Current Events > Can someone tell me why some are trying to push Pelosi out?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Other than OpTiCs ?

to make room for Maxine
---

I seem to be missing a post

A genuine belief that new voices are needed and/or a misguided belief that the GOP wouldn't be able to immediately vilify whomever is the speaker if it wasn't Pelosi.
---

Pelosi is the old guard. They want to change it up.
---

whitelytning posted...

Pelosi is the old guard. They want to change it up.

So yeah nothing about policy or positions just all optics haha.

Part of it is that people don't understand what the role of the speaker is.
---

Right hates her cuz shes a lib (and a woman.... and from SF)

Left hates her cuz shes not frothing at the mouth to impeach Trump.

So they will rally behind someone else, if the off chance that happens, that person becomes speaker....

Impeachment wont happen and people will blame weird off points about why that person just wasnt left enough and this cycle will continue

/jaded rant

Maybe she reminds people of Hillary.
---

Hopefully it is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Just for the lols and to see her in the media even more.
---

TheCEmanCometh posted...

Hopefully it is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Just for the lols and to see her in the media even more.

You mean senator Ocasio-Cortez?
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

TheCEmanCometh posted...

Hopefully it is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Just for the lols and to see her in the media even more.

You mean senator Ocasio-Cortez?

Wont happen unless she gets some wins. I mean if sex and the city couldnt top de blasio, shes not toppeling a democrat senator

CruelBuffalo posted...

whitelytning posted...

Pelosi is the old guard. They want to change it up.

So yeah nothing about policy or positions just all optics haha.

That and despite her clear credentials the left is distrustful of her 'bipartisan overtures' to the GOP. It feels like a return to the ineffectual normal where Dems are concerned, and that's particularly heinous when we've watched the GOP legislative body race to the bottom in terms of fairness, the value of compromise, decorum, responsible policymaking etc.

And with so many diverse voices coming with this new crop of freshman representatives, dems and left sympathizers read this as a sign that the party's leadership should reflect that shift in demographics, both to signal the party's leaning into the political implications of this demographic shift, and to signal a shift in the strategy of the party as a whole.

There may be something to some of that. Where there is no evidence to support her replacement is this idea that Pelosi's history and household name recognition among the right is a liability for the left, and that it will somehow motivate the opposition. The right will throw all its resources into attacking whoever the Democratic congress eventually selects as the speaker, because their only true is acquiring and consolidating power, and they can't do that by invoking compromise or conciliation. To suggest that Pelosi herself is particularly toxic is to ignore patterns of the past eight years.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

TheCEmanCometh posted...

Hopefully it is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Just for the lols and to see her in the media even more.

You mean senator Ocasio-Cortez?

Lmao it's a lot easier to win a seat in the house off naive children than it is to win a seat in the senate.
---

White old and basically a neo con dem that the commie wing hates, which I can side with them on I guess.

hollow_shrine posted...

the left is distrustful of her 'bipartisan overtures' to the GOP.

Not sure why this isn't a legitimate point. The democrats have had a history for decades of making shitty deals, and losing those deals in entirety, to the right. And if anything we need someone who will do the opposite to reign in the extremism on the right. Well, or let it flounder while real progress is made.
---

Ah, ineffectual Democrats, how I've missed you
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

the left is distrustful of her 'bipartisan overtures' to the GOP.

Not sure why this isn't a legitimate point. The democrats have had a history for decades of making shitty deals, and losing those deals in entirety, to the right. And if anything we need someone who will do the opposite to reign in the extremism on the right. Well, or let it flounder while real progress is made.

I'm a little confused because it sounds like we're agreeing with one another.

Dems are bad negotiators because they often assume the GOP argues in good faith and they clearly don't. Any recently re-empowered Democrat giving her victory speech and even alluding to the idea of bipartisan cooperation, particularly in the context of the past decade, is going to attract a certain level of skepticism from the left, who are going to want someone in her position to fight for them as brazenly as McConnell and Ryan have for the right.

On paper, I am aware that few people have been as effective in their role as Pelosi, and that her ideological ambitions have vastly more in common with the left than they don't. It is a question of optics. Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.
---

It'd be nice if all these people shit talking Pelosi had an actual person as an alternative to her. As is, they're just playing to the people on bOtH sIdEs that hate her.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful. How useful were those people spouting nonsense at Ted Cruz at a restauant? Has he changed his ways and joined TheResistance . Have his supporters left him?

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful. How useful were those people spouting nonsense at Ted Cruz at a restauant? Has he changed his ways and joined TheResistance . Have his supporters left him?

They weren't also passing legislature.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

They weren't also passing legislature.

Neither will the House likely.
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.
---

Anteaterking posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

They weren't also passing legislature.

Neither will the House likely.

That's not exactly a point against having a hard stance liberal as speaker.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

CruelBuffalo posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

The whole point is the democrats are already trying to please everyone. They practically have their own free bj booth. We need someone who won't bother trying to please racist clowns and will do something for the people in society who make it function.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

That's not exactly a point against having a hard stance liberal as speaker.

Or a point for.

If you look though, most people trying to replace Pelosi themselves are to the right of her. People to the left of her complaining aren't presenting an alternative.
---

Anteaterking posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

That's not exactly a point against having a hard stance liberal as speaker.

Or a point for.

If you look though, most people trying to replace Pelosi themselves are to the right of her. People to the left of her complaining aren't presenting an alternative.

This.

P4wn4g3 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

The whole point is the democrats are already trying to please everyone. They practically have their own free bj booth. We need someone who won't bother trying to please racist clowns and will do something for the people in society who make it function.

Soo is this person gonna ignore that Trump needs to sign it and it needs to also pass the Republican controlled senate?

Anteaterking posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

That's not exactly a point against having a hard stance liberal as speaker.

Or a point for.

If you look though, most people trying to replace Pelosi themselves are to the right of her. People to the left of her complaining aren't presenting an alternative.

Well as far as your second point goes I'd agree. As far as the first goes I'd say it's a point for insofar as less right wing obstroctionism is concerned, and more rallying power for the left, especially the farther left. If the house effectively does nothing Republicans have a free pass to say "See? These Dems don't even do work lol" all the while passing more shitty bills by the senate. It basically sets them up to win another majority in all branches.
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

We don't need to appease everyone, just ourselves. The left alone has the votes if we motivate people who already agree with us to the polls.

We've spent eight years making concessions to the right, when it's clear we should have done what the right did and chose politicians who championed democratic ideals to the detriment of everything else. We have a voting majority who is receptive to those ideals, and who respond very positively to democratic candidates who commitment to those ideals comes across authentically.
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

Other than OpTiCs ?

Because there is only place in the Democratic Party for transexual genderfluid Hispanic mixed with Black women that had an abortion

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

The whole point is the democrats are already trying to please everyone. They practically have their own free bj booth. We need someone who won't bother trying to please racist clowns and will do something for the people in society who make it function.

Soo is this person gonna ignore that Trump needs to sign it and it needs to also pass the Republican controlled senate?

The public certainly wouldn't ignore that. That is definitely part of the point. It's also why the election results were disappoi ting to me.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

those people don't exist because the democratic party leadership gives no new faces any room to breathe in the house; it's (one reason) why charismatic folks like Beto and Sinema decided to run for Senate.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

We don't need to appease everyone, just ourselves. The left alone has the votes if we motivate people who already agree with us to the polls.

We've spent eight years making concessions to the right, when it's clear we should have done what the right did and chose politicians who championed democratic ideals to the detriment of everything else. We have a voting majority who is receptive to those ideals, and who respond very positively to democratic candidates who commitment to those ideals comes across authentically.

My gut instinct is that there are less people on the left than the right who would stomach behaving in a similar matter as the right has but we havent seen an example to know if this is true. I know I wouldnt but thats me.

CruelBuffalo posted...

Right hates her cuz shes a lib (and a woman.... and from SF)

Left hates her cuz shes not frothing at the mouth to impeach Trump.

So they will rally behind someone else, if the off chance that happens, that person becomes speaker....

Impeachment wont happen and people will blame weird off points about why that person just wasnt left enough and this cycle will continue

/jaded rant

Has nothing to do with impeachment. Impeachment would never happen given the landscape of Congress right now.

One reason theres a lot of pushing against her is because theres a fair amount of freshmen that promised not to vote for Pelosi, either because they dont identify with her politically, or if theyre in a more conservative area, to counter-act all of the Nancy Pelosi liberal nonsense that was being blasted over the airwaves. Supporting her now would be shooting oneself in the foot before you could even start doing work in Congress.

Another reason is because shes been party leader in the House for 12 years. There has been little to no shift in who the officers were. Thats a long time. Ambitious people have either left politics or pursued other office because theres no future to move up into in the House Democrats.

Anyways nobody has stepped up to face her yet. Cant really lose without an opponent in this case. Even if someone does step up, Pelosi will do what shes done her entire time as Speaker... wrangle the votes she needs to win.

She did it for Obamacare. She did it for the bailouts. She did it for the Stimulus package. She can probably do it yet again.
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

Soo is this person gonna ignore that Trump needs to sign it and it needs to also pass the Republican controlled senate?

You pass it anyway. The shadow of 2020 give you a certain amount of leverage. And if that doesn't pan out, you make good on that threat and bludgeon the assholes with their own voting records. It'll make your point better for your own constituents than any smear campaign ever could.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Soo is this person gonna ignore that Trump needs to sign it and it needs to also pass the Republican controlled senate?

You pass it anyway. The shadow of 2020 give you a certain amount of leverage. And if that doesn't pan out, you make good on that threat and bludgeon the assholes with their own voting records. It'll make your point better for your own constituents than any smear campaign ever could.

Of course I agree they should pass a bill of what they want to get peoples positions on the record, but if there is compromise afterward that makes sense to get stuff done I am for it. I realize this is extremely general and hard to actually discuss until we get actual examples

CruelBuffalo posted...

My gut instinct is that there are less people on the left than the right who would stomach behaving in a similar matter as the right has but we havent seen an example to know if this is true. I know I wouldnt but that's me.

Maybe, but I'm not advocating synthesizing some left equivalent to GOP red meat, which is a lot of fear mongering about immigrants, moral panic about shifting social mores, opining about an imagined golden past, and repeating national narratives reaffirming exceptionalism. The left isn't receptive to these kinds of messages. The left is less willing to entertain outright lies, and can be shamed out of spreading conspiracy theories. On a psychological identity level the left and right are different. I'm not saying we're not vulnerable to the lure of intellectual dishonesty, but that we do it differently. A leftist media propaganda machine would look markedly different from something like Fox and nothing like MSNBC for example.
---

Balrog0 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

those people don't exist because the democratic party leadership gives no new faces any room to breathe in the house; it's (one reason) why charismatic folks like Beto and Sinema decided to run for Senate.

Which is the bottom line of why the democratic leadership needs changed.
---

FWIW, most of the people actually running against her, and the ones who signed that letter opposing her, are to her right. People like Tim Ryan and etc.

Pelosi isn't great, and she has some real bad instincts on things (Paygo would be silly, for one), but she's miles better than Chuck Schumer, who got reappointed Senate Leader without a vote.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Many on the left want someone who's unapologetically here to slay.

That would be nice.

Doesnt mean it would be useful

You'd need still need someone competent in the role, true. Why not seek both? Someone who is hip to the modern political games who also has an appreciation for good policy making.

Lol well once we find this unicorn that can to this tap dance of appeasing eveeyone see if they want this role because that person would be better served as president

The whole point is the democrats are already trying to please everyone. They practically have their own free bj booth. We need someone who won't bother trying to please racist clowns and will do something for the people in society who make it function.

This, basically. Bipartisanship is poison and I am not interested in entertaining it anymore.
---

Yeah. Change is too slow.
---

It's because she's beholden to big donors. She thinks her best quality is how much money she can raise from corporations and billionaires.
---

ledbowman posted...

It's because she's beholden to big donors. She thinks her best quality is how much money she can raise from corporations and billionaires.

Citation needed

It seems odd to dismiss the optics of changing speakers if how people view Pelosi is hurting the Dems goals. Thats not nothing - optics matter a lot in politics.
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

It seems odd to dismiss the optics of changing speakers if how people view Pelosi is hurting the Dems goals. Thats not nothing - optics matter a lot in politics.

No kidding. But Democrats can't strategize worth a shit.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

It seems odd to dismiss the optics of changing speakers if how people view Pelosi is hurting the Dems goals. Thats not nothing - optics matter a lot in politics.

No kidding. But Democrats can't strategize worth a shit.

Arent you the one arguing Democrats should stop trying to appear Centrists, the ones on the right of Pelosi are the ones gunning for her.

CruelBuffalo posted...

ledbowman posted...

It's because she's beholden to big donors. She thinks her best quality is how much money she can raise from corporations and billionaires.

Citation needed

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/22/nancy-pelosi-defiant-not-stepping-down-239861

I am a master legislator, Pelosi declared. I am a strategic, politically astute leader. My leadership is recognized by many around the country. That is why I am able to attract the financial support that I do, which is essential to our election, I am sad to say.

She's happy to keep the status quo instead of working to clean up the system.
---