-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
NPR: Group of Democrats moving to oppose Nancy Pelosi's campaign for speaker of the House
- Thread starter Stellar
- Start date
I am hoping you're right
I am sorry to others if I came in hotheaded (although, really, comments about "HOW OLD ARE YOU LOL ?" American politics since the 2000's have been wack enough for me to worried)
I think my reaction is due that, in a time where we are on the brink of incoming climate catastrophe, and a constant rise of fascism that isn't going to stop anytime soon due to migration waves, people like Pelosi who Schumer who still try to keep up appearances, a thing that routinely costs the democrats a terrible lot of ground doesn't resonate well with me. I got a lot of trans friends in the US who are absolutely terrified of what's coming up next, and feel devastated themselves when they reps they support immediately let them down (morally speaking) with comments like these.
I don't think wagging fingers at the concerned disenfranchised/threatened class or saying that showing a bit more political clout is "perfectionist" or "extremist" is particuarily helpful. People are rightfully terrified right now, they are already the victim of persecution and comments like Pelosi do not help build trust among regular people
But I admit it was my bad to get mad. It's not on Pelosi's responsibility for the faults of other democrats, and she did do a lot of good in the past, so I'll give her that. Apologies everyone (I should also stay out of these threads more, bad for my hoot pressure)
Pelosi is propped up by her great fundraising.
Not from small donors, but large donors.
Legalized bribery and corruption.
She's not just bad for the Democratic party. She's bad for the country.
Centrists and corporatists love her because they are ok with the status quo with minor incrementalism.
Not from small donors, but large donors.
Legalized bribery and corruption.
She's not just bad for the Democratic party. She's bad for the country.
Centrists and corporatists love her because they are ok with the status quo with minor incrementalism.
Nancy Pelosi is the most liberal and progressive House leader in American history. Period.
You're not getting more than minor incrementalism passed in the US system except for very rare circumstances, it was designed that way. Bemoan it if you want but that's hardly pelosi's problem.
But the biggest leap forward progressives had since The Great Society? That was thanks to Pelosi with Obamacare. And both LBJ and Pelosi are masters of legislative work. It's not a cooincidence.
Ignored the legitimate criticisms of Pelosi.
Donors give you power. You serve donors, not people.
Policy favors donors. Positive feedback loop tjst benefits gop politics.
Eh, Schumer needs to go and I was fucking outraged the second he was announced as Reid's replacement.
Pelosi is fine though. I have issues with her, but her tenure as speaker during Obama's first two years saw an incredible amount of very progressive legislation getting passed. Most of it was killed or greatly watered down by the Senate, but that's not on her. She did a pretty good job.
Pelosi is fine though. I have issues with her, but her tenure as speaker during Obama's first two years saw an incredible amount of very progressive legislation getting passed. Most of it was killed or greatly watered down by the Senate, but that's not on her. She did a pretty good job.
I'm okay with that. He is my congressman and his district is very liberal Hollywood.
Hmm?
You didn't address my points. The corrupting of money in politics is undeniable.
Like someone to the right of her? Because that's what Tim Ryan and his merry band of tens of people are.
Last edited:
You don't bring a knife to a total war. We can address money in politics while using it to get there.
Because you have no policy substance to back up your claim. "She has big donors, thus corrupt" isn't an indelible truth, despite how much some of you would love to simplify things to that degree. Where in her voting or leadership record, exactly, do you see signs of her bending to her donors' will?
Like i said this is why the GOP loves cutting from Education, lack of Civics classes literally makes it easier to get people to freak out like they are in this thread.
Pelosi doesn't need fundraising or donors to win SF. She's been on the ballot for decades. She doesn't run a campaign and will hold the seat until she dies, not having to spend a dime running for reelection other then what's required to file paperwork.
Hi,
Welcome to page 13.
Let me get you up to speed.
The 10 Democrats are from the same Tim Ryan group that's been doing this for 10 years
Tim Ryan far from being a radical is a conservative Democrat who is supported by Conservative Democrats
So what you just said good to is the exact opposite of what you want and yet your first instinct to the headline was to say good... on Page 13.
Take a moment and reflect on what that means for you.
I have my own issues with her but no. she's very good at what she does and having a blue dog instead is the opposite way we should be going.
so this group is mad she's too liberal.
fucking pass.
so this group is mad she's too liberal.
fucking pass.
Aside from this being a push from right-wing Dems...
Oh, come on, folks, stop buying into GOP propaganda. Pelosi, for her faults, is an exceptional whip, and there simply isn't anyone remotely as competent as her, as far as we know. In minority, she forced the GOP to concede to a fuckton of demands in order to pass a budget because the party who were supposed to be in government couldn't get their shit together.
Disunity is poison in politics. We've seen that all too well with the GOP's inability to govern despite having all three branches of government before the midterms happened.
Oh, come on, folks, stop buying into GOP propaganda. Pelosi, for her faults, is an exceptional whip, and there simply isn't anyone remotely as competent as her, as far as we know. In minority, she forced the GOP to concede to a fuckton of demands in order to pass a budget because the party who were supposed to be in government couldn't get their shit together.
Disunity is poison in politics. We've seen that all too well with the GOP's inability to govern despite having all three branches of government before the midterms happened.
I've felt this for a while, but damn, your attitude sucks.
Not everyone spends every waking moment on this forum grandstanding and getting into arguments. Maybe take a moment to reflect on that before lashing out against people.
Cool, who is making the complaints and who is the replacement?
Who?
Oh.
Eeeehhhhhhhhh no thanks.
Who?
Oh.
Eeeehhhhhhhhh no thanks.
Pelosi has had zero defections as her time as minority leader on every single important vote with Trump.
She got Dozens of congressmen and congresswomen to give up their seats to pass the ACA knowing it would seal their politics fates.
She is going to do just fine.
I'd rather have her attitude than some of these people's reading comprehension.
The first post does not go into detail about who the group is and there is even very little discussion about them (maybe a post or two) on the first page.
Can confirm. I live in SF and barely saw a single sign for her.
LOL
Reminder this is the Tim Ryan "The Dems have gone too far left under Pelosi" gang claiming to be the silent majority.
Also, Pelosi has some leverage with Trump. Sure, there will be a moment for her to step back but for the moment, I can't think of anyone else to do her job.
99.99% of her getting donations are for the general party and the rest of her caucus
IIRC she regularly donates her campaign funds to other candidates.
Context for the term Silent Majority in American politics -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_majority
According to Republican pollster Frank Luntz, "silent majority" is but one of many labels which have been applied to the same group of voters. According to him, past labels used by the media include "silent majority" in the 1960s, "forgotten middle class" in the 1970s, "angry white males" in the 1980s, "soccer moms" in the 1990s, and "NASCAR dads" in the 2000s.[29]
it means white people
it means white people
It would take ~100$ million for a primary opponent to even sniff a 10% gap.
I think Breed will likely replace her. I don't see her ambitions leaving the Bay.
How many people are in this group of Democrats again? And how many Democrats are there in the House?
Terrible analogy. You're agreeing to a gun fight and bring a bb gun. System favors gop and so you lose. And if you win, you get held hostage by donors. Money in politics will never be addressed in congress
That's her other job in the party. Other then the big wigs (Obama, Clintons) she is the big obtainer of donations for the party.
Boiled Goose
You gonna get back to me. Genuinely interested in seeing any substance to your assertions. You've been making them so long that I am positive you have evidence.
You gonna get back to me. Genuinely interested in seeing any substance to your assertions. You've been making them so long that I am positive you have evidence.
The last election was 134 to 63. Pelosi needs 116 to win. Even if they were to grab every incoming freshman, they'd need to flip 18 more Pelosi votes.
Just like with things like racial or gender discrimination, you look at aggregate statistics.
Look at Princeton study. Data is overwhelmingly convincing.
Man, those corporate donors must love donating to her randomly. Totally not an investment.
Just like with things like racial or gender discrimination, you look at aggregate statistics.
Look at Princeton study. Data is overwhelmingly convincing.
Man, those corporate donors must love donating to her randomly. Totally not an investment.
"I can't point to a single vote in her long career, or can't be arsed to look, but hey, data shows it applies to Politicians in a general sense, so it MUST apply to her case specifically. Even though I can't find anything to back it up."
Frankly people who post in threads without reading them deserve more shaming than they get
No lies detected. Her leadership has been awful for minorities and the poor. Her hyper pro capitalism stances don't help either. Nor does her condescending attitude with leftists.
User banned (1 week): hostility, attacking other members, and a history of similar behavior
If you don't like the truth, that's your issue, PoliEraer.
Screw compromise with these people. Centrist desire to do that has slowly contributed to the death of workers rights, helped contribute to the rise of fascism instead of trying to curb it, minorities being endlessly scapegoated and attacked, etc.
All because, "we need to accept this as normal, stop being so uppity and just let us compromise". The more we try to compromise, the more we play into their hand and the further right wing this country becomes.
Pelosi needs to be gone.