Why the attacks and disdain of Pelosi?

[question everything]

Last edited Sat Nov 10, 2018, 01:04 AM - Edit history (1)

One of the local Democratic candidates here was a subject of many nasty ads and a recurring theme was that he "supports Nancy Pelosi." I am sure many here have seen the same. Honestly, I saw it as misogyny hiding as politics.

Earlier on Chuck Todd program, Abigail Spanberge (VA 7) said she does not want Pelosi to be the speaker. She never gave a reason.

And now I've heard that my candidate, who flipped the seat of the R who "did not embrace Whiny Donny" does not want her, either. Why not? I am almost having a buyer's remorse. Yes, I will try asking him. If I know how to reach him.

Do any of these Young Turks realize that it was Pelosi who brought the 2006 winning and these ones?

Why not try to meet with her, see what her plans are and where you can fit into the new House?

I am pissed.

[msongs]

1. its not the repubs attacking her that matter.... nt

[Blaukraut]

2. Playing right into the republicans' hands with that

Does anyone really believe that the right wing wouldn't attack ANY Dem speaker, no matter who it is? Right now it's Pelosi, because she is effective. I get the desire for young blood, but as Treebeard said: "Don't be hasty". The old, experienced guard can teach the newcomers how to actually achieve results instead of just pounding tables.

[Johnny2X2X]

3. Whatever it takes to win

Nothing matters but winning in 2020. If Pelosi gives us the best chance to win then she should be Soeaker. If she doesn’t then she shouldn’t be.

[Wintryjade]

4. I am with her.

[Brother Buzz]

5. A 'Left Coast' loonie

It really that simple. Well, more specifically, a Left Coast female loonie

[TygrBright]

27. Except that she isn't, really. Born & bred in the Baltimore 'hood.

And that's where she learned her politics.

Street fighter from way back, our Nancy.

What pisses people off about her is pretty simple, I think:

She has no need whatsoever for anyone else's approval or approbation.

I don't always agree with her, and sometimes she gets on my wick hard.

But I respect her greatly, and think well of her leadership in these tough times.

thoughtfully,
Bright

[question everything]

55. Thank you for this

Of course none of us agree with any of our leaders all of the time. Though I am sometimes envious of the Rs who get locked step with their leaders.

But the attacks on her, as they are still on Hillary, are personal and visceral.

[EffieBlack]

30. She's either so liberal she supposedly turns off Republicans or she's not liberal enough for

the progressives.

People need to make up their minds.

[question everything]

6. Adding Mark Shields' comments from the PBS NewsHour earlier

And I think — I think the victory — David and I disagree on this. I think it was enormous personal victory and political victory for Nancy Pelosi. I really do. She was the one who passed health care in 2009, almost single-handedly. And the party paid for it in 2010.

And, ironically, in 2018, it was the issue that rode that the Democrats rode back. And I thought she showed iron discipline by keeping the party on that issue. And I think it's — I think it's significant.

Thirty-three or 34 women elected to the House for the first time who are Democrats.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/shields-and-brooks-on-midterm-results-and-gop-lockstep-loyalty-to-trump

[Hermit-The-Prog]

31. and Amanpour with new Congressman Malinowski

Followed Pelosi's advice.

See:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211406195

Edit to add:

I caught that on PBS but had to shut it off when "David" started talking about economic anxiety.

[In It to Win It]

7. It's because she good at it!

Nancy Pelosi is amazing! I support her!

[aikoaiko]

8. Nobody is loved by everybody.

[jaysunb]

9. Correction: the lady on MPT was from Northern Virginia not Georgia. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

13. Abigail Spanberger (VA7)

[question everything]

23. Thanks. Corrected (nt)

[question everything]

15. OOps, sorry. Was it the one held by Eric Cantor?

[Stinky The Clown]

25. Yup. Cantor Brat Spanberger

[brer cat]

16. Thanks for the correction.

I didn't see it, but it didn't sound like Lucy McBath. She was very careful not to get pushed into a debate about Pelosi.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. Drives me nuts! Pelosi was master at getting things done and hasn't lost her touch, but...

there's always that contingent that insists on throwing out the good for the perceived perfect. "Perceived", but maybe not so perfect after all.

It rarely works out well, but that never stops them.

[mtnsnake]

11. Sorry, I'm not following you. Are you talking about Democrats attacking her as well as republicans?

If it's Democrats you're referring to, I don't think that just because someone thinks we could do better with a change in the House Speaker position that it should be considered to be an attack on her.

[question everything]

17. Yes, the Democrats who are ready to throw her to the sideways

After the great work that she has done.

Yes, there should be debates about who should be the best to lead us to 2020 and to block Trump, but right form the start to say that now they are elected they should oppose her and not even provide a reason?

I have seen some threads on these pages, too, objecting to her being the Speaker. I think just objecting with no good reason is attack.

Certainly the Republican ads linking a candidate with her were attack.

It is like Limpdick thundering "Hillary!" without adding anything and the message for his dittoheads was clear.

Same with "Nancy Pelosi." I am not aware of any male politician whose enemies would just say his name and the blood pressure of the listeners would rise.

[mtnsnake]

19. Thank you for the clarification. Well said.

[Baltimike]

12. Because "divide and conquer" is their game...some are unwitting, and some

know EXACTLY wtf they're doing.

[Bfd]

22. Thank you. A war is lost or a democracy falls, when the center is weakened by relentless assault

Its the oldest strategy of control in existance.

To destroy the powerful center of anything, the assault must come hard from the right and hard from the left.

To destroy a Democracy, the same method must occur at the same degree & at the same time.

It isn't difficult to se it in play once you step back & look at the target of the assaults.
In the case of topling a democracy, the assaults from any direction are all directed at the same point. The strong center.

It is obvious & the method is as old as the first days of mankind. Tribe against tribe.

[question everything]

24. Very well said. We should keep this in mind

Thank you.

[Bfd]

38. You are welcome

[SaschaHM]

14. 2006-2010 Pelosi was a great speaker because she had ironclad control over the house.

She was able to get members to walk the plank for her and take votes. They respected her, her vision, and her leadership style.

If 2018 Speaker Pelosi can't do the same with the incoming class of congress, then she will be a terrible speaker. Sure, she can go negotiate with Trump, but if she can't sell it to her Congress, get the to take tough votes, and respect the path that she dictates, it's going to be the last days of Boehner, without the Papal visit all over again.

If she can't convince enough Democrats to line up behind her for the first non-consequential vote in congress, then she might not make it through the session.

[question everything]

18. Agree. But I would like to know why the new memebers are against her before stepping

on the Capitol Steps.

Whatever they thought of her before the elections, this victory is hers as much as everyone's else.

At least meet and caucus and see who is the alternative.

[SaschaHM]

20. Winning their election doesn't mean they owe her and that...

just discounts folks that did more work on the ground than Pelosi did. She wasn't their campaign managers, their volunteers, nor the head of the DCCC. Whatever miniscule part she may have played, and with her negatives it may not have been a positive part, doesn't guarantee her the speakership.

If you ran saying that you weren't going to vote for Pelosi, you're not suddenly going to flip on that because you won an election where the mention of her name was a drag on your campaign and Nancy Pelosi has been in politics long enough to know that her feelings do not take precedence over something that you've told your constituents consistently.

It's Pelosi's job to convince those folks to support her, not the other way around.

As to them not saying why they won't support her, that's not something that needs to be aired and hashed out in the public eye. The last thing anyone wants or needs is incoming members pointing out every grievance that they have with a Nancy Pelosi speakership in front of cameras. That can happen behind closed doors in Dec. when Dems meet to chose a new speaker. If anything, that just adds more stuff that they may have to walk back if she becomes speaker. A simple "No" or "Yes" will suffice.

[question everything]

35. But some do give her credit

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211406195

[Bfd]

21. As for certain 'fellow liberals', its the same reason they destroyed HRC's stellar career. .

They have to steal these women's mandate, their success because what these women have accomplished cannot be replicated. Their name must be completely destroyed by propaganda & assault because someone else wants to make the successes of these remarkable women of our history, their own.
And there's a reason for that.

When they present these amazing new ideas, they have already been created, when they brag about laying claim to a fascinating populist idea, its not new, its already been done and in the history books of some of the brightest thinkers of our Democratic Party.

Rather than honor these women for their policies & relentless fight for parity & equality, we see a deep throated Tea Partyesq need to destroy what good has gone before them, only to recreate the same thing, only in their own name.

It is a method we have seen repeated throughout political history.
To steal the gold, a thief must find & break the strongest barrier.
It is precisely what Vladimer Putin set out to do, what he had to orchestrate in his goal of stealing the National Treasure from the Russian people, and now the American people.

Anyone supporting this assault on the Democratic Party is simply part of the thievery of the successful works of someone elses accomplishments.

Now as for Republicans, well they just don't give a shit about anyone but them, and are simply keeping the nation from complete revolt until we have no way back to democracy.
So yes, the distraction is in the form of convincing half the populace that women like Pelosi, Feinstein, Clinton..our strongest links, must be stopped & replaced by something shinier, younger, with a much fresher face, yet sounds a lot like what we've already had, except they have no workable policy plan for these shiny new idea of theirs.

They will hand over Democracy with a mea culpa & take their cut when the coup is complete
It is how a Democracy falls

Thank you.

[oasis]

46. +1 million.

[Bfd]

52. Thank you.

[NBachers]

54. Yes

[RockRaven]

26. She's effective, so Repukes hate and demonize her. And some Dems have absorbed that message. nt

[Hermit-The-Prog]

32. the same way and reason they demonize Hillary

[allgood33]

28. Just an hour ago my spouse and I talked about the same thing. Everyone, even our new Dem Reps

ought to be asked to identify exactly what Nancy has or has not done to warrant the attacks always lobbed at her.

Next time someone says says they won't vote for her as Speaker, ask them why? What has she done that makes you not want her for Speaker (especially the newbies in Congress ought to asked this). I don't mind folks not "liking" her but they should have a legitimate reason. Age, gender, ethnicity, her record, what...???

I believe she will willingly hand over the gavel when she believes she can no longer be effective. otherwise...

[TheFarseer]

29. Democrats could not possibly have lost in 2006

With the Iraq war at peak unpopularity. The problem I have with Nancy Pelosi is that every Republican runs against her instead of their actual opponent and it works better than any other arguement. I dont know what exactly is so bad about her in their opinion but damnit it works as a campaign issue. They just say random democratic candidate supports Nancy Pelosi and its all over. Theres no good way to respond to that charge. Sorry, it's really hard for me to love Nancy Pelosi when i see this happen EVERY election.

[EffieBlack]

33. You think they run against her because she's Nancy Pelosi?

No. They run against her because she's the Democratic Leader. And if she's replaced they'll do the same thing to THAT leader. Only THAT leader won't have anything close to the experience and chops that Pelosi has.

The question is, why do Democrats fall for it every time?

[TheFarseer]

36. I think that's a valid argument

But that attack did not work with Harry Reid and they tried it. There's something about Pelosi that allows this attack to stick. Maybe shes just been around longer? Of course they would TRY to attack whoever is the democratic leader but you can't know if it would be effective like attacking Pelosi has been for them.

[Awsi Dooger]

40. I agree with your version

It wouldn't work to same degree with a Harry Reid type and it wouldn't work with a younger charismatic male Democrat.

My right wing friends don't know a damn thing about politics but they darn sure know Nancy Pelosi's name, and summon it whenever stuck in political arguments. I always default to David Brock's book, "Blinded by the Right," in which he emphasized that right wingers despise women in position of power to such extent that conservative magazine sales soared whenever a prominent female was mocked on the cover, and especially if she was associated with liberal politics.

I loved Hillary but she had no margin for error, given the misogyny. Everything had to unfold perfectly. If we nominate another female the same will apply.

Deny at our peril.

Also, you are absolutely correct that 2006 could not have been lost. It is laughable when posters try to pretend otherwise. I am never going to allow situational influence to be sidelined. Nancy Pelosi deserves zero credit for 2006. Zero. Not only Iraq but Bush had been stuck in low 30s to high 30s approval ever since Katrina in late summer 2005. Bush's approval throughout 2006 was lower than Trump's approval during 2018.

Here is the Gallup link so 2006 Bush approval can be checked. Scroll down to look at each weekly poll:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx

[EffieBlack]

43. How is this attack "sticking"?

Sure - lots of people, including some Democrats, demonize her, but have any of the attacks actually resulted in serious political damage to any candidate or issue. To the contrary - Pelosi consistently kicks Republican ass, even in the minority, and has just helped deliver the Democrats' most successful midterm in 45 years.

The Republicans have put her up as the Boogeyman because she scares the snot out of them and they want her gone. Unfortunately, some clueless Democrats are falling right into the Republicans' trap. The good thing is that Pelosi is a badass who has earned the respect and loyalty of a majority of her caucus, so she's not going anywhere until she's good and ready.

[TheFarseer]

48. In my experience

When a congressional election is tight and issue focused, the R will start bombarding the air waves with ads featuring our candidate and Pelosi together and pull away. Do you ever see ads where our candidate says I’m going to stand with Nancy Pelosi? Maybe this is a regional thing? I definitely see the other side saying they will stand with Trump and Paul Ryan.

[EffieBlack]

49. These recent contests were "tight and issues focused" and the Rs DID bombard the airwaves with

anti-Pelosi ads this time around. Just like they ran anti-Obama ads and anti-Bill Clinton ads and anti-George Soros ads, etc.That's what they do. But it's foolish for us to use that to determine who our leaders are - not only because we shouldn't let Republicans decide who we choose to have on our side, but also because they're going to do that to ANYONE in leadership on our side.

They're not attacking Nancy Pelosi because she's Nancy Pelosi. They're attacking her because she's the Democratic leader AND because she's effective as hell and they want her out of the way. And since they can't pick her off themselves, if they can get US to do their dirty work for us, they get to kill two birds with one stone: get rid of their chief and most effective nemesis AND make complete fools of us while they laugh their asses off at how stupid we are.

[TheFarseer]

50. I guess we just don't agree on this.

I can only speak for my area, but attacks on Bill Clinton did not really work because he was more popular than they realized and the economy was pretty rockin in the 90's, and attacks on Obama were really dumb because he won my red district in 2008. People always point to how much money she raises, but don't you think the leader would have a definite leg up on anyone else just because they're the leader? Bottom line - does it help or hurt in a congressional election to be linked to Nancy Pelosi? Does it help or hurt to be linked to Obama/Soros/Clinton in a congressional election? In my completely honest opinion, just for my area - Pelosi hurts, George Soros hurts, Obama is a mixed bag. Bill Clinton is a mixed bag. To go even a step further, I think Hillary Clinton is a mixed bag. She at least fires up the women voters. Anyway, that's my two cents. People don't have to agree with me.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

34. seriously?

Did you miss the blue wave that just happened? It came largely because Democratic candidates ran on the issue Pelosi championed and told them to run on -- health care.

Even the damned GOPers tried to jump on that bandwagon. See every rally by Obama where he called them out as lying. See Biden's speeches. See most Democratic candidates.

Pelosi had the plan that worked, in spite of demonization by GOPers.

[TheFarseer]

37. Maybe I have Nebraska myopia

No Dems won here and Pelosi was a handy punching bag for the R's. I do feel like most Midwestern candidates run away from her. Just my perspective. Like you said, alot of districts went blue so she worked for some areas just fine.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

39. red KY here

1 of 6 districts is blue here, and I live in one of the red ones.

In general, candidates who followed Nancy Pelosi's advice won.

[Recursion]

41. OK, but they'll do that with whoever is speaker. You know that, right?

There's not some magic Democrat we can choose that Republicans won't vilify.

[Awsi Dooger]

42. National House exit poll on Pelosi: 31% favorable 56% unfavorable

Very difficult to get that low, since it includes so many partisans from your own side. Trump was 45% among the same group:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls/national-results

[EffieBlack]

44. The only polls that matter are the ones around the country where people voted in a Democratic House

Who gives a shit whether people like Pelosi if she's delivering?

Funny how the poll you link to doesn't poll Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer or Paul Ryan? Why is Pelosi the only Leader being checked up on?

Surely, it's not because she's the most unpopular. For example, Mitch McConnell has just a 24% approval rating, according to Gallup - worse than Pelosi's 29%. Schumer also polled at 29% favorability, but there's no push to drive him out of his leadership position. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/1/congress-lands-19-job-approval-rating-not-so-far-a/

And, FYI - Mitch McConnell has a 52% disapproval rating in his own state while Pelosi was just reelected with 86% of the vote in her district.

But Pelosi is the only one of the four leaders who people are trying to drum out of office. I wonder what makes her different - besides the fact that she's effective as hell?

I can't believe how many Democrats are falling right into the Republicans trap. They must be laughing their asses off at Democrats for being so gullible.

[duforsure]

45. She's smart and effective

And poses a danger to them because of that. She's a threat to them and why they don't like her.

[Midwestern Democrat]

47. I think Pelosi deserves to become Speaker again - you don't throw out the leader after taking back

the House - but I do think we seriously need to get younger Democrats in the House leadership within the next four years. We've never had a situation before where the three Democratic House leaders (Speaker, Majority Leader, Majority Whip) were all almost 80 years old - it used to be that the Majority Leader and Majority Whip were the eventual heirs apparent for the Speakership. When Sam Rayburn died, everyone knew Majority Leader John McCormick would succeed him; when McCormick retired, everyone knew Majority Leader Carl Albert would succeed him; when Albert retired, everyone knew Majority Leader Tip O'Neill would succeed him; when O'Neill retired, everyone knew Majority Leader Jim Wright would succeed him; when Wright had to resign, everyone knew Majority Leader Tom Foley would succeed him; likewise, everyone knew Majority Leader Dick Gephardt would one day succeed Foley (alas, Gephardt never got to become Speaker - he did succeed Foley but as House Minority Leader). We're now looking at a situation where for the first time either ever or in a very long time - the next top House Democrat will probably have to start at the top (Speaker or House Minority Leader) without ever having served as Leader or Whip beforehand.

[Turbineguy]

51. The RW hate machine

has minions here too.

[EffieBlack]

53. Apparently

[Gothmog]

56. These attacks are because Nancy Pelosi is so very effective and a great leader