendously evil and destructive the Republicans are. You’ve shown yourselves to be absolutely no better.
The watering-down that occurred happened in the Senate, not in the House.
Exactly. He heard the American people say: “Send more jobs offshore! Cut Social Security! Keep the Bush tax cuts for the rich! Keep the wars going!”
Boy, that man sure hears what he wants to hear, doesn’t he?
So, what, someone rightly points out that Pelosi did not do her job when others fawn all over her for things she never did, and now you want to pick up your marbles and go?
Nothing but the truth must ever be told. You may not like it, but it is what it is and no amount of spinning is going to change that Pelosi repeatedly failed to do her sworn duty as Speaker of the House. One can praise her until the cows come home, and it still won’t change that she consistently allowed the worst policies to become law while the best were swept into the trash can without ever getting a serious debate, much less a vote.
Absolutely! The only reason that a public option was not passed, is because Obama had already negotiated it away, even while pretending that it was still on the table.
I agree with everything you wrote. Impeachment did weaken Clinton, and most definitely it was the duty of Congress to impeach and remove George Bush from office.
Jon Walker has a fresh cross-post up: Strong Signs Massachusetts Voters Are Ready to Embrace Marijuana Legalization
Sweet Jesus, we’re actually in agreement. Pelosi’s fault in this is that as Speaker, she had the power to decide what came up for a vote and what didn’t. She could have used her position to force the White House and the Senate to adopt a far more progressive health bill than she did, yet she allowed a bill written by and for the insurance industry to pass. Likewise, on every other issue, Pelosi let the far right dictate the outcome. The policy decisions she has made outweigh whatever personal liking people may have for her. Some people cannot bring themselves to accept it.
I did data entry for a local candidate and I cannot tell you how often I had to put “undecided” next to several candidates names, even just days before the election. No, they weren’t all independent voters, but they surely were all “low-information” voters.
Rep. Pelosi being in any Democratic leadership role in the future should be “off the table.” She is just another lying war criminal, supporting endless Bush wars of aggression and supporting endless Obama wars of aggression.
Since when is torture and war crimes “policy choices”??
Bullshit.
Impeachment would’ve cemented Democratic majorities, and if the newly elected ones in 08 had acted like Democrats instead of Republicans, they would’ve cemented D majorities for a generation.
Talk about a wasted opportunity. That’s likely to never happen again.
Well done, “Democrats”.
Did you check the 1998 election results? Were you even following the news in 1998? Because if you were, you’d know full well that I’m right, and here’s why:
For most of 1998. Newt Gingrich and other Republicans and their fellow travelers were telling anyone who would listen that the Clinton scandal would cause a massive shift of 60-plus House seats and a dozen Senate seats. The GOP/Media Complex, led by FOX News, dutifully relayed this as reliable, expert judgments, and continued to do so as the months wore on — even though polls showed the American people wanted nothing to do with impeachment. The chattering classes were starting to acknowledge reality as November approached, and scaled back their predictions a tad (even as they lectured the public on being so amoral), but as late as two days before the election, Democratic House and Senate losses were still in the cards as far as they were concerned:
As for making Clinton more subservient: Um, no. It actually put the kibosh on a deal Clinton and Gingrich had worked out to “reform” Social Security, Newt’s way.
She has large negatives with most American voters.
Does this not matter?
Republican troll is trolling.
So does Sarah Palin. So do the teabaggers — who are even now being told to siddown and shaddup by their GOP masters.
Impeachment is off the table…
Pelosi can go to hell. I could care less what she does, but she is no friend of mine.
Where the Jobs.Doing away with NAFTA. Bills and Newts Foundation To Remove Jobs From The USA.If something is not done to get jobs back were only digging a deeper hole for ower children and grandchildren.If we do not get jobs produceing goods we use everyday we will have to dig a deeper hole for them.Stop the unfair trade she did not do that.NAFTA
Amen.
We should keep her around just to drive GOPers nuts…one of the main reasons I didn’t want Hillary to be pres is I was so sick of the jokes and killed vince foster bs that 4 more years would of killed me.
Hope she stays as leader. She is progressive on most issues (though I hated that she didn’t fight the Patriot Act) – and she got some good things done, despite Obama, blue dogs and Republicans.
Reid, on the other hand, should be booted. Ironic that the better leader loses her gavel and hapless Harry gets to keep his post.
On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that Obama is open to extending the upper-income rates if that is the only way to ensure that the tax rate for families making less than $250,000 do not expire.
Any moderate Democrat who would be an effective leader would soon have the same negatives. The negatives aren’t a result of legislation she pushed, they’re a result of the constant stream of right-wing disinformation.
Wow, all this trashing of Pelosi (who was able to pull together disparate Democrats in spite of “themselves.”) And the Senate did so much better? It’s OK to critique leaders, but asking for blood or retribution seems pretty stupid. It also cements the Tea Party line that Nancy is the most horrible person in the world. Why not just go to work for World Net Daily instead of wasting your time venting in the comments section.
PS Just who the fuck do you all propose would be a great minority leader? I didn’t see any positive recommendations in the posts above.
Who’s her likely replacement? What chance does anyone you’d support have?
I’ve never been affiliated with any party either, as you would know if you paid as much attention to other people as you pay to yourself. YOU, on the other hand seem to ignore things like “relatively” and “for the most part” and other modifiers in order to paint a stark black and white picture, rather than allow any nuance. That’s a conservative trait, as is your self congratulatory manner and pompous attacks on people who don’t agree with everything you have to say.
Unless she is going to stand up and refuse to do Obama’s craven work, she won’t be effective.
And you have Rand Paul and the other circus freaks that compose the new core of your “party” which in reality is a dysfunctional cult. Fortunately, the wicked witch, Meg Moneybags, and Bizarro Sharon all lost because of their flagrant incompetence—which probably cost you dopes the Senate.
Compared to these imbeciles, Nancy Pelosi is Gandhi. I’ll take her over anyone in your cult anytime.
Tracerfan @ 51
“She has large negatives with most American voters…”
Please cite your reference on this so we can check this out or are you just speaking for yourself?
Imho, Nancy Pelosi staying will ensure that the Progressives have a voice and a person to give direction for the next two years in addition to her outstanding fundraising ability mentioned above.
Thinking about it… that isn’t quite true. Among republicans it easier to create negatives for a woman than a man, but I’m not at all suggesting choosing a man. I think the Dems should keep her.
“Impeachment off the table” sort set the tone of her tenure. I find the evaluation of her contribution in this blog on the outer edges of fantasy land. Are talking about the same person? Jeepers.
For thos who think Tuesday’s election was a shift to the Republican side, please look at the results yesterday and in 2008. So far in about 75 races I’ve been through, NOT ONE Republican got more votes in 2010 than he/she/or the party rep on ticket in ’08 did. In fact, the numbers I’ve seen so far are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayy low, as in turnout looks low to me even in a mid-term. (Weren’t the pundits on the teebee talking about high turnout on Tuesday?) Maybe I’m wrong, but they look really low to me.
Mid terms are about turning out your base, not some kind of actual example of where the country as a whole is. Right now the Republican base is fired up. The Democratic base is pissed off (rightfully so). End of story. Wipeout.
This also explains the strange polls folks were seeing. Lots of people were asking WTF? when they saw polls saying the American people still favored the Democrats on issues and still preferred them over the Republicans but polls also showed them losing. Badly. That’s because among those that voted, they did lose badly. Among the country as a whole, the Republican brand is still as marginilized as it was in ’08. It’s just now the Democratic brand is now nearly down there with them.
I don’t know how much evidence the naysaysers need, nor do I care. It’s time to STOP listening to them for the sake of our country.
This country WILL SUPPORT liberal agendas and policies. And it will in fact VOTE DEMOCRATIC when they believe those policies will be enacted (see 2008) but they won’t when they beleive those policies won’t be (see 2010).
Please please please STOP with the myth this is a center right, Republican country. IT IS NOT!
She knew it would go nowhere, and figured it was best to focus the House’s limited energy on the legislative programme. She is going to regret that decision. The new House will almost certainly resurrect the old House Unamerican Activities Committee under a new name. Bloggers beware. ‘Are you now or have you ever been…?’
The country is ripe for a New Deal Democratic coalition (or a third party New Deal coalition) and ready to follow the liberal side for three decades. They’ve followed the conservative one for three now and finally are convinced it doesn’t work. It’s the moment we’ve all been waiting for our whole lives, and yet the Democratic Party seems unwilling to take advantage of it.
Who will take advantage of it?
Nancy Pelosi has been one of the most effective leaders in my lifetime and should definitely continue to work for the advancement of core principles of the Democratic Party.
Other countries with parliamentary systems see leaders come into and go out of and return to power, so there’s no reason why should she stop fighting.
I’d support her, and we should work to make sure she has better partners next time than Reid and Obama as well as make sure that the Democratic Party cannot return to the New Dem/Blue Dog garbage.
I’d support it and its candidates. Short of something on the level of divine intervention to help him see the error of his ways, I’m not voting for Obama in 2012. Nor will I support anyone who talks and walks like a corporatist New Dem/Blue Dog.
Agree. This whole left-right, “center-left vs. center-right” dialogue is way too simplistic. The only way this can be analyzed is issue-by-issue, proposal-by-proposal.
For example, is a nation in which the majority support a public option tied to Medicare, no cuts to SS, leaving both Iraq and Afghanistan, and break up of TGTF banks center right? Hardly.
Maybe someone at FDL should do a post showing that the answer to the “center right vs center left?” question depends not only on the issue but also on the specific proposal. (Maybe they already have.)
Did you see this?
Sorry, meant TBTF banks.
I listened to the Michael Moore clip featured on Early Morning Swim this morning. That stat he cited about 14m young people who voted in ’08 not turning out in ’10 could account for the entire shift considering that (I think this is right) Republicans only got 5m more votes than Dems overall. It seems that Democrats have often purposely dampened enthusiasm to keep Republicans viable.
I’ll listen to that clip again and correct myself if I got it wrong.
That’s definitely been done! Jane got into some hot water over it about a year ago. Basically, I think the left-right dialogue is performance meant to distract. If anything, we should at least be thinking in terms of the interests of insiders vs the interests and will of the people.
Well, if the reaction to the losses by Hoyer’s Blue Dogs and the disenfranchisement of the base is to put someone more Blue Doggy in charge – if that’s what Dem leadership wants to do – then more power to them. Heath it is.
The real problems is that I’m so disenchanted with the Dems that I could give a damn who they put in to run Obama’s “hey Mitch, if I change parties will you re-elect me” agenda.
Pelosi didn’t go for impeachment bc she ddin’t care about the country, she didn’t care about how many Americans and ME civilians get killed, she didn’t care about torture, she didn’t care about much more than keeping America in dept to military conglomerates and reliant on Eric Prince’s forever. She didn’t care enough to even try to get things like the transfer of al-libi to be suicided in Libya blocked. She didn’t care about standing up to Obama, she just doesn’t care.
It’s ridiculous to say that playing the role of, “whatever the President wants” to both Bush and Obama is somehow evidencing a commitment to governance. It’s not. Serving as a check on the Presidency and, in the House in particular, pushing aggressively for things that appeal to populism, like a public option – that’s governance. Being the check, forcing the balance – that’s governing.
People think the disenfranchisement of “the base” and them “not showing up” is the problem, but that’s only one very small part of the problem. I did show up, I did vote Dem. But the difference over the last 2 years is that I have stayed honest with my friends and associates. When the topics come up about how crappy the Dems are doing – on some things (like the stupid birth certificate issue) I’ll push back – but I’m not defending the atrocious, no public option, no vision, healthcare program. And yes, I’ll shake my head with them over it. And this is where all the “independents” end up switching. It’s not bc of nasty ads – those are appeal to base ads. It’s because their Dem friends have no enthusiasm to sell them on what Obama is doing, what Pelosi is doing, or (blech!) what Reid is doing.
The fact that the Dems don’t have an option that makes me give a damn – that’s more telling than whether you end up with Nancy or Heath. She’ll be marginally better – so what?
And as someone who is now “stuck” with Rand Paul (but did show up to vote for Conway) I’m tickled at the angst. People seem to forget who Paul is replacing. Bunning. So yes, that’s a change for the better even without the Dem. And for that matter, Mr. Aqua Budha has been more consistent on foreign wars that 95% of Dems, including Pelosi and Obama. Mr. Aqua Buddha fired his campaign manager/woman abuser pretty damn fast – how long did Obama stick with Summers while we were all economically battered? If you take Paul’s concept of making people pay for the first $2000 of medicare and overlay it with “if they have overall retirement income of over $50,0000″ or something like that – I don’t find it that offensive. His thoughts that maybe we should decriminalize lots of drug offenses and approach that area of law enforcement differently don’t antagonize me that much either. Yeah – I basically still think he’s kind of a nut and doesn’t understand a huge chunk of what he’s talking about, but he’s a thousand percent improvement on Bunning. I’d rather have Conway, but at least Paul won’t be lockstep on wars like Conway would have been. And with all that ambivalence from someone like me (friends still buy me tie-dye), it’s pretty easy to see how Independents aren’t going to be revved for Dems.
There’s not one basic value or principle that the Dems have latched onto and promoted as their own that would excite anyone much. I give them credit on Pell grants and raising the minimum wage – but when they balance that with billions for drone bombings in mutliple countries and huge increases in military aid that will increase corruption and instability to unstable and poverty stricken nations – eh, well, color me less impressed. Rand Paul is more likely to speak out against Obama’s warmongering than either of Nancy or Heath. How sad is that?
Mathematically, one would take each issue and array right-and-left leaning proposals horizontally. Then use polling data to locate the where the majority of the population stands.
Repeat this for all issues, and then do a weighted average across issue areas — weighted by the relative importance of the issue to the public.
If this were done, on the most important issues to the public in 2008, the nation was not only center-left, it was arguably left.
I totally agree
this morning LODO as usual shouted about the USA being 20% liberal and 40% conservative, base on some poll
most people in the USA have no clue what liberal or conservative mean. For goodness sake Chris Matthews calls OBAMA lefty?
but when you ask people questions base on proposals
for example
Americans who like the Public Option 70%
Americans who want to leave both wars 60 to 70%
americans who are against free trade deals 80%
much better way of looking at America and getting a feel for where people stand today
Do you hate the Dems and Republicans 90%
Well said Mary.
No, I didn’t. I’ve missed a couple of the DR show this week.
That was great, and thanks for posting it. Glad I got to see it.
They are 100% correct.
This country is ripe and ready. All we need is a political party that will give them what they want. That party will never be the Republican party. Never. Gonna. Happen. I hope that party can be the Democratic Party. But it’s not looking good right now, unless someone in the mid-levels of the party structure starts making noises. All of those at the top of the party structure are lost causes. Write them off, they’re sold out, done.
It may well end up being a third party. Which sucks, because retaking the Democrtic Party would be VERY VERY HARD. Making this work with a third party is going to be EXPONENTALLY harder.
Make that Democrat.
Pelosi approved the torture though she later denied this.
I’m late getting back to this post, for varying reasons. But, you da bomb. As hard as it is to be me and you, us, imagine how hard it is to be some other people. Not, that you have to. I’m just saying, that as uncomforable as it is to deal with people who’s need to lecture, vomit their own scared perspective, there’s always a good little outcome.
Perspective.
That’s the part of Education that some miss. If you are paying attention, you see the Other and, at some point, learn something.
Not speaking to the president here, just saying. Ha!
Eveytime you make a nasty comment, people see your name. Tinman has no heart. I wish you all best in finding some compassion for other people. You deserve it because you are human. But, go read Job and then think about what that mean. Sorry, not a demand, just a suggestion.
I’m sorry you’re so angry that you have to be so mean here. It’s not just me who thinks that.
It is a tough call. But I reluctantly support Pelosi. She will have another impeachment issue, whether Impeachment of Obama is still on the table. Obama might undermine her by agreeing with the R’s that he should be impeached.
I’m joining the “off-the-table” camp. Pelosi allowed democracy to pass on war crimes. If that’s progressive then we’re in some sort of fantasy land.
Wow, according to you and Mary, Heath Shuler is as good as Nancy Pelosi and Paul Rand is better than Jim Bunning. I’m glad I’m not black, an immigrant, or someone dependent on social services – I’d be really fucked if that represents both the conservative and progressive view. Nancy wasn’t/isn’t perfect, but I’ll try to assume your angst is more emotional than logical. I find the wars on an ideology to be just as repulsive as you, but until you get some jobs to people in the flyover space that dog ain’t gonna bark. People have to stop being worried about their own kids before they take moral stock of what’s going on elsewhere in the world. That’s human nature. Preaching otherwise is as weird as waiting for the rapture.
Now who was it that made the decision to have Kucinich pull his amendment for states to have the rights to initiate a single payer system to see it replaced with the Stupak Amendment? She pretty much even bi-passed the Blue Dogs with that one and went straight for the jugular of progressives with that move by catering to the most conservative in the party. Am I remember the history of all that correctly?
Wow.
I don’t think you could’ve missed Mary’s point more if you tried.
Maybe you could though. Good luck.
Compassion for someone who is charged with carrying out the business of the people? I feel for the little kid who lost their kitten, but not for someone who sells out the soul of their country for political expedience. Torture is not something to be glossed over. Sorry, no way, no how.
Except one thing is bothersome. The south is no longer democratic. I guess that is ok but neither is the midwest or the upper midwest. At some point you are no longer a national party. Just one with an agenda but not representing the majority. We could well be headed there. I don’t find that a comforting idea. Maybe it’s just the economy. But maybe it’s the agenda too. Maybe lots of people really do not want a public option and such things. I know there are some around here who for some reason think that the government running health care is un American. Time to reasses.
I agree with your posts entirely Michael, and am disappointed in David Dayen for the slant of his essay. People have very short memories, it would seem. The entire argument forimpeachment in the case of the Bush regime was that they were criminals. Why did people vote for Obama? He was considered honest and honorable, and the young people flocked to him in droves. We had already overcome questionable voting procedures in giving the Democrats the majorities in Congress because we expected that doing so would bring the criminals to account. That’s what impeachment is supposed to do: it’s a judgement call that sets the record straight.
Nancy Pelosi took the impeachment of these criminals off the table. She played the game pretending to be a progressive when she wasn’t. How do I know that she wasn’t ? David says it – she’s a great money raiser. Hey, where’s that money coming from?
Boy, the majority of you folk on this thread sound just like Republicans. Nancy played the same game Obama has, pretending to be a progressive when she wasn’t. When she did have the power to do something Constitutionally Important, something that might have made a huge difference, she swept it off the table. She and Obama strategize for corporate interests. They are both cardboard figures.
Grow up, people. There ARE standards. There ARE things which are the right thing to do in themselves and not for the ‘politically strategic’ reasons. And the American people are now SO aware that they will discount all your strategy AND THEY WILL NOT SUPPORT IT ANY LONGER.
I agree emotionally with much of what you say. But, I still support Pelosi. I still think the major issue is the economy and jobs. But I no longer have any big interest in health care, with or without a PO. They can repeal it, if that makes them happy. I just think the time is not right and not enough support it with the lack of jobs in this country. We have too many other problems that need to be addressed, read wars, taxes and deficit. The agenda was too big. It has to be cut down to a few things, like jobs, taxes and wars. Health care will have to await another generation, it seems.
I really wouldn’t be surprised if Pelosi eventually gets that gavel back.
If the Republicans expect to find success by sabotaging any and all attempts at bipartisanship, they may be surprised in 2012.
Ya know, after paying attention closely, Obama scares me. The old wolf in sheeps clothing. I don’t trust him to save social security/medicare which I will actually use sometime in the near future.
Pelosi DID fail us on Bush. But I know realistically that impeachment of him was impossible. She threw her hope into the Obama basket-as MANY did. But since he’s turning out to be Bush 3 she knows what he’s made of better than anyone-and I hope she stays around.
Look to see Obama NOT supporting Pelosi. He NEVER that I’ve seen has supported anyone progressive. That will be your tell right there-if she’s gone-I think it will be Obama unchecked. I know Pelosi has many faults but unlike Mr. Obama I don’t think she is out to destroy the Democratic party.
Among polled independents, her positive/negative score was 8%-61%.
Most excellent, Mary.
My agreement is total.
One does not govern well or justly without a moral compass and a commitment to principle.
Both Obama AND Pelosi (et al) have not merely disappointed, they have DELIBERATELY destroyed.
They have destroyed checks and balances, they have destroyed the rule of law, they have destroyed human beings … and they have done so intentionally, because, frankly, they care neither about the nation at its heart or the people of this nation who have entrusted them, the political class, to serve the interests of ALL. Period.
DW
It’s very hard to have to admit that this is true.
It’s because once you admit to yourself that the president and the speaker of the house have no intention of upholding their constitutional responsibilities, the very next emotional adjustment is to hopelessness.
Most of us have never; in our wildest dreams thought there was any chance we might be sitting here only two years into this administration, contemplating a betrayal so complete.
I makes one feel utterly foolish to argue that we are in any real sense, getting what we were led to believe we voted for.
Wow back at ya friend. If you guys think Rand Paul is someone you’re just “stuck” with, but can keep you tickled with the angst it causes, hey good luck. Enjoy the feeling. But please realize that by hating on Nancy and everyone else even marginally right of your progressive idealism doesn’t offer us much hope for success. If you can’t find common ground with even liberals, I don’t foresee much success against the real bad guys. And it kinda makes you sound like Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Andrew Breibart and all the rest of the purity testers. But hey that’s just stupid me.
WTF are you even talking about?
Did you not see the part of her post where she said she VOTED FOR CONWAY?? Or the part where she made the point that Shuler would be more of a Blue Dog speaker? Or the part that she listed two issues that she (and I) are in agreement with on Rand (ending the wars in the ME and war on drugs) and that makes two MORE issues than what I was in agreement with with Bunning?
Are you pissed off because we’re not stomping up and down and crying because Rand Paul and dozens of other completely batshit crazy assholes won?
Your post didn’t make any sense based on Mary’s post. Or at least what I got out of Mary’s post. Maybe that’s my fault, but if you want me to agree with you you’ll first have to help me understand what your point is.
Also, I didn’t see any major “hating” on Pelosi. I saw a list of things (all factual) that Pelosi did (or didn’t do). Is pointing out facts “hating” on someone?
I can’t figure out WTF you’re talking about but I’m willing to listen if you’ll help me figure it out.
EDIT TO 103.
OK, well, maybe I see where her choice of words of saying doesn’t doesn’t care might be construed as hating on her. But still, that’s a legitimate conclusion to draw from the facts of her actions.
She took impeachment off the table. Anyone that cares about the rule of law, our Constitution, and accountability wouldn’t have done that. IMO that’s a fair conclusion. If one does care about the rule of law and accountability, then one would do everything in their power to see that when someone doesn’t follow the rule of law, they are held accountable.
Here we are standing in the ruins of what was built in 2006-2008, and there is still significant support for one of the archeticts of the debacle. Yeah, Pelosi might play the inside game very well, but what I see in her public statements and interviews is someone who is afraid to be in her own skin. That she is a lightning rod for Republican attacks doesn’t bother me. That she won’t fight back does.
“Pelosi didn’t go for impeachment bc she ddin’t care about the country, she didn’t care about how many Americans and ME civilians get killed, she didn’t care about torture, she didn’t care about much more than keeping America in dept to military conglomerates and reliant on Eric Prince’s forever. She didn’t care enough to even try to get things like the transfer of al-libi to be suicided in Libya blocked. She didn’t care about standing up to Obama, she just doesn’t care.”
That sounds like someone who doesn’t like Pelosi And blames her for the War on Terrah. That’s factual???????? I’ll take away the “hating on” comment, but you owe me an explanation of how this is not opinion. None of us has been in Congress every day of the past two years to know what really has gone on. (Or at least I assume that’s true. :) )
“People seem to forget who Paul is replacing. Bunning. So yes, that’s a change for the better even without the Dem. And for that matter, Mr. Aqua Budha has been more consistent on foreign wars that 95% of Dems, including Pelosi and Obama. Mr. Aqua Buddha fired his campaign manager/woman abuser pretty damn fast – how long did Obama stick with Summers while we were all economically battered? If you take Paul’s concept of making people pay for the first $2000 of medicare and overlay it with “if they have overall retirement income of over $50,0000″ or something like that – I don’t find it that offensive. His thoughts that maybe we should decriminalize lots of drug offenses and approach that area of law enforcement differently don’t antagonize me that much either. Yeah – I basically still think he’s kind of a nut and doesn’t understand a huge chunk of what he’s talking about, but he’s a thousand percent improvement on Bunning. I’d rather have Conway, but at least Paul won’t be lockstep on wars like Conway would have been. And with all that ambivalence from someone like me (friends still buy me tie-dye), it’s pretty easy to see how Independents aren’t going to be revved for Dems.”
That sounds like someone who’s comfortable with Rand Paul (even though, granted she voted for Conway.) You have a right to believe that Paul will be relatively OK. But I also have a right to believe that Paul is probably going to be the Devil Incarnate. Neither of our opinions are pointing out any factual basis for those opinions. I hope your right, but I feel the odds are that when smart guys like Cockburn and Paul get together they can really gum up the works. And they are very smart when it comes to manipulating the system.
Right wing democrats are right now attacking Pelosi for not being conservative enough and the supposed progressives are attacking her for not being liberal enough. The White House left her dangling in the wind. The Senate absolutely fucked her by not supporting anything coming out of the House. I don’t get what amounts to equating her to Joe Leiberman (or for that matter all the other spineless Dems in the upper house.) And what is it accomplishing?
I appreciate your willingness to listen. And what I fear is that all this in-fighting is making our commonalities pointless.
Edit to previous after seeing your edit to 103. LOL I care about the same things you do. But I feel we need to establish some priorities. Given your pseudonym, you’re probably as old as I am. Over the past 10 years, I’ve seen a lot of pain passed on to the weakest members of our society – and it’s usually because conservatives are pricks, liberals have become spineless (since Reagan) and progressives are always bitching. I agree that we need to press for the rule of law. But when people in our own country are suffering it seems incredibly useless and senseless to argue about people who are basically on our side. As an example, I’d point out that that the political system has turned backwards on safety net issues. People in social services are now having to argue over whether to cut quantity or quality. A single, homeless mom with two kids is a lot better off with more Pelosi’s and fewer Shuler/Pauls. Thanks for hearing me out.
Get real. I said I was tickled bc as I noted, the angst over Paul shows a real lack of understanding of what he was replacing – BUNNING.
You obviously don’t know much about the characters involved if you don’t realize that Paul is a helluva lot further to the left of Bunning than, for example, Coates is to the right of Bayh.
If you’re happy with Pelosi – fine. I’m not saying she wouldn’t be better than Schuler, I’m just saying that neither of them gets my blood going one way or another. Neither will do anything laudable bc neither has shown themselves to be a good person. ymmv, but you’re the one doing the hating, not me. I’m the one doing the “I don’t give a rats ass” ;)
…but the most effective leader in the Democratic Party may just hang around for a while longer.
I would say that’s one of the major problems in a nutshell, eh? And the fact the chuckleheads at Kos want her back should tell you something as well.
Amerika, it appears, is ready to descend towards Third World country status at much greater speed in the coming days.
But hey, what do us Recovering Progs-turned-Socialists know, we’ve only been correct about everything since 2001.
No Hope/No Change, 2012
I mostly agree with everything here. And I’ll always try to listen. Sometimes shit doesn’t get through this thick skull, but every once in a while it does.
I just don’t think she was hating on Pelosi personally, she was hating on here issues, and I agree with her. On all of them.
And I don’t Rand Paul is going to be anything other than a complete, batshit crazy, teabagger. Mary knows this too. She simply made the point that he may not be as bad as Bunning. And I agree on the two issues she mentioned, which, as I said, is two more than I ever agreed to with Bunning. (Although I did enjoy his book :))
Anyway, I agree with most, if not all, of what you wrote here, and I agree with Mary. IMO they aren’t mutually exclusive.
And thank you for responding kindly. It amazes me sometimes that folks respond kindly even when I probably deserve worse. Thank you.
EDIT to 109.
DOH! Failed memory failing me again. I thought Bunning was the one that wrote Ball Four, I book I read decades ago. It wasn’t Bunning though. I don’t even know if Bunning wrote any books. If he did, I probably wouldn’t enjoy them.
The first part of that is just a lie and when you have to make that kind of lie to make your point, you might as well change your name to Rush. Re: Rand Paul (who I think you mean instead of Paul Rand) and Jim Bunning – explain to me how Paul is different – especially if you are someone who ”
black, an immigrant, or someone dependent on social services.”
Paul, as I said, is a nut. Apparently, in your world, that’s high praise? Whatever. But as creepy bad as he is, it’s just plain silly to have a meltdown that Bunning is being replaced by Paul and that somehow is a change for the worse. Maybe Inhofe or Sessions might be worse than Bunning, but probably not.
“Nancy wasn’t/isn’t perfect, but I’ll try to assume your angst is more emotional than logical.”
What angst? You’re the one having angst over whether or not Nancy wins or loses. I marginally prefer her, but don’t really care and don’t really believe that it will make a nickel’s worth of difference over the next two years who holds the minority slot. Pelosi had it forever under Bush and never did anything with it, then had the house given to her in 2006 by people like me who donated to every Dem around and worked on GOTV and convincing indies and Republicans – and continued to do nothing. Then she got Obama and proceeded to abdicate any sense of institution so that she could pander to his worst decisions.
“I find the wars on an ideology to be just as repulsive as you”
?? I don’t even know what you’re talking about there. It’s not responsive to anything I posted.
“…but until you get some jobs to people in the flyover space that dog ain’t gonna bark.”
As an Kentuckian, I’m guessing you meant that dog won’t hunt, bc the yappy little Bush/Obama/Goldman Sachs etc. rat terriers in the Republican and Democratic parties manage to get some good barks out no matter what. I’ve been saying since 2006 that the Dems needed to be pushing job issues, so you just aren’t making sense here. It’s not like they’ve done it – despite Nancy’s power position since 2006. How you think that’s a ringing endorsement to keep her on- that she’s done nothing on jobs since 2006 – I don’t get that one? I do give her credit for the long overdue minimum wage raise. Not something that is so important in the overall scheme of things that I’d say – oh, what the heck, commit us to billions in military costs and dead Americans and blown up families in the middle east, it’s all ok since you did raise the minimum wage.
“People have to stop being worried about their own kids before they take moral stock of what’s going on elsewhere in the world.”
Said like someone whose “own kids” aren’t in Afghanistan. Lucky you. And golly gee whiz, Nancy’s helped people quit worrying about “their own kids” so much since 2006 that … oh, wait.
The competent immoral and the incompent moralizer may each get their own devoted teams, but the incompetent amoralists who don’t even bother to protect their own end up with just a few die hard team fanatics for whom reality doesn’t mean much. “Preaching otherwise is as weird as waiting for the rapture.” ;)
So go chill and start wondering how you are going to convince indies and Republicans that Pelosi is going to look after their kids when your best shot at convincing me is belligerently misquote me and then splutter out that *Paul Rand* isn’t any better than Jim Bunning.
And what is it that you did for Conway, btw? I not only voted, but took others who wouldn’t have gotten there but for me. I appreciate your big smoochy thanks. ;)
Tx. ’nuff said. :)
lol on the Bunning. Was Ball Four by Bo Belinsky. (I have sometimers disease as well.)
passing the resolution to approved the Deficit commission’s dirty work and taking impeachment off the table is enough to warrant being called a Republican.
the whole issue of having principles that are different from the Republicans is what i value as far as Pelosi is concerned. Pelosi is aiding and abetting the Republicans by doing these things. and i don’t care about her ability to raise money or fight, if the most important battles are lost.
how can you say you are for liberal/progressive/social/humane principles when you help the Right?
Crazy and bad. this election is just a taste of more to come unless the Democrats stand for values that are not negotiable.
wont get any support or votes from this left leaning American, have a spine and support accountability and honesty. such BS, vote the party line or else. evil is still evil
Wow, you’re pretty angry. So many things to respond to.
Sorry to bother you with the idea that single homeless moms living on the streets with their kids in the winter might not be much better off than Afghani’s. I would have thought the suffering was just as bad. I guess I’m wrong.
My own kids are grown and successful. I don’t worry about them. Right now I’m the legal guardian of a DD child who was abandoned by both his parents. He’s been with me for 8 years (since he was 4 mos old.) I worry a lot about his ability to survive in this country because he’ll probably never outgrow his affliction.
I voted for Patty Murray and have voted in every election in WA. State, including bond issues, since 1972. I didn’t take people to the polls though. I don’t have a car.
I did mean bark. Out here on the west coast all our dogs are used to let us know when there are used car salesmen in the neighborhood. And it’s probably against the law to hunt pigeons in the big city.
” ‘People have to stop being worried about their own kids before they take moral stock of what’s going on elsewhere in the world.’ Said like someone whose “own kids” aren’t in Afghanistan. Lucky you. And golly gee whiz, Nancy’s helped people quit worrying about “their own kids” so much since 2006 that … oh, wait.” Sorry about missing your point, I guess. My point is that most people have to meet their own needs before they think about others. The two wars in the mid-east just aren’t on people’s minds right now when they’re having to go to food banks and the unemployment office. Or worrying that they’re one step away from having to do that. I’m not making a judgement about it, just a point. Human nature is human nature. I think death from drones is incredibly immoral – just like you. But right now, you and me and maybe, figuratively, three other people are thinking along those lines in the good ole us of a.
I don’t see “Nancy’s power position since 2006″, when the Blue Dogs never supported her. The roll call of Dems over Repubs never matched the roll of Conservatives over Liberals. She’s the only one who really compromised in good faith (unless you truly believe that your own opinion is the only one with merit.)
I didn’t say you praised Rand Paul. I said you seemed to indicate he was better than Jim Bunning. I disagree. Bunning and Paul would both agree that the Civil Rights Act is a violation of Free Enterprise because segregated counters should be up to the business owner. They also want to abolish the Dept of Education and Americorps (two communist agencies ‘fer shure.) That must be an east of the Mississipi thing cause I don’t get it. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree because I think Paul IS Inhofe/Sessions with a large dose of Cockburn.
You’re right that convincing indies and Republicans that Pelosi is looking after their kids is a big job. I’m a board member for a non-profit social service agency. Pelosi was instrumental in getting at least some neo-dems to support the stimulus package which provided aid to a lot of people in need. And apparently even you aren’t aware of that. And that’s just one example. I can provide more if you like.
Tell you what, I’ll chill if you’ll do the same. I’ll start by being more understanding of your anger and perhaps you could acknowledge that maybe spending so much energy attacking Pelosi benefits our mutual antagonists.
In any event, here’s a big smoochie back at ya. ;) My smoochie is 100% snark free and I hope yours is as well.
Edit 114. Comments are intended as a response to Mary @ 111. Sorry ‘ bout that. :)