Washington?
It’s true, he killed it on ‘Rich Plantation Husbands of Virginia’
I think it would depend on how much they hated the Dem nominee.
This is my position too. Pelosi can still be the power behind the throne, because, let’s be honest, she will be. But we need younger blood. It’s politics after all, optics are important. I’m not saying put whatshername from New York in there, but we have to have someone under the age of 70 that can do the job. Ideally someone in their 50’s who can inspire the younger generation that made this whole thing happen in the first place feel more connected to things.
Then again I’ve come around on term limits, so if it was up to me this wouldn’t even be a discussion because Pelosi would be off doing something else right now along with Mitch McConnell and Chuck Grassley.
Absolutely. Grant to a lesser degree.
Warren G Harding absolutely and positively.
Some impressive numbers for the youth vote.
No, it is because they are incompetent as well.
They actively prevented compromise. They had a lot of weight, because the GOP needed them, but the result was that it created situations where the GOP was paralyzed.
Paul Ryan probably could have gotten SOME of the stuff they wanted, but couldn’t because they refused to vote for anything that involved any kind of compromise.
I mean, sure, lots of their ideas are terrible, but they ultimately failed to really achieve any significant legislative wins because they let the perfect be the enemy of the good. They couldn’t even compromise with the left wing of their own party
Oh please. There are lots of veterans in politics. Having the generals responsible for victory in the three most important wars in US history win the Presidency is not the same as having a two-bit reality TV star win. An absurd comparison.
Harding is closer, as is Reagan, to the nature of Trump’s popularity, but both of them actually held state-wide offices before they ran.
Hey, thanks for trolling by, buddy!
He did say ‘reality star,’ not ‘celebrity.’ I took that to mean ‘reality TV star.’
I was more referring to the uncanny knack of expressing an unsupportable hot-take of “The current Speaker could be the Republican nominee in 2024” and then, when presented with an abundance of evidence that such things are incredibly unlikely to happen, doubled down with the “What this hot-take presupposes is, ‘What if it did?’”
Lol. A sample size of 1 = abundance of evidence. Oops sorry - Henry Clay also ran, so three have tried one has succeeded a bunch more haven’t tried. Sounds impossible!
It must be that they haven’t tried and haven’t won because they never heard your argument for it. Or maybe there’s another reason 😉
Yes perhaps there’s another reason that people who hold one of the 3 most powerful political positions possible and have no term limits might not end up giving that up to run for President. Something about sausage bits, I guess.
That’s not a bad idea, but who? Who can the you get basically the entire Democratic caucus to agree on? The anti-Pelosi people keep saying we need someone younger, but they have no earthly idea who that might be.
Let’s say there really are some never-nancy Democrats out there, for the sake of argument.
I don’t know all the procedural rules in the House, but it seems to me if they call a vote without party unanimity and Pelosi let us say gets 190 votes while some random Democrat gets 37, then the Speaker will wind up being a Republican with 200 votes… Presumably the usual thing is to whip the party into line beforehand. Assuming the rebels would be too junior to head any committees anyway, what carrot or stick do they have that would compel the required majority?
So what’s the plan here? “We’re going to get rid of Nancy Pelosi and her boring competence and only after Pelosi is gone will alternatives come forward!” That can’t really be the plan, can it?
The party is about to start looking towards the 2020 Presidential election. This isn’t the time for a dumb leadership struggle in the House. Nancy Pelosi may be old, and Republicans may not like her, but I have more faith in her ability to work with (and yield the spotlight to) the Democratic primary process and eventual nominee than in a new Majority Leader with something to prove.
only after Pelosi is gone will alternatives come forward
If someone were gathering support among Democratic House members in order to replace Pelosi, they would very likely keep it from public knowledge until their prospects were favorable. It’s not like they need your vote.
Honestly, I don’t get the Pelosi fatigue. Sure - she’s old and there’s a good argument that it’s time for younger forces to take over - but I don’t get the “she’s too centrist” argument. The Democrats are a party that span a broad set of opinions - talking and fronting left-wing proposals that don’t have broad support within the party seem directly antithetical to the job she has had to do. But age has the benefit of experience and connections.
Agreed. More than that, I’d say the Democrats need an effective House leader, because the next two years will undoubtedly see further attacks on democracy. Pelosi seems like the best bet for that.
Though having said that pro-Pelosi piece, I think it would make sense for the Democrats to have Pelosi take the gig for the next two years, have her announce that she is stepping down in 2020 as house speaker (which would defang a little bit the GOP attacks for 2020), and use the coming two years to groom her successor.