Nancy Pelosi is a badass MF and I want her to be Speaker

[Captainant 27644]

Just now, David Dennison said:

And yet, not one person in the Democratic caucus has challenged her as Speaker.

There is no one else in that caucus who can do her job.

Yet.

What job is she accomplishing right now? Please, drop some knowledge on me. What concrete outcomes has she positively effected this far as speaker?

Please show your work and provide evidence. Because I'm happy to re-enumerate and document what I feel are her failures and capitulations to genuine evil. 

[Asithappens 974]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

except pelosi's strategy is apparently all over the place. occasionally criticize the president, despite daily outrageous acts. then, i dunno, criticize members of her caucus for....doing their jobs? she's out of touch. she's aged out. she doesn't nor will ever understand anything in the contemporary age of politics from here as it moves forward.

Ok, I'll just make a couple of comments and then cease to darken this thread's doorstep.

Is Pelosi's strategy all over the place? I don't know. I don't think one can come to that conclusion based on just what we've seen so far. And as far as "occasionally" criticizing the president, are you arguing that she should be constantly criticizing Trump? I don't. That is a sure way to get people to stop listening to you. So, imo, Pelosi should pick here criticisms carefully, even if that leads to some deriding her for only "occasionally" bashing him. 

Pelosi is within her jurisdiction as Speaker to criticize members of her own party. I frankly don't see why a Speaker wouldn't do otherwise.

As far as Pelosi being an addled and incompetent politician (as you basically aver) I don't see it. Is she great? No. But imo she is a seasoned and wily politician.

And lastly, as far as this new, great age of "contemporary politics" goes, the party on the left is now the party on the right. Imo, politics doesn't change all that much. It is what it is.

[hayden_horn 11362]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And yet, not one person in the Democratic caucus has challenged her as Speaker.

There is no one else in that caucus who can do her job.

Yet.

she's bleeding herself to death with the leeches of her inaction.

just because no one has challenged her yet, does nothing to allay my position she is doing a shit job.

which is 180 degrees different than my position when she and shumer cornered trump in front of the press. but that was old people vs old people. she's going to eventually lose the old people vs young people fight. especially if she keeps attacking members of her own caucus.

she's being divisive right now, and for no real good reason except to try and control her caucus. the problem is that is not how to control democrats. that's the republican mitch mcconnell way of doing things, because republicans are spineless and have abdicated any kind of independent view of policy because those sweet lobbyist dollars require them to tongue trump's asshole.

you don't control democrats. you corral them, and nancy is fucking that up by cracking a whip instead of offering a carrot, and, i dunno, working with the younger caucus on issues that matter to them.

Edited July 11, 2019 by hayden_horn

[Asithappens 974]

9 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

An impeachment and the GOP senate's refusal to convict can be a messaging win for the Democrats. Doing nothing has no upside at all.

Yeah, imo the Dems don't need a "messaging" win.

They need an electoral win. 

And let's look at the statement that doing nothing has no upside, or is a neutral tactic.

It could be that impeachment has a real downside. 

I'll take a political position that has no upside over a position that (probably) has a downside any day of the week.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Asithappens

[David Dennison 18851]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

70%+ of democrats support impeachment.  

45% of voters support impeachment.

These are well beyond Nixon/Watergate numbers pre impeachment and that was in a media environment without Twitter and Fox News.

Pelosi has been trying her hardest to keep those impeachment numbers down because she does not want to fight a battle she might not be able to control.  She’s as spineless Paul Ryan except worse because she’s a democrat. 

She doesn't have the votes.

She doesn't want to whip them.

Yet.

[Asithappens 974]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

70%+ of democrats support impeachment.  

45% of voters support impeachment.

The Senate votes on impeachment, not the voters.

That's a mighty big difference.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Asithappens

[Captainant 27644]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

you don't control democrats. you corral them, and nancy is fucking that up by cracking a whip instead of offering a carrot, and, i dunno, working with the younger caucus on issues that matter to them.

This is the biggest failure. She's not giving her caucus ANY opportunities to make a difference and actually accomplish any measurable policy outcome. That's going to lead to discontent. 

Know what would shut people up? Action. Give your caucus members something to fight for, instead of each other. 

[David Dennison 18851]

7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

What job is she accomplishing right now? Please, drop some knowledge on me. What concrete outcomes has she positively effected this far as speaker?

Please show your work and provide evidence. Because I'm happy to re-enumerate and document what I feel are her failures and capitulations to genuine evil. 

She's kept it from being worse. That's all she can do.

[GSU&UT 1798]

2 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

The Senate votes on impeachment, not the voters.

That's a mighty big difference.

Why do you idiots keep pointing this out as if we obviously don't know that he would never been confirmed of impeachment in the Senate? The point is to fucking fight, quit worrying about optics because that is never a winning strategy, especially when the current optics are that you're too spineless to oppose him.

[Asithappens 974]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

What's the strategy? Roll over to Mitch McConnell and pass funding bills for concentration camps while not driving accountability and checks against the executive? That's was keeps bringing in the money right? Can't win elections without money, but if all you do with the power is continue to chase donations, what's the fucking point?

This is a false dichotomy. Pelosi's lack of initiating impeachment proceedings does not mean her only other option is to roll over to McConnell.

I still am gobsmacked that people don't think that Trump would eat this impeachment shit up like two scoops of ice cream. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

5 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

The Senate votes on impeachment, not the voters.

That's a might big difference.

No, the Senate votes to remove.

The house votes to impeach.  

Making Trump run as an impeached president is what Pelosi is giving up here. 

Something that has never been done in the history of this country. 

The facts and evidence clearly warrant impeachment and removal.  If the Senate wants to vote to not convict, hang that around their neck. 

Impeachment also slows the Trump administration down from doing things like starting wars and killing kids. 

 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[wildcat09 29348]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

The Senate votes on impeachment, not the voters.

That's a mighty big difference.

And if Pelosi and the Dem leadership had any idea how to effectively present a real opposition’s message, they could make every GOP vote not to convict a huge GOP liability.

Republicans look at every issue and see political opportunity. Democrats look at every issue and only see how it can bite them. This is why Republicans keep winning.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

No, the Senate votes to remove.

The house votes to impeach.  

Making Trump run as an impeached president is what Pelosi is giving up here. 

Something that has never been done in the history of this country. 

The facts and evidence clearly warrant impeachment and removal.  If the Senate wants to vote to not convict, hang that around their neck. 

Impeachment also slows the Trump administration down for doing things like starting wars and killing kids. 

How do you know? 

[Captainant 27644]

Just now, Asithappens said:

This is a false dichotomy. Pelosi's lack of initiating impeachment proceedings does not mean her only other option is to roll over to McConnell.

I still am gobsmacked that people don't think that Trump would eat this impeachment shit up like two scoops of ice cream. 

Funding. Concentration. Camps. 

That bill they passed is funding the raids this weekend. 

Great job. 

[David Dennison 18851]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

And if Pelosi and the Dem leadership had any idea how to effectively present a real opposition’s message, they could make every GOP vote not to convict a huge GOP liability.

Republicans look at every issue and see political opportunity. Democrats look at every issue and only see how it can bite them. This is why Republicans keep winning.

Really? Who is the Speaker of the House?

[David Dennison 18851]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

Funding. Concentration. Camps. 

That bill they passed is funding the raids this weekend. 

Great job. 

What would you have preferred?

[Asithappens 974]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

Why do you idiots keep pointing this out as if we obviously don't know that he would never been confirmed of impeachment in the Senate? The point is to fucking fight, quit worrying about optics because that is never a winning strategy, especially when the current optics are that you're too spineless to oppose him.

Well, simply by virtue of the fact that somebody is posting numbers about how the voters (voters, not Senators) feel about conviction. 

And let's try to get some sense here for the Dems (god knows they've been run over by the GOP for a while): the point is NOT to "fucking fight". The point is to WIN.

[Dropout 355]

Pelosi is bought off like the other corporate democrats. She can’t fight for what’s right even if she wanted to. You’re the puppet /Trump.

Pelosi prefers to fight the left of her own party rather than Trump because that is what she was paid to do. Tlaib AOC Omar Ayanna these women of color are free to do what they feel is right. It shows every time you hear one of them speak.

Please excuse these women of color if they don’t vote for funding concentration camps. They know what it’s like fighting discrimination and dehumanizing behavior. 

[Asithappens 974]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Funding. Concentration. Camps. 

That bill they passed is funding the raids this weekend. 

Great job. 

Welcome to the rough and tumble world of politics, I guess.

You're looking for purity where it cannot be found. 

[Dropout 355]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

Well, simply by virtue of the fact that somebody is posting numbers about how the voters (voters, not Senators) feel about conviction. 

And let's try to get some sense here for the Dems (god knows they've been run over by the GOP for a while): the point is NOT to "fucking fight". The point is to WIN.

So wrong and why they never win.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Dropout said:

Pelosi is bought off like the other corporate democrats. She can’t fight for what’s right even if she wanted to. You’re the puppet /Trump.

Pelosi prefers to fight the left of her own party rather than Trump because that is what she was paid to do. Tlaib AOC Omar Ayanna these women of color are free to do what they feel is right. It shows every time you hear one of them speak.

Please excuse these women of color if they don’t vote for funding concentration camps. They know what it’s like fighting discrimination and dehumanizing behavior. 

This is great. They should keep doing this.

It means they'll lose battles, though. That's the hard part about politics.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Really? Who is the Speaker of the House?

Not the best argument since Pelosi is letting the Republicans win. 

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Dropout said:

So wrong and why they never win.

But they do. It's why Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House.

[Dropout 355]

It is great. They’ll lose battles but they’ll win the war.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not the best argument since Pelosi is letting the Republicans win. 

Are they?

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Dropout said:

It is great. They’ll lose battles but they’ll win the war.

You won't know this until November 2020.

[GSU&UT 1798]

5 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Well, simply by virtue of the fact that somebody is posting numbers about how the voters (voters, not Senators) feel about conviction. 

And let's try to get some sense here for the Dems (god knows they've been run over by the GOP for a while): the point is NOT to "fucking fight". The point is to WIN.

The entire fucking point is that the majority of Democratic voters want to see him impeached in the house, they want to see their party have the guts to fight him because it inspires them. Why are you refusing to admit that? Literally all of us Democratic voters are telling you this and you just keep on ignoring it.

[Dropout 355]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But they do. It's why Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House.

They may win a title. They never win on actual policy and law. They give in every single time. There is no point in winning if what you’re fighting for is meaningless. Nice title tho Speaker Pelosi. I hope you feel proud.

[Asithappens 974]

2 minutes ago, Dropout said:

So wrong and why they never win.

And I would say that's why the Dems don't win. 

They focus on fighting and not on doing what it takes (politically) to win. 

To win you have to battle, that's for sure. But if your whole point is the battle and not the winning, then you're doing it wrong imo. That assumes you want to actually get your guys/girls elected to office, preferably the WH.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Dropout said:

They may win a title. They never win on actual policy and law. They give in every single time. There is no point in winning if what you’re fighting for is meaningless. Nice title tho Speaker Pelosi. I hope you feel proud.

Republicans have the exact same gripe.

Weird.

[Captainant 27644]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Republicans have the exact same gripe.

Weird.

Republicans actually worked towards their policy goals.

Weird. 

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Captainant said:

Republicans actually worked towards their policy goals.

Weird. 

But they don't get them. 

[Asithappens 974]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

The entire fucking point is that the majority of Democratic voters want to see him impeached in the house, they want to see their party have the guts to fight him because it inspires them. Why are you refusing to admit that? Literally all of us Democratic voters are telling you this and you just keep on ignoring it.

And this confirms my opinion that the majority of Dem voters are dumb.

Again, you are refusing to see that impeachment would fire up Trump's base. 

So the Dem's are inspired, say 20% via impeachment. And the Trumpkins are inspired, say 40%.

What's the old saying? Keep fucking that chicken?

And I am not (at least didn't mean to) refusing to admit that Dems may be "energized". Please quote me if I did so I can do my mea culpas.

My point has pretty much been that the GOP base will be energized. Probably a lot more than the Dem's would be. If you can't see that then I must not be doing a good job of explaining myself. 

[wildcat09 29348]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Really? Who is the Speaker of the House?

"I'm one for my last twenty but got a hit in my last at bat, that means my approach is working!"

[Captainant 27644]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But they don't get them. 

They got a tax cut and concentration camps. Fuck, they even got democratic votes and have placed impeachment out of reach apparently. Sounds pretty goddamn successful to me compared against nancys showing. 

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Captainant said:

They got a tax cut and concentration camps. Fuck, they even got democratic votes and have placed impeachment out of reach apparently. Sounds pretty goddamn successful to me compared against nancys showing. 

They didn't get the tax cut when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House.

 

[wildcat09 29348]

4 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

And this confirms my opinion that the majority of Dem voters are dumb.

Again, you are refusing to see that impeachment would fire up Trump's base. 

So the Dem's are inspired, say 20% via impeachment. And the Trumpkins are inspired, say 40%.

What's the old saying? Keep fucking that chicken?

And I am not (at least didn't mean to) refusing to admit that Dems may be "energized". Please quote me if I did so I can do my mea culpas.

My point has pretty much been that the GOP base will be energized. Probably a lot more than the Dem's would be. If you can't see that then I must not be doing a good job of explaining myself. 

Do you... do you seriously think Donald Trump's base is going to stay home in 2020 under any circumstances?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

3 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Again, you are refusing to see that impeachment would fire up Trump's base. 

And you are refusing to see why this is a terrible argument and surrendering the country to the tyranny of morons.    

Trump's base isn't getting anymore fired up than they did during Kavanaugh and that produced the biggest blue wave in the house since Watergate. 

[hayden_horn 11362]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

And if Pelosi and the Dem leadership had any idea how to effectively present a real opposition’s message, they could make every GOP vote not to convict a huge GOP liability.

Republicans look at every issue and see political opportunity. Democrats look at every issue and only see how it can bite them. This is why Republicans keep winning.

it's the mack brown approach. it's a play not to lose strategy. it's a prevent defense. it's a loser. they should be on the warpath (as AOC currently is, with the rest of the younger members of the caucus), calling out bullshit at every corner.

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Really? Who is the Speaker of the House?

who is the senate majority leader?

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What would you have preferred?

a spine. the republicans knew the democrats would cave, because that's what democrats do. they were afraid of taking the blame for not passing that bill. fuck that. pin that blame on the republicans, and, more specifically, mitch mcconnell. side with AOC and go with them to the goddamn concentration camps on july 4 during the recess. point out how mitch mcconnell is okay with this. don't cave.

[wildcat09 29348]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

it's the mack brown approach. it's a play not to lose strategy. it's a prevent defense. it's a loser. they should be on the warpath (as AOC currently is, with the rest of the younger members of the caucus), calling out bullshit at every corner.

who is the senate majority leader?

a spine. the republicans knew the democrats would cave, because that's what democrats do. they were afraid of taking the blame for not passing that bill. fuck that. pin that blame on the republicans, and, more specifically, mitch mcconnell. side with AOC and go with them to the goddamn concentration camps on july 4 during the recess. point out how mitch mcconnell is okay with this. don't cave.

This. Every centrist Dem is terrified that Republicans will pin bad shit on them, even when it's the Republicans who are actually responsible. It's like they're actually unaware that they can blame bad things Republicans are responsible for on Republicans (really they're aware of it they're just terrified that doing so will bite them somehow).

[retread 2951]

55 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

this is what is so insane about her leadership.

she should have been at the border with AOC. she should be highlighting these major issues WITH the new members of the caucus. 

that's how she drives unity and compromise with her party in the house.

So much of this. It's not rocket science. If you're not going to impeach, then be out there every day in the media with several of your members. Have a posterboard that you update every day with the transgressions of the WH. Bombard social media with facts all day and every day. Nancy's good for calling Trump names a couple of times a week, and that's about it.

Like hayden said ^, all they've been doing so far is just playing prevent defense.

[David Dennison 18851]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

a spine. the republicans knew the democrats would cave, because that's what democrats do. they were afraid of taking the blame for not passing that bill. fuck that. pin that blame on the republicans, and, more specifically, mitch mcconnell. side with AOC and go with them to the goddamn concentration camps on july 4 during the recess. point out how mitch mcconnell is okay with this. don't cave.

Side with the extreme minority.

That's a winning political strategy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Side with the extreme minority.

That's a winning political strategy.

DO YOU KNOW WHO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS?!?!?

[retread 2951]

The July 4th holiday was coming up and the Ds decided to punt. That's the bottom line.

[DixonHur 11296]

Just now, retread said:

The July 4th holiday was coming up and the Ds decided to punt. That's the bottom line.

Punt?  They fucking Leon Lett'd that shit.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, retread said:

The July 4th holiday was coming up and the Ds decided to punt. That's the bottom line.

It was that or not pass anything. It passed 84-9 in the Senate. It's politically untenable to not do anything.

 

 

[Dropout 355]

1 minute ago, retread said:

The July 4th holiday was coming up and the Ds decided to punt. That's the bottom line.

RIP America?

[retread 2951]

Meanwhile 80 immigrants are still standing in a room designed for 40 people. MAGA.

[bad_teammate 13193]

You guys call me a troll. lol this is professional level shit right here

I'm in awe.

[Dropout 355]

Just now, David Dennison said:

It was that or not pass anything. It passed 84-9 in the Senate. It's politically untenable to not do anything.

 

 

It was drink the tea or no one drinks it. Either way we were taking the tea and liking it. It would have been politically untenable to destroy that tea in protest.