For Democrats, U.S. House win moves Pelosi to centre stage

[mikebike]

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

I just want someone who will rake Trump over the coals. 

That won’t be Nancy... she is an appeaser.

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

In another thread you mentioned (and I 100% agree) that 45 will "get worse" after these midterms. And you think P. is the ideal foil to take him on. Unbelievable.

 

You don't seem to understand that there has been a paradigm shift in the political landscape which has left P's skill set a decade behind what is needed.

That's precisely why the democrats need someone that knows how what she's doing. It's no time for a rookie. She's going to the speaker's position so best to accept that. If she doesn't, I will certainly support whoever that is. 

Also it's not only about taking him on. It's about using the best tactics for the situation at hand. Yes the democrats should make deals with "trump" if that benefits Americans. The base might want red meat but the democrats need to win over independents and even anti-"trump" republicans. Otherwise, they will have no chance in 2020 if the public perceives the democrats of not being willing to do anything constructive and being ONLY about resisting "trump." That includes making the best choices on how and when to push investigations and IF to pursue impeachment. Obviously if "trump" goes full on kill off the Mueller investigation, most any leader would be going for impeachment. He might be getting there. 

Edited November 8, 2018 by Jingthing

[Berkshire]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

Bullfeathers.

 

Apparently you have never heard of a group of people called “advisors”.

 

Pelosi is TOXIC to Dems future success. Her ilk is what the nation rebelled against to produce 45.

Hmmm, we all should concede that most of us don't know much about Pelosi.  I certainly don't.  And neither do the haters.  All the Trump supporters are going by is what the right-wing media has been telling them...which is to hate on Pelosi, Hillary, CNN, etc.  Their opinion doesn't mean squat to me.  Again, I'm happy to let the House Dems decide for themselves.  And if it's Pelosi, cool.  If not, cool. 

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

That won’t be Nancy... she is an appeaser.

Dude, the USA is a center right nation with the potential of being a center left nation. If you're saying no compromises should be made if overall they are good for the American people, you don't sound like a democrat to me. Maybe shop for another party. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, connda said:

I can think of a number of junior Democratic members of Congress who would do a stellar job as chair, but instead Dems keep backing aged dinosaurs who are physically and mentally challenged. Pelosi at times can barely string a coherent sentence together. The party need to change and the youthful members of the party will eventually usher in that change.  Hopefully sooner than later.  Pelosi as well as a number of the dinosaurs on both sides of the aisle desperately need to retire for the good of the nation. 

Ageist crapola. Bernie and Jerry Brown would NOT approve!

[mikebike]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

That's precisely why the democrats need someone that knows how what she's doing. It's no time for a rookie. She's going to the speaker's position so best to accept that. If she doesn't, I will certainly support whoever that is. 

Also it's not only about taking him on. It's about using the best tactics for the situation at hand. Yes the democrats should make deals with "trump" is that benefits Americans. Otherwise, they will have no chance in 2020 if the public perceives the democrats of not being willing to do anything constructive and being ONLY about resisting "trump." That includes making the best choices on how and when to push investigations and IF to pursue impeachment. Obviously if "trump" goes full on kill off the Mueller investigation, most any leader would be going for impeachment. He might be getting there. 

You think the loser Dems, led by P., have had the best election “tactics” since P. took the reigns? Let me remind you of the disaster that was Hillary’s run. Let me remind you of all the state legislations, governorships, seats lost under P’s tenure. Her, and Hillary’s, politics and tactics are from a now bygone era.

 

There is a whole “wave” of younger Dems who are actually pushing POLICY change as opposed to more of the same fundraising, status quo-loving, loser, corporate, appeasement “tactics”.

 

She would be welcome to stay on and advise but get her the heck outta any spotlight if you want the Dems to beat 45 in 2020.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

You think the loser Dems, led by P., have had the best election “tactics” since P. took the reigns? Let me remind you of the disaster that was Hillary’s run. Let me remind you of all the state legislations, governorships, seats lost under P’s tenure. Her, and Hillary’s, politics and tactics are from a now bygone era.

 

There is a whole “wave” of younger Dems who are actually pushing POLICY change as opposed to more of the same fundraising, status quo-loving, loser, corporate, appeasement “tactics”.

 

She would be welcome to stay on and advise but get her the heck outta any spotlight if you want the Dems to beat 45 in 2020.

I agree with you halfway. I think it's best for her to lead right now and transition to a new leader for 2020. We disagree about what the priorities are right now.

Cheers. 

[Jingthing]

Another way to look at this, before the democrats took the house, being almost all about opposing "trump" made perfect sense. Now the democrats control the house. The overall American people (much bigger than the hard core democratic base) is looking for a party that's willing to represent ALL Americans. "trump" is not. He is only about his hard core base. 

Edited November 8, 2018 by Jingthing