General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMother Jones column: Never Forget That Nancy Pelosi Is Very Smart
But Ive always thought that if you respect someone, it means you respect them even when you disagree with them. So you can still disagree with Pelosi, but you should acknowledge that she most likely has pretty good reasons for not pursuing impeachment; going slow on investigations; not pushing for an even more liberal border bill,¹ and being publicly dismissive of AOC. I dont know that I agree with all of these decisions, but I dont suddenly think Pelosi is a dimwitted sellout because of that. I think we just disagree. And given her massively greater knowledge of Congress, I suspect shes more right about this stuff than I am."
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/07/never-forget-that-nancy-pelosi-is-very-smart/
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)I hope my fears are assuaged. But I fear she's making grave mistakes.
world wide wally
(21,734 posts)yowzayowzayowza
(7,017 posts)unlike some.
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)If she can't inspire, rally and lead the Democrats in the House, maybe someone else should
yowzayowzayowza
(7,017 posts)n/t
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)not just 1 of a group
yowzayowzayowza
(7,017 posts)n/t
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)yowzayowzayowza
(7,017 posts)Sis poom bah. Follow the Leader!!! Ya, ya, ya.
Congresscritters aren't kindergartners.
Bla, bla, bla!!!
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)yowzayowzayowza, For each response ... Pelosi knows a hell of a lot
more than she is given credit for, and she gets a lot of credit.
I wince at some of her decisions but I trust her. and yes,
Congresscritters aren't kindergartners.
Skittles
(153,104 posts)pnwmom
(108,952 posts)And for those in swing districts and red districts, pushing for impeachment could significantly lower their chances in 2020.
world wide wally
(21,734 posts)pnwmom
(108,952 posts)If you think your Rep should push for impeachment, then you should be telling him or her so -- over and over.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...she should have some amount of pull over her caucus members in terms of getting them more comfortable with using the tools at their disposal. Specifically regarding impeachment. If this president hasn't earned impeachment, who has or will?
JoeOtterbein
(7,699 posts)...POTUS Trump.
In other words; don't believe it for a second.
Hamlette
(15,407 posts)comparing Pelosi to Trump
Pelosi gets shit for being a girl and being old and it is unwarranted. She singlehandedly saved the ACA. We owe her a lot.
JoeOtterbein
(7,699 posts)...not smart! Please re-read.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)Sorry, but I just find that sort of thing cringe-inducing.
highplainsdem
(48,886 posts)melman
(7,681 posts)Ligyron
(7,615 posts)Hell, I don't even know what it is.
Arthur_Frain
(1,836 posts)Really. Isnt this the equivalent of some people claiming that trump was playing 3 dimensional chess while Hillary was playing checkers? I am so sick of these plans within plans, as if this were some spinoff of Game of Thrones.
It may be that the average American voter is about as intelligent as a hammer. WTF? As if there were some major advantage to keeping your cards close to your chest with the current political factions in play. But trying to assign some greater-game mentality by stringing together a laundry list of actions you might find confusing is ascribing way too much altruism, intelligence, and leadership to someone who is, when it comes down to it, really just another politician.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)And the author's sentiment that "guess she knows more than I" was old three months ago. It is 100% unbelievable we haven't stood up and impeached this MF.
diva77
(7,629 posts)are now. Also, Democratic House needs to use its impeachment inquiry lifeline before next election -- with all the unaddressed election fraud, who knows what the next "election" will bring.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)If there is no breaking news splash for more than a day...they assume there was nothing bad behind what happened. "Those Democrats couldn't prove anything or they would have.".
Trump is a different kind of criminal than Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld. Yet we are doing nothing again.
Arthur_Frain
(1,836 posts)The answer is always some crap like well they wanted to play the long game or something like that.
This is one thing that Ive never understood about Democrats/liberals, they have this Oh, I guess youve suffered enough, now that Ive won, theres no need to seem nasty or vindictive mentality. Perhaps not, but two things leap to mind about that.
First, the Republicans/conservatives have no such compunctions about avoiding nastiness. Ive watched every republican administration since I became politically aware mow through the previous administrations staff and legislation like scythe through chaff. Gleefully. Rubbing the oppositions nose in it. Elections have consequences they intone righteously, (ignoring their birtherism bullshit for 8 years and more) while rolling out a scorched earth agenda that would make Grant blush.
And second, when you dont even slap their hand or bloody their nose when they behave this way, they become emboldened, and like a child learn to just scream louder and throw spastic wild punches until everybody caves.
Im tired of this. Im tired of people who excuse it. Im tired of being told to be patient because somebody has inside info Im not privy to, etc. Turn up the action, or get the f%$k outta the way.
diva77
(7,629 posts)Response to Arthur_Frain (Reply #41)
Name removed Message auto-removed
in2herbs
(2,944 posts)an epiphany and do what's right for the country, tired of the Dems behaving like it will be OK; we only have to apologize to our rapist for raping us and the country will be saved.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)There was no way anyone could stop the pardon, there is no Constitutional way to undo a Presidential pardon for Federal crimes.
Many in the Nixon administration served time which is very unlike what happened to other GOP criminals in later years.
What Dems need to learn is that "looking forward" is roughly equivalent to putting a cast on a broken leg before resetting the bone and expecting to be able become a prima ballerina. You've got to fix the underlying problem to succeed going forward.
mcar
(42,278 posts)You know that, right?
George II
(67,782 posts)Do you understand how presidential pardons work? The House and Senate don't get to vote on presidential pardons.
Are you hinting the Nixon's pardon was Nancy Pelosi's fault? She wasn't in the House until more than a decade after Nixon was pardoned.
pnwmom
(108,952 posts)This isn't just about intelligence. It's about data.
Arthur_Frain
(1,836 posts)If youve got actionable data/info, then formulate a plan, communicate to your allies what the plan is, and then act on it. Simple, no? Simplistic, yes. But as an alternative to the convoluted yet-another-layer-to-the-onion philosophy where nothing gets changed (miraculously, the same tired old white folks (sorry, true) hold the reigns of power, because, conveniently, nothing upsets the apple cart) it would be refreshing to see someone, anyone do just that. Trying to pretend that our politician is oh-so-cagey and clever amounts to nothing more than rewarding them for doing nothing.
This doesnt strike me as a winning strategy. Unless your a politician or the one percent, cause nothing will change up on bankers hill.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)be privy to this secret data or he wouldn't be supporting opening an inquiry. Nor the Dems who wisely support impeachment now.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)And, as such, she's privy to more classified information than Nadler is.
The only other Democratic Member who receives this classified information, Adam Schiff, is also not in favor of impeachment inquiry being opened up now.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)that Mueller didn't even hint at..that they are holding tight to that will unveil itself at some point in time. And it is not incriminating enough and dangerous enough to stop this person now .by any means possible? This is well beyond fantastical. Holding on to some kind of contorted logical explanation why we are not standing up to already documented crimes and exercising our constitutional responsibility? Makes total sense to me!!!
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)You claimed that it's unlikely that Pelosi would be privy to information that Nadler doesn't have. I corrected you.
End of discussion.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Look at it.
mcar
(42,278 posts)SharonAnn
(13,771 posts)And dont forget strategy. We need to 1. Keep a Dem House majority and 2. Elect a Dem President.
Speaker Pelosi is in a war with many battles and more to come. I think shes focused on these objectives. And when the timing is right, the results of the investigations should bring overwhelming demand for action and she will respond. Overwhelming means a much larger % of our population will demand it.
I dearly wish that the time was today, but its not here yet. But Winter is coming for the house of Trump.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Pelosi's blessing of impeachment or the groundswell of Dem House members? Could be a self-fullfilling prophecy.
Why one person, with a vested interest gets to decide is still a mystery to me.
I think that most every Dem who had the courage to speak up has done so already.
EveHammond13
(2,855 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,614 posts)I've always had great respect for Ms Pelosi, even back when she garnered the same criticism for not impeaching GW Bush.
The result of her patience back then was a democratic party takeover of the Senate, the House of Reps, and the White House... by a black man.
Always playing the long game.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Like it is a normal world now. We have a maniac on the loose. And there are probably millions of backroom travesties going on that are hidden while we all focus on the latest shiny object trump throws out. And amazingly the debates didn't seem to call any of that out. Cutting crucial scientific studies on climate change initiatives - people on the verge of discovery.. And, reversing Obama's ban on cancer causing coal dumps into our waters to name a few.
rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)I went through the 2000s with Democrats backing the Republican on stuff against liberals/progressives... you recall we could not call ourselves liberals...bad word then.
One example was Petraeus dont betray us in which Democrats sided with Republicans over liberal/progressive.
Im sick of it. If Nancy has one great plan and it has great results, then Im the first to say, I am glad I was wrong.
Im not an inexperienced person. I never got over the impeachment is off the table
George W should have been impeached...Trump?...holy shitcakes.
If Pelosi has as great plan then great. But in the mean time, I like to hear from old people like Bernie Sanders, and young people like AOC.
ProfessorPlum
(11,253 posts)someone who doesn't support getting money out of the system or a single payer healthcare plan is not "pretty progressive".
Pelosi is very good at playing the Washington political game and of keeping her caucuses in line. I respect that ability. But that doesn't mean I have to turn a blind eye to the fact that her desired ends are clearly different from mine.
Locrian
(4,522 posts)What her unquestioned brilliance is? Raising money? Losing 1000 dem seats? Having a 30 yr old poster of health care in your basement? Seriously - what is this 3d chess brilliance about?
Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)
Post removed
JCMach1
(27,553 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,955 posts)Its a small simple piece. Fairly accurate.
Response to JCMach1 (Reply #40)
Name removed Message auto-removed
JCMach1
(27,553 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,955 posts)Of course, AOC and her colleagues dont care about that. Theyre playing an entirely different game, and they know perfectly well they dont have the votes to actually pass anything. Their goal is to move public opinion, and the way you do that is by holding out from the majority in the most conspicuous possible way. If it works, AOC will someday be Speaker of the House and her Democratic Socialist politics will have broad support throughout the country. If it doesnt work, shell serve a few terms, write a book, and then disappear.
In other words, theres nothing much going on here that we havent seen a dozen times before. Young Turks vs. The Old Guard is a guaranteed crowd pleaser. Sometimes it works (Democrats in 1972, Republicans in 1994), sometimes it doesnt (Democrats in 1980, Republicans in 2010).
In this sense, then, I dont really take Pelosis comments very seriously. Why is she dissing AOC? Because thats her role as leader of the party, thats why. Among other things, she needs to protect all the people who did vote for her bill even if they had qualms about it. Shes taking the heat so they dont have to.
wsbradshaw
(41 posts)We lost the House under her leadership once before. Her smartness could be leading us down that road again.
George II
(67,782 posts)mcar
(42,278 posts)redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)democratisphere
(17,235 posts)SHE knows what she is doing. I have complete confidence in HER, to make decisions.
cutroot
(873 posts)Snackshack
(2,541 posts)She certainly would not be where she if is was not. Unfortunately i think she has lost sight of what matters.
Turin_C3PO
(13,894 posts)Speakers of the House weve ever had. In general, I trust Pelosis judgement and strategic planning in matters related to legislative issues.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)getting rid of a criminal with no respect for law
Me.
(35,454 posts)"So whats going on? In one sense, Pelosi is just playing her traditional role as a working politician: youre successful if you can round up the votes to get things done. The squad members may get a lot of press, but they couldnt even persuade their fellow progressives to hold out for a better bill, let alone any of the centrists. That really is kind of a pitiful performance, and Pelosi is rightfully pointing out that shes the one who put in the shoe leather work to get support for a stronger bill than the ones Republicans were proposing.
Of course, AOC and her colleagues dont care about that. Theyre playing an entirely different game, and they know perfectly well they dont have the votes to actually pass anything. Their goal is to move public opinion, and the way you do that is by holding out from the majority in the most conspicuous possible way. If it works, AOC will someday be Speaker of the House and her Democratic Socialist politics will have broad support throughout the country. If it doesnt work, shell serve a few terms, write a book, and then disappear."
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,308 posts)by wanting her to lead the Democratic Party.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Since "leading the Democratic Party" is not part of the Speaker of the House's job description.