Never Nancy

[NATI BENGALS]

(11-16-2018, 09:42 AM)hollodero Wrote: So, you'd root for an outsider?

Absolutely. I hate the two party system. But it is all we have right now. And if you want to ensure the people who voted for trump keep their head in the sand and keep voting for the guy with the R next to their name that is what nancy is. 

I would take Bfines choice of the Marine Corp officer with combat experience from multiple tours who graduated from Harvard  all day every day. From what i know he would be my first choice. 

[*bfine32*]

(11-16-2018, 09:47 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm sure (hope) your joking by caller her the "hot chick".  She's already facing pressure from the old white men who don't like them women in their halls.

How did you know who he was talking about?

As to the comments: Yes, it is trivial to call a sitting member of Congress a "hot chick". 

So it's only the old "white" men that don't like women in their halls or were you as well being a little tongue in cheek?  

[*bfine32*]

(11-16-2018, 09:01 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Absolutely. I hate the two party system. But it is all we have right now. And if you want to ensure the people who voted for trump keep their head in the sand and keep voting for the guy with the R next to their name that is what nancy is. 

I would take Bfines choice of the Marine Corp officer with combat experience from multiple tours who graduated from Harvard  all day every day. From what i know he would be my first choice. 

FWIW a distinguished Military Career carries a lot of weight for me; perhaps too much. I know if would have came down to Trump and Webb I wouldn't have went 3rd party. 

[GMDino]

(11-16-2018, 09:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How did you know who he was talking about?

(11-16-2018, 09:45 AM)michaelsean Wrote:  I want the hot chick from NY.  

(11-16-2018, 09:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the comments: Yes, it is trivial to call a sitting member of Congress a "hot chick". 

So it's only the old "white" men that don't like women in their halls or were you as well being a little tongue in cheek?  

Nice of you to jump to the defense of a female like that, as you say you always do.  

Thanks for not just responding "hit".  

[*bfine32*]

(11-16-2018, 10:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: Nice of you to jump to the defense of a female like that, as you say you always do.  

Thanks for not just responding "hit".  

You didn't answer the questions posed. 

[GMDino]

(11-16-2018, 10:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You didn't answer the questions posed. 

I did.

Oh, "old white guys" you mean.

Yeah...I meant that.

https://www.infoplease.com/history-and-government/us-government/african-americans-114th-congress
https://www.infoplease.com/history-and-government/us-government/african-americans-115th-congress

[Dill]

The right wing media has been very successful at branding Dem politicians--especially women--in the image the right wants. By the time the election comes around, the terrain of the debate is already a long uphill slog for the Dems. Fox and company did it to Hillary. It was the Benghazi scam, more than anything, that cost her the election, along with the years of unprovable accusations turned into "proof" there is a double standard for the Clintons since they are never indicted for murder or real estate fraud or stand down orders. Clintons="the swamp," which was so bad before Trump and cronies took office.

In doing it to Pelosi, they create a division with Democrats because she is now radioactive to some audiences--Republican voters. As Benton pointed out, local elections could be won in Kentucky, apparently, by tying Republican opponents to Pelosi. Was Pelosi really the difference though, or just part of the noise? Perhaps it helped suppress Democratic votes by encouraging them to stay home?

I don't think this branding is a good reason for seeking "new blood." Pelosi has been effective. And she has a great deal of experience in an arena where experience is the difference maker. No Dem currently has her "inside game." I see far more advantage to the Republicans if this branding tactic once again limits who can lead the Democrats and they turn to "fresh blood"--meaning less experienced blood.

If this works it will be very disappointing that Democrats allow the opposition to shape their choices this way. It means many do not grasp the larger picture.

There is perhaps an opportunity to break the rage machine, or at least reduce its effectiveness, in part because Pelosi has been so strongly for the ACA (as opposed to tax cuts for the 1%) while so many of her opponents were against it, and because Trump himself is overtaxing the machine now, reducing its effectiveness. Branding Professor Ford as a confused ninny worked for the base, of course, but animated many women voters who saw a man accused of abuse protected by another man accused of abuse, occupying the highest office in the land. And Trump has dissed military sacrifice again, and chosen to believe MSB over his own CIA. He will provide so many more challenges for RWM spinners in the coming months it will reduce their effectiveness against Nancy.

[Yojimbo]

(11-20-2018, 03:07 PM)Dill Wrote: The right wing media has been very successful at branding Dem politicians--especially women--in the image the right wants. By the time the election comes around, the terrain of the debate is already a long uphill slog for the Dems. Fox and company did it to Hillary. It was the Benghazi scam, more than anything, that cost her the election, along with the years of unprovable accusations turned into "proof" there is a double standard for the Clintons since they are never indicted for murder or real estate fraud or stand down orders. Clintons="the swamp," which was so bad before Trump and cronies took office.

In doing it to Pelosi, they create a division with Democrats because she is now radioactive to some audiences--Republican voters. As Benton pointed out, local elections could be won in Kentucky, apparently, by tying Republican opponents to Pelosi. Was Pelosi really the difference though, or just part of the noise? Perhaps it helped suppress Democratic votes by encouraging them to stay home?

I don't think this branding is a good reason for seeking "new blood." Pelosi has been effective. And she has a great deal of experience in an arena where experience is the difference maker. No Dem currently has her "inside game." I see far more advantage to the Republicans if this branding tactic once again limits who can lead the Democrats and they turn to "fresh blood"--meaning less experienced blood.

If this works it will be very disappointing that Democrats allow the opposition to shape their choices this way. It means many do not grasp the larger picture.

There is perhaps an opportunity to break the rage machine, or at least reduce its effectiveness, in part because Pelosi has been so strongly for the ACA (as opposed to tax cuts for the 1%) while so many of her opponents were against it, and because Trump himself is overtaxing the machine now, reducing its effectiveness. Branding Professor Ford as a confused ninny worked for the base, of course, but animated many women voters who saw a man accused of abuse protected by another man accused of abuse, occupying the highest office in the land. And Trump has dissed military sacrifice again, and chosen to believe MSB over his own CIA. He will provide so many more challenges for RWM spinners in the coming months it will reduce their effectiveness against Nancy.

As much as you say some Dems are buying into right wing talking points, I’d caution you to not buy into the neo-lliberal establishment talking points about Pelosi’s experience or her record as a progressive. Most of us to the left of Pelosi are supporting Barbra Lee as Speaker. She has plenty of experience and better progressive credentials.

Personally, I can’t get behind somebody who’s victory speech is “let’s cave to the other party”. When Republicans won the House under Obama, did they come out and say they want to work with Dems or did they say the voters gave them a mandate to oppose anything Obama wanted done?

[Dill]

(11-20-2018, 04:52 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: As much as you say some Dems are buying into right wing talking points, I’d caution you to not buy into the neo-lliberal establishment talking points about Pelosi’s experience or her record as a progressive. Most of us to the left of Pelosi are supporting Barbra Lee as Speaker. She has plenty of experience and better progressive credentials.

Personally, I can’t get behind somebody who’s victory speech is “let’s carve to the other party”. When Republicans won the House under Obama, did they come out and say (A) they want to work with Dems or did they say (B) the voters gave them a mandate to oppose anything Obama wanted done?

LOL I believe they chose option "B" above. 

You make good points, Yoji.  Can't really disagree/refute. The question is really which will be more effective in passing--or blocking--legislation.

[Yojimbo]

(11-20-2018, 05:07 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL I believe they chose option "B" above. 

You make good points, Yoji.  Can't really disagree/refute. The question is really which will be more effective in passing--or blocking--legislation.

I have a hard time believing any meaningful legislation is going to get passed under their current split Congress. What the House should be doing until 2020, is passing legislation that they know Republicans have to vote no on, like Medicare for all and raising the minimum wage, that the majority of voters want. Will make it easier to hang no votes around politician necks, than having nothing on record that they can then lie about their positions on. Never mind, they’ll just lie anyways.

I’ve never been a Pelosi fan, mostly due to I hate what money does to our government, but I’m not saying she should go sit in the back row. I’d be fine with her chairing a committee or being the whip. She had her turn at Speaker and minority leader for the last decade. Time to get a different voice at the top. Besides Lee, I also like Raúl Grijalva.

[BmorePat87]

Potential challenger Marcia Fudge is under fire for a letter she sent 3 years ago asking for leniency for a former lawmaker and judge she knew who admitted to brutally beating his wife. He was arrested this weekend in connection to his ex-wife's murder.

She defended the letter by saying she was asking for leniency for the person she knew him to be 30 years ago.

I'm not going to tie the murder thing to her judgement, but after someone admits to "brutally beating" their wife, I don't see how you can, in good judgement, ask for a lighter sentence for them based on their actions 30 years prior.

[Yojimbo]

(11-20-2018, 05:32 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Potential challenger Marcia Fudge is under fire for a letter she sent 3 years ago asking for leniency for a former lawmaker and judge she knew who admitted to brutally beating his wife. He was arrested this weekend in connection to his ex-wife's murder.

She defended the letter by saying she was asking for leniency for the person she knew him to be 30 years ago.

I'm not going to tie the murder thing to her judgement, but after someone admits to "brutally beating" their wife, I don't see how you can, in good judgement, ask for a lighter sentence for them based on their actions 30 years prior.

Agreed. This is positions of power always have each other’s back, like the thin blue line. Horrible way to govern/lead.

[Belsnickel]

(11-20-2018, 04:52 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: As much as you say some Dems are buying into right wing talking points, I’d caution you to not buy into the neo-lliberal establishment talking points about Pelosi’s experience or her record as a progressive. Most of us to the left of Pelosi are supporting Barbra Lee as Speaker. She has plenty of experience and better progressive credentials.

Pelosi is further left than the establishment Dems. I'm not saying she's as progressive as myself, a social democrat, but she is more progressive than many people give her credit for just based on her voting record. I've gotta say, though, the idea of Speaker Lee is a wonderful one and she does have more progressive chops than Pelosi. It would be interesting to see, though, if being in that leadership role would result in a more pragmatic approach from Lee on some issues.

(11-20-2018, 04:52 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Personally, I can’t get behind somebody who’s victory speech is “let’s cave to the other party”. When Republicans won the House under Obama, did they come out and say they want to work with Dems or did they say the voters gave them a mandate to oppose anything Obama wanted done?

But they didn't succeed in making him a one-term president. We should be working with Republicans, but we shouldn't abandon our principles to do so.

[Yojimbo]

(11-20-2018, 10:11 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Pelosi is further left than the establishment Dems. I'm not saying she's as progressive as myself, a social democrat, but she is more progressive than many people give her credit for just based on her voting record. I've gotta say, though, the idea of Speaker Lee is a wonderful one and she does have more progressive chops than Pelosi. It would be interesting to see, though, if being in that leadership role would result in a more pragmatic approach from Lee on some issues.


But they didn't succeed in making him a one-term president. We should be working with Republicans, but we shouldn't abandon our principles to do so.

Except Republicans demand Democrats abandon their principles for bipartisanship. The big bipartisan deal under Obama would have made cuts to SS and Medicare. That is a complete abandoning of Dem principles. The Republicans have been dragging the entire system to the right sine the 80’s and 90’s by never giving an inch. Time for the Dems to grow a pair and start forcing Republicans to move in their direction for a change.

[Yojimbo]

(11-20-2018, 05:32 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Potential challenger Marcia Fudge is under fire for a letter she sent 3 years ago asking for leniency for a former lawmaker and judge she knew who admitted to brutally beating his wife. He was arrested this weekend in connection to his ex-wife's murder.

She defended the letter by saying she was asking for leniency for the person she knew him to be 30 years ago.

I'm not going to tie the murder thing to her judgement, but after someone admits to "brutally beating" their wife, I don't see how you can, in good judgement, ask for a lighter sentence for them based on their actions 30 years prior.

She dropped out today and endorsed Pelosi.

[fredtoast]

(11-21-2018, 05:29 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: She dropped out today and endorsed Pelosi.

Hate it when the Fudge drops out unexpectedly.

[*bfine32*]

(11-21-2018, 05:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Hate it when the Fudge drops out unexpectedly.

Or even worse: When they pack it in. 

[Dill]

Don't see why Nancy can't mentor some younger Dems for 2-3 years. Maybe that will happen. Best of both worlds.

[Mike M (the other one)]

Go Nancy!!
Tell them pups how it is.

I'm rooting for ya to give us some totally unforgettable quotes over the course of the next 2 years.

[Belsnickel]

So Lee lost her bid for Caucus Chair. It was a very close vote and disappointing in my opinion.

Pelosi won the vote in an uncontested race to be the Democratic nominee for the Speakership. However, she only had 203 votes, with 32 Democrats refusing to vote for her. Once the vote goes to the floor in January, she will need 218 to become Speaker.

The defectors were a combination of moderates and progressives. The moderates are mostly those that have said in their campaigns that they won't vote for Pelosi, so they are likely out of the question. The progressives seem to be moving to supporting Pelosi, so she will probably get there by the time the vote comes around.