She had her time Paul. Obamacare. All that.
New Blood please.
And I'm a hard-core, centrist, progressive-hating, true blue, original Yankee style, died in the Wool, Democrat.
40
Sorry Paul - all that you say is true. Now she should step aside. If she is losing elections for democrats, please remember that handing Republicans boogeyman and messages which resonate with anyone is to hand them these elections. She should go - it is not about her.
67
Great article and even better takedown of Paul Ryan and all his phoniness, fake-ness and kindergarten-level understanding of economics.
106
If Pelosi deserves credit for the things mentioned here, and perhaps she does, she shares the blame with other Clinton Democrats for turning the party away from the working class in order to suckle at Wall Street's teat. This San Franciscan has no intention of ever voting for either Pelosi or Feinstein again. It's onward to socialism for this former Democrat.
61
Right on! The only explanation for Pelosi hatred is pure misogyny.
142
Thanks for the great commentary. I totally agree with everything you wrote.
81
If America wanted more of the same old Democratic Party Pelosi championed, Hillary Clinton would be president. But thank you for writing something positive about a Democrat, rather than writing about how much the Republicans hate them. The news media isn't helping matters much these days, this was a step in the right direction.
33
While some of those Republican Speakers of the House did not perform well, Boehner was a guy who tried to work with the Obama administration until they moved the goal posts on a compromise tentatively agreed upon. That compromise was legitimate and would have satisfied some of the democratic agenda as well as the Republican. It was the democratic administration that pulled the rug out.
Ryan is not flim flam. It was just that no democrats and not enough Republicans had the guts to work with him on hard decisions on the budget.
Pelosi was a train wreck for the American public and Krugman is again operating in a different universe unknown to man or woman.
18
A thousand times yes to this commentary. Speaker Pelosi has been remarkably effective. It's a key reason why Republicans want her gone and it feeds the misogyny and ageism of those who believe 'fresh' equals young and not female.
As for the press, amplifying partisan attacks isn't your job. It is okay to argue that others are equipped to do the job, but why not do it while highlighting those qualifications? Anything else feeds a partisan agenda.
56
Congressman Pelosi clearly is the victim of the same sexist character assassination as that perpetrated against Hillary Clinton. If she were a man, they couldn't "demonize"/"witchify" her quite the same way. No question about it, it is truly a modern version of the witch hunt. Its obviously so easy for the male chauvinist pig party referred to as the GOP to do so....even "their women" fall in line!
88
The hallmark of a good leader is that he or she prepares the next generation of leaders and fades away into the sunset when he or she knows that time is up. While age should not be a bar, one needs to plan for future leadership else 2 generations will go by without democratic leadership of any kind. (consider that the house has been lost since 2010) Pelosi needs to go just as Clinton and her friends need to go. New leadership will emerge only if sunshine is allowed in.
45
Thanks you so much for your column and a defense of her record. I have found her to be at the least reasonable and the most extraordinary, all while she has to endure attacks from the right as well as the left. I know, as a woman, that her being female has been an important factor in the attacks. I admire her ability to withstand them all!
61
I'm with you intellectually but let's hope your kind words serve as her epitaph.
There is something about Hillary and Pelosi that, rightly or wrongly (let's not get into that now), reeks of influence peddling. For me it has nothing to do with their gender, it has to do with why even liberals are fed up with government.
Influence peddling has become a sort of moneyless corruption (actually obfuscated money-based). Long ago we used to call it compromise but make no mistake, ever since SCOTUS tied money to speech, this type of hidden legal corruption pervades what Trump correctly called the swamp. We all agree it's a swamp though I won't dignify Trump's deranged reasoning here. Many of us have their own, more thoughtful and valid reasons to call it that.
Besides why not take away the only thing they have to run on? Several up and coming Dems have made inroads by saying they won't vote for her. Good for them.
Ms Pelosi: Thank you for being a great Speaker and Minority Leader, but think about the greater good of your ideals. Take yourself out and take away one of the few Republican rallying points.
18
While I abhor the right's demonizing of every woman it comes across, I think this article points up a very inconvenient truth for democrats. They will not beat trump with a minority or female candidate. They will almost certainly nominate one because their most cherished symbol is having a woman president. But in 2020 there are much bigger fish to fry, that being the current president. Think of all the air that would go out of a right wing hate campaign if they have to run against a white male. Well, it's a lot. They need to put off their fondest dream for a while, or they may never get the chance. trump 2020, pence 2024, pence 2028. They may get a woman president yet, but they won't be the party that nominated her.
18
The GOP is running on the economy, something the Democrats ignored for over a decade. Well, that's not true. Obama did everything to destroy America's economy. Encouraging cheap labor illegal aliens cost Americans jobs & wage increases, the reversal of that encouragement has caused wages to rise.
Obama didn't care if cutting the Capital Gains tax resulted in more revenue, he even said so during a Charlie Rose interview. To him, it was a question of "fairness" not revenue, or growth of business.
Obama didn't care what industries he bankrupted, he said so regarding the coal industry.
Everything from regulations to taxes to not fighting for American jobs the way the current Trump led GOP is doing crippled and stagnated the American economy, which is not feeling the joy of a huge investment by business.
Who's afraid of Nancy Pelosi? Nobody cares either way.
11
I don't care what Paul Krugman says- Pelosi has been in office for decades.. It's time for her to go!
It amazes me.. Americans love to scream at old people when they are driving - but they they unconsciously hand over the keys to the stewardship of our country to the same old people every election.
Nancy- for the Love of God! Step down and give somebody else a chance! Or at least turn your blinker off!
28
The Republicans have managed to demonize Nancy Pelosi, but let's face it: they will demonize Steny Hoyer or anyone who takes her place. Once Harry Reid was their Satan, and now it is Chuck Schumer.
Had Bernie Sanders won the Democratic nomination for president, the goppers would have made mincemeat out of him, too. This is what they do.
32
The GOP hates Nancy Pelosi so much!...She must be doing something right!
68
Many will defend Pelosi, like Clinton, against sexism. But, the crucial issue is this----Pelosi is a centrist Dem, aligned with big money donors, and their requirements---she’s just way way way better than the GOP and Trumpites. That’s our “American Dilemma”.
She rejects the new solutions to our grave problems— (centrist in other capitalist democracies)--- but negatively labeled socialism by our old time Ds long in power. Will PK face it?
The public clings to ACA since it's all we have against h/c disaster. Before ACA, US h/c was a human rights violation. Millions died, or were disabled or bankrupted. But most modern democracies wouldn’t even put up with ACA--- a super complex 2nd rate system, using our taxes for insurance profits, not our care. Abroad even rw parties accept their h/c for all rights. Any retort to that, PK?
Instead of objective analysis, PK will always defend Obama, Clinton and the Ds---all in truth vastly superior to the Trump regime. But we deserve better from the so called conscience of a liberal, to tell the truth instead of just shilling for the Dems.
Our weak middle class, unbalanced economy and profit-based health care are the issues. And campaign finance---avoided by columnists like the plague.
Krugman writes easy anti R, pro D columns, praising the D's centrism, as if it is liberal. But that center must compete for big $$ with GOP, and must listen to their interests, while marketing to the mass of voters. We see thru it.
17
And, as a reporter who covered Pelosi’s rise and lived in her district, I can tell you many of us have not forgotten her early lonely work against AIDS. She fought so hard that San Francisco’s AIDS budget was bigger than President Reagan’s was for the entire country. (Mayor Dianne Feinstein also gets credit for this). Many of us haven’t forgotten.
—Hank Plante, Palm Springs
91
I'd like to see any MAN, Republican OR Democrat, give an 8-hour speech in 4-inch heels, without a bathroom break!
49
Come to think of it, Dr. Krugman, you're right. One of my most rock-hard Democratic friends lamented that "Reid and Pelosi" were President Obama's most worrisome problems. I wasn't sufficiently concerned to argue with him.
Now I read this column, imagine Ryan and McConnell sitting side by side wearing perfectly matched ties, and clarity emerges.
Thank you.
9
No prominent Democrats, not even Obama, have weathered the Republican propaganda combine unscathed. The savagery with which they lie, smear and attack is disgusting and shameful. Fox and AM radio are cancers, gnawing away at a hostage audience.
The only reason Pelosi should step aside is that she's nearly 80. We need leadership that can last a bit longer than she has in tank, as we did when she came up.
18
Nancy Pelosi is my political hero. She is single handedly the most trustworthy and successful democratic political person last 40 years.
Having said that , Krugman conclusion was right on spot for all republicans and some our sore democrats
" it’s just the fact that she’s a woman — a woman who happens to have been far better at her job than any man in recent memory."
In this political talent desert which you stumble upon very frequently extremely shallow and sorely loser man covered political land scape she is even a more enviable and wise oasis than Hillary Clinton.
Let me write down one sentence it will crush your soul.
watching every day Trump as if the saviour of nation , ultimate decider etc. bombastic behaviours, once in a while seeing Nancy pelosi in one news program looks like , a spiritual enrichment in a monastery, budhist temple or sufi gathering .
As a man I confess: Trump represent man, Pelosi represent woman.
nothing more to say.
16
I've been cured of Nancy Pelosi since she took impeachment of Cheney 'off the table'.
Whatever anyone thinks of Trump, what Cheney & Bush did in Iraq was so vastly worse.
Pelosi's leadership was desperately needed then to maintain some check against a lying, rogue executive who did unspeakable damage. She showed no teeth then as now.
Polite decorum is not how you fight Trump-publican redstatism at this point. All the prior rules of reason are what's off the table.
That “Better Deal” is how she plans for Democrats to win back congress & beat Trump?
You'd need leaders with teeth.
10
I remember somebody -- presumably Republican -- asking me if I preferred "Trump's agenda" or "Pelosi's agenda", as if she was Trump's equal as far as ideological warfare was concerned. Of course they were assuming that attaching Pelosi's name to something would make it toxic, though to me "Trump" is the real toxic name.
9
Pelosi should allow someone else to take her Speaker job officially, in order to keep Republicans from demonizing her as a tool to win votes. It is unjust, but she should move on for the betterment of the US and her party. She should pick someone who is young, telegenic, affable, and who has no issues of sleaziness. Pelosi can even run things behind the scenes but should not claim the mantle of Speaker. The Democrats need to slaughter the Republicans in the next election and shouldn't give them the power of running ads about Pelosi. This is asking Pelosi to take the hit that she doesn't deserve, but she should do it to help take back Congress.
10
Excellent article. Krugman's analysis is spot on. I'm sick of the media spreading the false rumors so dear to the Republican attack machine. Pelosi is not only one of the greatest leaders the U.S. House has had, but she has worked tirelessly to pass legislation that helps the working class and Republicans know this. That's why they are spreading their smears about her.
32
The only thing I would criticise Pelosi and Chuck Schumer for is that I srill don't know what the Democrats are for in 2018.
And at the risk of being accused of ageism, i would like to see some democratic leaders under the retirement age.
But I would still prefer them over almost any Republican.
9
Krugman is a brilliant economist, but a lousy political pundit. He is totally in thrall to the Clinton/Obama establishment line. Despite the fact that it put real health care reform, as opposed to health insurance reform, off for a generation at least, Krugman still thinks that Obamacare is wonderful. It preserved the system of corrupt, greedy private insurance companies deciding who gets how much care and insured their obscene profits, as well as those of big pharma and medical specialists, and even increased them at taxpayer expense. Pelosi did nothing to fight for real reform.
It is known that the reason Pelosi was able to fend off challenges to her "leadership" was her fundraising abilities from the elite of Wall Street and California. Hardly a recommendation. Rather the same skill set that Hillary brought to her doomed campaign.
Pelosi, Shumer and the rest of the Democratic dinosaurs are totally beholden to the 1% establishment "limousine liberals". This is the 21st century, not the 20th and the old rules no longer apply. Time to move these dinosaurs out of the way for new, real progressive, 21st century leadership. Unless Dems do, they stand a very good chance of once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
12
PK did try, did a respectful job of covering NP's back, but he failed miserably by trying to convince us that Nancy has done a heck of a good job. PK, you should know, of all people, that the past is the past, and today we are talking about taking Trump down, away from the White House. We are talking about Dem leadership for the future, and you should know by now that person doesn't have their first name as Nancy.
4
the plain and simple fact as to why pelosi is so denigrated by not only republicans but democrats as well is that she is a woman.
20
Thank you Paul Krugman for so clearly and accurately
Illuminating the well deserved merits of former speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi. She has been a shinning light in Congress,leading the way and assuring the passage of important issues important to ALL the people of the USA. She has helped maintain the greatness of America!
18
I think the fact that the anti-Pelosi Republican ads are quite effective is reason enough for her to declare that she will not run for Speaker if the Dems regain the House, but will continue to mentor, advise, and fund-raise for Democrats as she has done her entire career. Having a powerful title that is used as such a weapon... doesn't Ms. Pelosi recognize that she can defang a lot of political races by relinquishing it? She achieved her goal of being the first woman to hold the Speaker gavel. If she wants to see another woman earn that achievement, perhaps this is the administration under which she must restrategize and cede to another Democrat.
7
So the bar has been set low -- really low, and she just edges over it. No cause for celebration. You won't see her endorsement sought much in the mid-terms either, as she rightly or wrongly personifies Congressional paralysis.
4
Thanks, Mr, Krugman, for so eloquently pointing out what everyone needs to be reminded of!
I agree with your assessment, and as a woman of similar age to her, I know that it is true - much of the ire is because she is a competent woman in a male dominated world.
There are other factors, of course. and it doesn't help that she is the essential West Coast liberal, and the causes she gets behind are those that will help the people, the disenfranchised, the poor and class of folks who often don't vote.
As you point, out she has had stunning successes, and she will likely go down as one of the better Speakers of the House.
All that said, in the end I like to see her retire for the good of the party and its appeal to young people. There is a lot to be said for bowing out when one is still close to the "top of their game", whether sports, being a lawyer (I'm looking at you Guilani), or politics.
13
In 2008, Obama's winning message was that he wasn't the monster that the corrupted coastal media had made out of Pes. George W. Bush, probably the last really nice man to serve in that office.
By 2016, the previous eight years had been devastating enough to the American workers' families that Mr. Trump only needed to promise that he wasn't a Barack Obama, and that vote was sewed up.
So, for either side to tell its partisans that they AREN'T that scary one leading the other side is likely to at least lock in that party's steadiest voters even if it doesn't get the not-sure out of the recliner in twelve weeks.
This is anything but news.
4
Nancy Pelosi is my representative, so I get to see that she and her staff work hard for her constituents on the "little stuff": veterans who need help navigating the VA, lots of immigration and permanent resident issues, and funding from SBA, just to name a few. That's one of the reasons why she receives such a high percentage of the vote in this district term after term. I'd be very surprised if any of the Repubs dissing her do half as much for their constituents.
26
I was hoping for a sober look at "Democratic" leadership in this piece but I got anything but. I'm glad high brow types are impressed with other high brow types but average people want people they can relate to. Pelosi isn't that at all, not even a little bit.
Americans want progressive leadership and individuals who BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY. People are not so easy to forget what happened to Bernie which was their real shot, or how Democrats supported fighting "hard crime", and bailing on the banks. Getting hard on capitalists? where?
7
Being able to relate to someone matters more than seeking and achieving beneficial policies? Your comment exposes one of the biggest problems with the way voters assess candidates.
16
Who's afraid of Nancy Pelosi?
Apparently, fellow Democrats. Democratic House candidates can't put enough distance between themselves and the maybe-Speaker. If she is so great and so accomplished, why are members of her own party afraid of being associated with her? Me thinks Krugman's views about her are not widely shared. Even among Democrats.
8
@JB
Here's a strong Democratic woman who has the courage to respond without cowering in the corner (ie saying she won't vote for Pelosi) to Republican attacks ads that try to brand her as a Pelosi puppet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgdwAhysuFY
Many others are simply not brave enough and avoid association with a Republican-created negative Pelosi brand
[And of course there are others who are ambitious rather than public-spirited, and want to be the leader themselves)
3
@JB
There's always a nice picture of the Minority Speaker's home on the web,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1UYRsJOJ30
You can't see the wall around this castle-like estate but it's a beauty.
Pelosi's got a magic touch with the coastal oligarchs. As long as those ties still bind, they might as well hold onto her as they prepare to run Auntie Maxine Waters and Keith Ellison for the White House.
3
@JB Democrats need to stop cowering in the face of Republican criticism. My suggestion: Democrats should ignore Republican’s political advice and choose their own Speaker.
11
Please let us not trot out the hoary last resort argument that people don't like Pelosi "because she's a woman." That's an easy one because it requires no evidence. But we've had too much water under the gender bridge in recent years for that to be credible any more.
As far as I can tell, she is dismissed by those who have no time for Democrats at all (like Conservatives, for example), or by those who have another agenda. For example, Progressives look forward to a bold new future after they take over the party, but they need to get rid of her first.
She's not so much a bad leader in their eyes as she is just in the way.
8
Thank you, Professor K., it was nice to be reminded of the good times we who vote Democratic once had. It's good to think about 2006 when Representative Pelosi helped lead the rout of Republicans. It's heart-warming to remember when she became the first female Speaker of the House. It's inspiring to think of the first two years of the Obama administration, when she was instrumental in helping to pass some of the most progressive legislation in the history of the United States.
But then we have to remember where we are today. It took a team of Democratic leaders to allow the Party to fail as badly as it has in the last decade and certainly not all of the blame can be laid at Speaker Pelosi's feet. However the fact remains that she was part of the group that valued fund-raising for approved candidates over building the party infrastructure. We are living in Trump's world now because while the Democrats could hold the executive branch for 8 years they forgot to contest the races for city councils and state houses. If the "blue wave" happens, we need fresh leadership in the House, the Senate and definitely in the Party.
8
"What’s so radical about protecting retirement income, expanding health care and reining in runaway bankers?"
More like what's radical about setting up a little nanny state for the little babies also known as citizens of this country who according to some can't or shouldn't be required to protect their own interests? Maybe the citizens of this country should be treated like babies, I can't say. Of course with this nanny state will be many, many rules overseen by many, many bureaucrats; but don't worry, they're not like the others.
3
A "giant among midgets," seriously? Krugman must have missed the memo that that is no longer socially acceptable terminology.
2
I love reading Krugman's articles to just to see if he has gotten any crazier than the last time. It seems the rapid descent continues.
11
@Bruce
Correct. I feel a similar allure to the articles written by Charles Blow.
7
I have a question that I would like others to expound upon, and create a dialogue to help everyone understand different ways of thinking.
Pelosi is said to be good at her job, but why does every other comment say she's being attacked only because she is female? There are many good female politicians who continue to win elections through voting: Harris, Gillibrand, McCaskill, Heitcamp, Collins, etc. (not because they are woman but because they offer substantive ideas and try to improve the lives of their constituencies). These attack adverts are the easiest way to put the Dem candidates in a difficult position. This position being: either endorse Pelosi and probably lose your candidacy, or reject her outright. So if the Democratic candidates win, they either have to get a different speaker of the house, or risk the massive backlash from their base for lying to them about their stance on Pelosi. What is her approval rating?
Even many Democrats agree she needs to go. Are they sexist pigs as well who hate women in power? Or is it just the Repubs that are, because I'm getting confused as to who's being called sexist, ageist, and misogynistic. It's sadly become part of their job to attack something, someone, to gain the upper hand (whether it be individually or as a house majority).
Can someone (politely, as I have tried to be respectful) please tell me why the fact that Pelosi is a woman and if you don't like her you are sexist, and how this makes someone a woman-hater?
3
I look forward to January 2019, when Nancy Pelosi will once more hold the Speaker’s gavel.
4
Bravo and thank you.
3
After we impeach Pence, she will be President.
5
I am. Ad I ahve vted for democrats in every election. And I am 80 years old. I want some one who relate to today's generation. My grandchildren think diffenently and my chidre uderstand them I don't because I am still using the cold war framework of 50s and 60s and 70s ad... This is 21st century. Nacy ad Shumer, you are my age. Just retire and be happy that you have done your job. ow let the new generation of democratic leaders lead for us.
5
You hit the nail on the head again this week. Nancy is an accomplished women in an industry dominated by incompetent men. We love to vilify woman and minorities in this country. The worst man is better than the the best woman for the majority of the country. Sexism and racism are alive and well in this country. Just ask the President, the GOP and their followers. Sad!
19
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, for your column defending Nancy Pelosi's impressive achievements as Speaker. I am proud to count myself as one of her admirers, and I am glad to see that you hold the same high opinion of her. It hurts me to see so many young Turks pointing to her as a symbol of a do-nothing party and saying "She needs to go!" Were they not paying attention during the years that she was Speaker, or are they too young to remember and too lazy to research it? They're probably the same people that were saying in 2015 that Ruth Ginsburg needed to retire. Thank God she did not.
6
That was then, this is now.
The majority of American voters, the people who did not vote for Trump in November 2016, are desperate for seasoned political leaders who can take to the national stage and be the voices and faces of the opposition.
While Ms. Pelosi is undoubtedly a skilled Capitol Hill operator, she has done nothing to provide the prominent, aggressive public leadership the opposition so desperately needs.
3
Thanks for reminding everyone that the image of Pelosi that right wing media created has nothing to do with reality. Conservative main strategy has always been character assassination. Not surprised it worked on hateful crowd. Unfortunately it also worked on some liberals.
The best strategy to answer question about supporting her leadership is to always relate it to issues: I would support Pelosi if she supports issues that are important for my district, improving health care system, infrastructure investments, making collage affordable, fighting corruption in DC, etc.
5
Thank you Dr. Krugman for this clear and concise defense of Nancy Pelosi. Unfortunately, she has been vilified for years by Republicans, much like the hatchet job on Hillary Clinton, and has also been treated unfairly by the media, as with Hillary too, so I think misogyny has a lot to do with this, as you say. When the Democrats lost the House majority and Pelosi had to pass the gavel over to John Boehner, Rachel Maddow on MSNBC did a segment on Nancy Pelosi's time as Speaker of the House, and I think she said that Pelosi had sheparded enough votes to pass over 100 bills in Congress. This included the ACA, and financial regulations as Krugman states, but also the Lily Ledbetter Act supporting equal pay for women. It's so sad that in our upside down world of politics today, that a real, true champion of the average middle class and working class is totally defamed by the opposition party, while the Republicans have done nothing to help average Americans, and in fact are actively and aggressively HURTING average middle class people by implementing there regressive polices of tax cuts for the rich, financial deregulation, destroying the environment, privatizing public lands and education, gerrymandering, voter suppression and appointing radical far right conservative extremists to not only the Supreme Court, but many lifetime appointments of Federal judges to the U.S. District Courts.
4
America lags behind many countries in not having a woman leader, and with fewer women in legislatures. Look abroad at May, Merkle, Thatcher, Meier, etc and many more. These nations also have health care for all, for generations already.
But as much as we need it, electing a woman isn't our highest priority in these dire times. Pelosi & Clinton are centrist Dems, way better than Trump, but still aligned too much to corporate money and the norms they set--- in health care, taxes, govt regulations, and funding for public interests.
We don't have the luxury now of focusing on sexism in politics as the 1st prority. We must find whatever candidates can save our democracy and economy.
The US was once renowned as a role model of an egalitarian society. But now our political power is in the hands of the rich and powerful. Our campaign finance laws legalize and normalize this. Our candidates follow the model.
That is what underlies both our political gender imbalance, and our socio/economic imbalance. It’s a power thing.
Trump, the misogynist, authoritarian exploiter is just a symptom of this political disease weakening our body politic.
The NY Times needs a new op ed page columnist to focus on this underlying cause, not just the symptoms, and the political furor that results.
4
it has to be a gender or age issue. it could not be "... you have to vote for it to see what's in it," and it could not have anything to do with the Speaker's real success, raising money for her party in a time when voters understand the undue influence of money undermining "government of the people." and it could not have anything to do with her unwavering partisanship in a time when tribalism threatens the very meaning of America. i have nothing but disdain for the corrupt and incompetent republicans of President Trump, but real reform will not come from this career politician. please, Mr. Krugman, think more objectively and more deeply rather than fall back on the easy explanation for the Speaker's popularity challenge.
2
We the people need to protect Nancy Pelosi, defend her at every Republican attack, her achievements need to be lauded far and wide.The Republicans need a substitute Clinton to attack and they have chosen Pelosi ,whom they fear most.
5
Of course Bill Clinton looks like a saint compared with the Gop bad characters PK lists. Who wouldn’t? Can’t PK, the con of a lib give us some better comparisons for objectivity? We deserve better.
Unfaithful Gingrich? If Clinton had just found a mature woman to have an affair with at some private location outside the WH, it might just be his business and not the public's. The GOP took advantage for power, as Clinton took advantage of a young staffer, convenient for quick sex in the WH office.
The GOP reaction was inevitable.
And if Hillary hadn’t confidently received millions in speech fees from the big banks that caused the worst crash since 1929, AND then refused to tell voters what she told them, then many voters wouldn’t have worried about her big money biases.
Krugman pushes Pelosi now, aiming to NOT associate himself with any new Dems who are too liberal for him, who might be termed 'socialist' in our distorted politics. He's aligned with the entrenched, centrist Dem power base---GOP lite, way better than rw GOP/Trump---but still too connected to mega donor norms to truly work for We the People.
By so aligning himself, Krugman may still get the Treasury Secy appt he expected from Clinton, if the Dems win 2020. . What a disappointment when she lost.
The conscience of a centrist.
5
I agree that Pelosi has been a good speaker overall, she needs to step aside if Democrats win back the House in Nov. If not, then in 2020 Trump reelection ads will have her face plastered all over them demonizing her and, by extension, all Democrats running for office then. We liberals can't afford to give the GOP any ammunition as we try to dump Trump.
Nancy Pelosi is the political equivalent of Paul Krugman: A divisive figure, tone-deaf to what worries working Americans who see their wages stagnant while the elite of whom she is a bona fide member continuous to enrich itself.
=====================
Roll Call's Wealth of Congress Index reported that Pelosi's net worth was $29.35 million and that she ranked the 15th wealthiest member of Congress for 2014.
9
She plays the role of "witch" in the Republican's witc hhunt. They need a target. Slather on abuse and voila! the hatred they feel is channelled to a visible Democrat. Not surprising she is the most visible Democrat, and they hate her, and tell us we should bail on her. Its not Pelosi AND, its Pelosi OR for the Republicans. Too big a constellation of stars on the Dems side, and they start to feel like they are not invincible.
1
Having held the leadership job in the congressional snake pit, she is clearly a remarkable and powerful person. But she is not a charismatic speaker. Hillary 2020.
Any individual who can make an unwieldy body effective will always be demonized/attacked by subversive forces. It is sad indeed that the news media comes across as patsies for not calling them out more often on their bogeyman fable. Nicely summarized Professor.
It has EVERYTHING to do with she's a female. Men in general, and especially republican men, are terrified of intelligent, capable, strong, independent women. It threatens their very existence. It's the reason Hillary is not in the White House. Elizabeth Warren, Hillary, Meryl Streep, Oprah, Angela Merkel, RBJ, the list goes on and on. Have you heard many men say nice things about any of this accomplished group of humans?
2
Please hold up Pelosi, Sanders. And Ocasio Cortez as the standard bearers of the Democrats. You won’t win an election for 20 years.
3
Yes, the fact that Trump can win exposed the shamelessness, ignorance, and racism of the Republican voter.
2
Oh my god, what planet is he living on?
The truth is that Nancy Pelosi is holding back the Democratic Party, and her very presence is a weapon that Republicans effectively use to destroy Democratic opponents and drive Republicans to the polls.
She bears a large part of the responsibility for Democrats losing power. Had she not rammed through Obamacare with cut-throat tactics, despite all signs pointing to how wildly unpopular it was, Democrats would have never been banished to the wilderness in 2010.
She has to go. She has done incalculable damage.
6
They attack Nancy the same reason they attacked Hillary and Barack. The media is run by corporate CEO's who have a vested interest in keeping taxes low, regulations lax, wages down and keeping working and middle class Americans divided on social issues and scandals. This media culture is not interested in reporting facts insomuch as creating narratives, that are mostly half truths designed to keep us from seeing their scheming.
7
Thank you, Paul Krugman, for defending the record of Nancy Pelosi. But I blame the Democrats as much as the Republicans for buying into the Republican onslaught against her. I marvel that people who work with her every day cannot see her as a progressive, cannot see how effective she is. I believe the vitriol from both inside and outside her own party is ageist as much as sexist.
Democrats, ask yourselves: Why do you think the Republicans hate her so much? Because she's so darned effective at thwarting their soulless agenda. Try to recognize propaganda when you see it, and get better at consulting the record.
3
Independents like me are terrified by her.
1
The things that Pelosi achieved that Krugman points to all help people in general. If Democrats would stick to that, they would be okay. But they don’t. They mix identity politics in with that. That’s why they’re losers. Pelosi, for all her accomplishments, embodies identity politics. That’s why she embodies the good stuff with identity politics. She is the embodiment of Democratic losers.
3
Too many Democrats and Independents have allowed the Republicans and FOXNews to define our leaders. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi etc. I often hear the lies from FOXNews echoed by lefties who think these women are too conservative. What’s that all about? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Let’s cut it out come together.
3
Bravo -- It is time someone with a megaphone is saying this....
1
Way to go, Paul. You always know where Republicans are weakest and most fearful of the truth: It's where they spend their money on lies and personal attacks. Let's take our country back, people.
3
In a country that has gone mad, bonkers, berserk, Pelosi stands out for her non-ideological approach to the common weal.
2
Unfortunately this rings true to a significant amount of white women who are opposed to seeing women in a leadership role. They preferred to stomach a sloth like don-the-con to be in that position, despite him showing receipts for his numerous flaws. If they had thought differently, Miss Pelosi would still be leader and Hillary may have been president.
2
Pelosi's signature accomplishment is enslaving Americans to the insurance companies. Krugmen credits her with "going after bankers" ... but note that the net result is that she eliminated the competition to the largest banks. She has championed shipping jobs overseas in exchange for protections for Hollywood. Her betrayal of and contempt for the working class has given us Trump and an RNC dominated congress.
137
@John
Um, care to provide some examples? How about Ryan's budget busting? Your ok with that? Bet you weren't 3 years ago!
13
@John
You stated my sore democrat ( independent friend)
"....She has championed shipping jobs overseas..."
My question was
during that period
What was Reagan, Clinton, Bush and Obama, Rubin, Summer, many other men who were in top of the Congress and government were doing?
Watching Pelosi destroying America?
You simply cannot digest woman success period.
18
The Pelosi problem has run it's course; Here's why, Since the Clinton's introduced accepting Wall Street donations from the same Billionaires that the republican party does the vast majority of democrats have been told, "Hang On, Helps Coming". Well, for working Americans the corporate democratic leaders have failed to deliver. FDR got it right when he stated, "You can't face in two directions at the same time. Shumer, Pelosi Clinton ,Perez and yes even Obama have tried to sell the 99% that they were the party of working men and women yet the only piece of legislation they have produced in the past 25 years is a, "For Profit" health plan that was created by the ultra right wing Heritage Foundation! During Obama's first term, dem's held a filibuster prof majority and could have easily passed Medicare for all and tuition assistance for millennial's yet they chose to line their own pockets. Back in 2014 the democrat party lost over 1000 seats nationwide and now in 2016 their economic issues are.. Listen,"Do you hear the crickets"? Do democrat leaders honestly believe that they will win back the house with, "Values" and Russia, Russia, Bad Trump, Bad Trump? Corporate Geriatric Democrats continue to be a, "Party about nothing". If someone disagrees please lay out their economic plan? Can't wait! Paul, you do understand that Donald Trump was elected? People are on to the con and as BAD as Trump is, his lies don't compare to the false promises and slight of hand that dem's are.
125
The Clintons most certainly didn't introduce accepting Wall Street contributions. That decision came out of the Supreme Court decision ruling in the Citizen's United decision to open the floodgates to unrestricted funding from dark money groups. Ironically, Hillary Clinton was a target of the group that brought that suit.
3
I agree, she's been effective. In my time I've seen three House speakers who stood out: Tip O'Neill, Newt Gingrich (for a time) and Nancy Pelosi. By all means give her her due, but then let someone new take over.
Any other organization that has been as manifestly failure-prone and incompetent as the Democratic party has been since 2010 would have cleaned out senior management by now. How many seats in congress and state houses lost? How much weak, convoluted messaging? Allowing the Republicans to control the politics. Ignoring state elections -- thus allowing the Republicans to gerrymander large parts of the country. Yes, ALL the party leadership shares in this failure.
(Don't come back with, "but Obama". Clearly, Obama got Obama re-elected. He wasn't helped by the party, nor did he do much to help the party. But that's another debate.)
Step aside and let some new people in.
3
Thank you for an honest and realistic assessment of Speaker Pelosi's terms as Speaker and the accomplishments she helped to achieve in comparison to recent Republican Speakers. Should she be elected the next Speaker I hope she will work to develop a new leadership team who can extend that record of accomplishment. Should she decide to withdraw as the next Speaker or another step forward to fill that role, I would hope she would also help to school them and the others amongst the leadership team in how to best serve the American public and well represent the interests of the American people and the principles and vision of the Democratic Party.
4
One most important issue was left out of this article and that is Nancy Pelosi passed the Public Option in the House. Imagine an option in a democracy to buy publicly administered health insurance. The Senate an ultimately Obama did not have the guts to stand up to the insurance companies.
Instead they supported a plan that punishes individuals it they do not purchase private insurance. Is that what government should do? If that was not bad enough, that they used tax money to subsidize purchase of private insurance. Does not seem a correct way of using tax money.
6
I wonder why no one is coming to Nancy Pelosi's defense? Where was her strong defense of Maxine Waters? Where was her strong defense of Merrick Garland? Where is her strong defense of Minority Voting Rights? Has she found out enough information about Single Payer yet?
Your right Paul, compared to the other house speakers, she is a genius. And when it comes to raking in the big donor checks she is unmatched. However, judging by the 1000+ seats that have been lost under her watch, along with the loss of all three legislative branches, we can and must do better. But since the centrists, 3rd-way, do-nothings demand to stay in power, they might as well keep Pelosi as their figurehead, because their moderate, Republican-light policies aren't going to substantially change anything for millions of middle-class Americans.
6
Funny how all the seats lost in 2010 and 2016 are on her, but somehow none of the seats won in 2006 or 2008 are.
(Nor should they be, of course. Nationwide campaigning isn't her job. It would be nice if more people were aware of that, but I suppose with Hillary out of any important position, we've got to have another she-demon to use as a punching bag).
2
@Mike
The loss of seats "under her watch" are not her responsibility. You are talking about state legislature seats, not federal Congress seats as if they are the same. Some Dems bear some blame for not fighting the GOPmandering of the state legislatures but blaming Pelosi for this is akin to accusing someone of being a bad mother because her relatives (in different states!) have unruly children.
Obama, as president and by political reality of longer than a century, was head of the Democratic Party for 8 years but never lifted more than a pinkie finger to help the party nationwide. Even now his endorsements are not touching state house races.
1
@Norm Ishimoto
Looks like nothing is ever Her fault. The first thing to learn about leadership is that it's all your fault, and the buck stops here. Take some ownership and push for some change, or maybe your pocket is stuffed with corporate checks in order to prevent change.
Like when you take over and a criminal Bush administration is torturing people, you keep impeachment on the table.
Representative Pelosi's job is to due well by the American people, which is all of our jobs as human beings. As a woman, who also works very hard, holding one full-time and two part-time jobs, with a four year degree, I find it very difficult to relate to her as a worker and a woman. Her responsibilities are no greater than mine or any other woman or man.
For me the visual of her frozen face, and I do mean this, physically frozen face most likely due to cosmetic intervention. Yet here we have in this country people including children who need legitimate dermatological assessment and intervention, yet for lack of insurance, never see a clinician.
Add to this the jewelry, the constant uniform of scooped neck shirt, and blazer, she comes across as stiff and unfriendly. She has been in office 30 years now, and look to the state of the union presently, a mosh pit of hate and uncertainty. It is time to look for a new Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, and Representative Pelosi should recognize this fact, and positively facilitate the change.
7
Thank for this article acknowledging Pelosi's noteworthy achievements and calling out the media for never mentioning them or defending her against GOP attacks. That criticism should also be leveled against House Dems. The go to question of the season for them is: 'Will you support Pelosi for House Speaker if you flip the House?' Every Dem should preface his/her answer by acknowledging her EXEMPLARY service, and thanking her for it. I don't get it, but am pleased to see this piece. Maybe it will wake some reporters and House reps up - to quote Joanie Mitchell - 'Don't always go to show, you don't know what you've got till it's gone.'
5
Thank you for a smart and eye-opening reminder of what Pelosi has accomplished. Two questions: (1) how were the Dems so blind-sided by Trump in 2016? (2) what have the Dems got as a platform today that is more than saying no to all the (admittedly so horrible you can't believe it) policy proposals from the GOP?
My worry is that Pelosi was too smug and incurious in 2016 and today she lacks the energy to put together a coherent platform. Or maybe she's just waiting until after November to figure out what in heaven's name the American electorate actually wants (and that bottom-up approach I admit would make some sense).
Herein we have people singing the praises of Ms. Nancy Pelosi, getting misty eyed reminiscing about bygone glory days and good fights won and feeling sorry for themselves that opposition to her is rooted in prejudice, hate, sexism, ageism, etc., etc.
I tend to believe that's all true, but that does not matter. The point is to WIN. Politics is a fight. You are either effective and victorious or you lose. Ms. Nancy Pelosi used to be effective and used to win. No more. She has now become a liability, mostly by her own failing to strike fear in the hearts of the opponents of the Democratic party who, like a mob, are emboldened to attack her with impunity.
Wake up Dems! You will lose with Ms. Nancy Pelosi in charge.
3
If you want to win, here's where you can start: don't let your enemies pick your leaders for you.
3
Why have they ruthlessly criticized Nancy Pelosi? Precisely because she's capable and talented. That's their standard game plan. The more capable a Democrat, the more relentlessly the Republicans attack him or her. And, unlike "normal" partisanship, the Republicans think long-term. Hillary Clinton faced a similar fate. Practically the whole nation didn't trust her and thought there was just something "wrong" about her by the time she was running for president. I believe that's because the Republicans knew that someday they would have to face her as a presidential candidate, and continually slung mud at her for years (decades?). By the time she ran, what was true and what was just Republican slime was so confused that there was no way she could dig out from under. As far as political talent and charisma, she was a pretty terrible candidate, but the way the Republican character assassins work in modern times, she could've been BILL Clinton and still struggled.
You can bet your last dollar a large portion of Americans think there just something "wrong" about Nancy Pelosi, but have no idea what. The Republicans are that good at being evil.
9
Absolutely correct. Although it's fair game to criticize Pelosi, the drive to demonize her (which many Democrats seem to join) is unfounded. Just as the fury that drove those who hated Obama can only be explained by racism, the vehemence of Pelosi's detractors can only be explained by misogyny.
9
@west -of-the-river How is that? I think the drive to demonize her (which has already happened) was the result of Repub think-tank strategies for this cycle. Choice A for Democratic candidate: Denounce Pelosi and they potentially may win their candidacy. Choice B: Support her, and probably lose your candidacy. Choice C: Lie and say you will not support her, but tacitly let her try to regain speakership, in which case said candidate will face the ire from directly lying to their constituents. It's not a male/female issue, it's to put the current Democratic candidates in a political bind so the Repubs can win. Why is that so hard to understand?
Thank you so much, Mr. Krugman for exposing
all 4 phony Republican House Speakers and showing
Pelosi's commendable track record.
We need more of these articles to show the fraud and lies of the Republican Party.
11
Democrats are high minded to the point of self destruction and the GOP is practical to the point of Machiavellian. I don't necessarily agree or disagree re Krugman's take on Pelosi's achievements, but are they relevant. I want to win and if Pelosi is unpopular and the Republican punching bag, why hold on to her at the expense of losing elections. If the Dems want to be anything but the Coastal Party, we need new leadership, hopefully younger and from the heartland, try OH or PA. The GOP loves to demonize older women as the bad witches and it is deplorable and successful. They are the party of Machiavelli, but we could get a little more mercenary ourselves if we wish to rule.
3
Nancy Pelosi was an amazing speaker! My congresswoman (a whining, neophyte democrat) whom I previously supported is now constantly calling for a speaker with "new" ideas - "new" being code for ageism. She should follow the old adage, "Don't fix what ain't broke". Pelosi all the way!
13
Krugman’s article admittedly was very useful in drawing attention to the questions of ageism and sexism as applied to our politicians. It caused me to rethink my own views about Pelosi. I came to recognize that while I disagree with many of her political views, I had to admit that she has been effective in getting legislation passed, which ultimately is the measure of a speaker.
But I was disappointed that Krugman felt the need to obscure or distort facts in order to make his case, which clearly wasn’t needed. For example, he described Gingrich as “led the impeachment of Clinton over an affair even as he himself was cheating on his wife.”. While that is a cute phrase and certainly will appeal to the NYT readership base, it is an unnecessary distortion of facts that weakens the otherwise solid point he was making in support of Pelosi. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, something that as an attorney he well understood was a crime, not for having an affair. Further, the very fact that Krugman suggests an equivalency in the “affairs” of Clinton and Gingrich indicates an astounding ignorance of the MeeToo movement or blatant political bias. One was a consensual relationship between mature consenting adults while the other was a complete workplace abuse of power by a President over a young woman barely out of her teens!!
Krugman, making such misrepresentations completely undermines your message and makes it justifiable for people to read it as a political hack job.
3
@JR
yes , Clinton lied about affair under oath. Sure you can dwell on that but does it really matter?
@JR...agree . If Clinton had just found a mature woman to have an affair with at some private location outside the WH, it might just be his business and not the public's. The GOP took advantage, as Clinton took advantage of a young staffer, convenient for quick sex in the WH office.
Gingrich private affairs are irrelevant. Why does PK have to cheapen himself? PK often shades the truth with cute phrases----too bad, at a time when we need real truth telling liberals to fight for us.
PK pushes Pelosi, because he wants to NOT associate himself with any new Dems who are too liberal for him, who might be termed 'socialist'. He's aligned with the entrenched, centrist Dem power base, and they are connected to big money donors.
That way, PK may still get the Treasury Secy appt he expected from Clinton. What a disappointment when she lost.
The conscience of a centrist.
2
At this point, Pelosi's qualifications, outstanding as they certainly are, do nothing to promote her as the next Speaker. She's damaged goods.
Under Nancy and Chuck, the Dems have been the same milquetoast squishycrats they have been since Bill Clinton dragged them sharply to the right in the '90s. If the party is ever going to become the dynamic party it can be, it can't do it with the old leadership.
5
As Conor Lamb and many others have stated, it's time for new leadership. The old leadership, however accomplished and worthy of respect and gratitude, failed to develop and execute a national plan for congressional Democrats. Though Republicans' chicanery is part to blame, the congressional Democrats lost working-class people, they lost the farmers, and lost the rural vote. They white lost males. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won't regain any of that either. It will take the Conor Lambs in the party. I'm sorry, that's just how it is.
2
Strong and convincing piece. Seems like the Democrats should be able to use her record of effectiveness as positive attack weapons instead of cowering before baseless Republican demonizing, where simple pejorative repetition of a name is a substitute for fact.
The country needs to be reminded what good management in governing can be. Now, and in a new House!
4
Krugman's splendid delineation of Pelosi's assets as Speaker versus the 4 male Speakers who have preceded and followed her. And I am particularly drawn to his assertion that the attacks are largely misogynistic, reflecting the biased sentiments of their president. They never have a specific about her, just that the candidate is a "Pelosi lover," "a Pelosi parrot," "a Pelosi pawn," and in some rants not publishable, that most obscene of obscenities, the "c" word. (We know Trump would use the "b" word when candid!") But no Republican I've read or heard speaks to any of her specific stances or her support for a specific policy or action. But then, isn't the cowards' way out?
9
Perhaps Democrats running in Trump territory should turn this around and campaign against McConnell, even though he is not running. Mitch is an uncharismatic example of the conservative movement that wants to destroy the Affordable Health Care Act and Social Security, and, best of all, he's extremely unphotogenic.
5
Transcript from Sunday, Nancy Pelosi on AM Joy, MSNBC: "Just win, baby." https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/12/pelosi_to_dem_candida...
JONTHAN [sic] CAPEHART, MSNBC: Why not, if the Democrats take back the House, give up the gavel, and give it to a new generation of leaders?
REP. NANCY PELOSI: I know NBC has been on a jag, this is one of their priorities, to undermine my prospects as Speaker, but putting that aside. I have not asked one person for a vote. I have not asked one candidate or incumbent for a vote. I, better than anybody, know how important it is for us to win this election because I see up close and personal what the Republicans and this president are doing.
I do not think we should let our opponents, the Republicans, pick our leaders. The Republicans are spending millions, tens of millions of dollars, against me. Because they're afraid of me because I outraise them in the political arena, I outsmart them at the negotiating table, and because I'm a woman who is going to be a seat at that table.
That is very important to me. If Hillary Clinton had won and had sat at the head of that table it would be different, but I am not yielding that. None of us is indispensable, but I think I am the best person for the job.
And I won't let the Republican ads, which are just flooding these districts, I say to candidates: Do whatever you have to do, just win, baby.
7
If you've been wondering why the Republicans are so focused on demonizing Pelosi, wonder no more; Krugman makes it crystal clear. From their prospective, she needs to be stopped.
4
Paul, I agree with your premise (Pelosi a giant among midgets) and surely the R's will continue to attack her, but I think you're forgetting the R's great MAGA "accomplishment"--a booming economy--which they're certainly running on and without which they'd be doomed. Yes yes, they had little if anything to do with the boom--but that hardly matters to them or their supporters.
There are too few articles or news reports like this one. In Nancy Pelosi's case, it's the same sort of double-standard sexism that plagued Hillary Clinton. Powerful, intelligent women are a threat. Newscasters and journalists need to pay special attention to how women in politics and public service are portrayed in the media and try to balance the negative with some positive information about their accomplishments and achievements.
3
Accurate, but preaching to the choir, who are already voting for Democrats.
The best way to expose a given Trumpian-Republican's irrational demonizing of Pelosi is to ask him/her what positions Pelosi espouses. You'll hear crickets.
6
This is all part of the Republican playbook--demonize anyone who successfully challenges them--and the media eats it up and spits it back out verbatim.
We wonder why Reagan was the Teflon president and Clinton was the Velcro president, and yet the answer isn't hard to see. The right keeps chanting shibboleths like Benghazi, even though they're full of hot air, and the media keeps repeating them.
Pelosi is just the latest victim of this name-calling, and whoever succeeds her will be subject to the same kind of malevolence.
4
@John
This is all part of the democrat playbook.
Defend a proven alienating loser who can’t beat the republicans at their own game (see, William Jefferson Clinton as proof of concept that it can be done) and put their selfish interests above all.
It is a divine blessing for democrat hacks that the Republic is at stake. They may be able to use this to their advantage rather than be held accountable for their actions.
Thank you, Professor Krugman. Every word in your column is true. When Republicans are faced with an opponent who is intellectually and morally their superior, they know they can't when a fair fight based on facts or ideas so they resort to character assassination and coordinated smears. They did it to Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Obama, Hillary, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. That's just how they roll.
8
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, for this overdue tribute to a much-maligned person who has done more good than many people realize. Nancy Pelosi deserves a lot of credit for what she has helped to accomplish during her tenure.
3
To Mr. Krugman's admirable observations one should add the damage that *Democrats* have wreaked on Nancy Pelosi. Common complaints – about her age, about being from another (presumably less enlightened) era, about not projecting enough fighting, "liberal", spirit – demean the Party.
Such backbiting contributes to the public perception that the Democrats are a gaggle in disarray, that Democrats stand for little besides elections, and that (to paraphrase Will Rogers' chestnut) Democrats are not an organized political party. The perception that Democrats are only *against* things surely is amplified by their being seen as habitually opposed to their own leaders. Can such a crowd actually govern in the interests of ordinary Americans?
Democrats, paraphrasing Hillel the Elder, should ask themselves: "If we are only for ourselves, who will be for us?"
2
I was thinking more along the lines of Karl Marx: "The Democrats are a party of themselves, but they are not a party FOR themselves."
Nancy Pelosi is a remarkable, accomplished woman -- it is very nice to read a positive article about her for a change. Thank you.
10
Obamacare was a great first step that was sold as a solution. If Pelosi had been effective, she'd have used her party's majority to pass a health care plan, rather than an insurance plan, and we wouldn't have had the problems we've seen every since.
Yes, Republicans sabotaged Obamacare. But shame on Pelosi for helping pass such a fragile half-measure and calling it "health care for all."
1
Bravo Mr. Krugman. This has been needed to be said for a long time, about this consistent, effective and accomplished Democratic Congresswoman.
Sadly, solid accomplishment appears to be way down on the list of qualities by which our leaders are nominated. If it were other, we would hear more about Sally Yates, James Comey (Yes!! ), Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, etc.
In passing, your article presents a huge contrast to the record of the Democrats' most recent Presidential candidate.
2
... James Comey? Really dude?
1
Thank you for coming to the defense of Nancy Pelossi. She deserves our gratitude. She does make a good tar baby for the Republicans because she's female, a boss, and old. I have an allergy to Donald Trump. I was shocked and embarrassed when I saw my first and last 5 minutes of the Apprentice, but I could turn it off. Now I can't, but I really want to. If Democratic candidates need to throw Nancy under the bus to win elections let them; she can be rehabilitated later in political science class. I'm desperate to turn off the Apprentice Live performance.
She must have an incredible team to be doing what she is at her age - the gold standard of leadership is succession.
5
Whatever happened to the idea that experience, seniority, and widely and deeply developed skills were the best credentials for office?
14
Well, supposedly, Republicans are the party that did away with that in favor of flashy and empty performative patriotism, and Democrats are the party that appreciates such things. But looking at the number of Dems who loathe people like Pelosi with a passion, you could be forgiven for wondering if this isn't one of these things that both parties, in fact, do.
Nancy Pelosi is the greatest speaker in recent times (probably since Tip O'Neill), and it is about time that someone points it out.
Time and again I simply marveled at her ability to keep her diverse caucus together and to deliver majorities against all odds. Razor thin majorities, but majorities nevertheless. And she probably always had a few votes in reserve who proved to be unnecessary and who could then vote their district. The mark of a great and successful legislative leader (like LBJ, to name another giant).
10
As a woman I had to be twice as good as any man to maintain my managerial job in a hospital setting. Ms. Pelosi is no different.
If we are assertive, then we are denounced as aggressive. Otherwise, we are denounced as shrinking violets. If we are competent, we are considered cold, while men would be considered to have cool heads. If we speak up, then we are pushy. And on it goes.
Ms. Pelosi did her job well and did good for America. I don't know anyone who now has ACA insurance who is unhappy about having it. But there are loads of Republicans who would like to take it away from them, along with Social Security and Medicare, while simultaneously giving money to the wealthy and stealing from the poor.
13
I appreciated Ms. Pelosi arguing for the public option. She seemed to be the only Democrat who would state her disagreement with Obama to eliminate the public option and tell him that there were enough votes to pass it, when he told her "there aren't enough votes". I still wonder why he persisted in saying there weren't enough votes when there were. If the ACA had included a public option, I wonder if it would have been so easy for Trump and his Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen to "dismantle" parts of the ACA. I'm not an economist, but I think the more embedded universal health care would have been, the harder it would have been for the inevitable Republican period following the Obama era (because there always is one - we are a fickle people). I think Pelosi was right, and we'd all be better off if Obama had listened to her about the public option. But even Obama is a guy and Nancy Pelosi is a woman. If she wants to retire, she should. I would hope she'd stay and use her incredible skills to argue for the public option again when the mockery that is our current administration comes to it's inevitable end with Trump being yet another disgraced Republican ex-president.
9
Yep. And yet a third of this comments section is convinced that Pelosi is a corporatist witch who didn't want anything "progressive" to pass and was completely beholden to Wall Street and the insurance companies.
Crazy can be medicated, ignorance can be educated, but you can't fix stupid.
2
You need to emphasize Pelosi's role in passing the ACA. Obama and the Democrats were close to giving up on it in the face of unanimous Republican opposition and shaky Democratic support. Pelosi wouldn't have it and insisted on, as the opposition put it, "jamming it through".
We have Speaker Pelosi to thank for playing a decisive roll in passing the single most progressive piece of legislation in the last two generations. Many Republicans in red and blue states now benefit from the ACA!
12
Good article, but the so-called "Hastert Rule" was more extreme than Dr. K indicated (as other posts may have noted). The Hastert Rule required that any bill introduced for a vote have support not just of a majority of the Republican caucus, but that it have enough Republican support to pass the House with those votes alone. in other words, a small group of extreme right-wingers could scuttle legislation as long as they had enough votes to bring Republican support below 218 votes, (thus necessitating a least a little Democratic support in order to pass). This Rule meant that Hastert gave up one of any Speaker's best tools in controlling his caucus, that of threatening to bargain with the other side if his own extremists were unreasonable. Speaker Hastert, as Dr. K points out, failed to use his office's powers to control extremists and pass worthwhile legislation, at great cost to the country, the scuttled immigration bill of 2005-6 being one excellent example. The "Hastert Rule" rewarded right-wing hostage-taking, making it more routine as time went on. as
8
Not so fast. Yes, compared to the likes of Denny Hastert and Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi is a shining beacon of decency. But she's also the embodiment of the Democrat Party's embrace of Big Money in recent decades, along with the corresponding policy incoherence and abandonment of working class interests. This has played more than a small role in getting the wretched federal government to where it is today.
Not long ago, Pelosi opined that people don't want a new direction. This sentiment alone disqualifies her from resuming Speaker of the House. Hopefully, Krugman's piece is just an initial attempt at the hagiographies that will follow Pelosi's fade from the national scene. The Dems do indeed need fresh faces at the top, and not because of the chronological age of the old guard, but because Pelosi, et al.'s years-long abandonment of working people.
9
Mr. Krugman, most of the accomplishments to which you refer occur in the past. An important role of the speaker is to shepherd party legislation, but this has become much tougher for her than in the past. Why? because Democrats lost 63 seats in 2010 and 13 seats in 2014 under Pelosi leadership. As the Speaker, she must bear responsibility for these continued losses.
Also, the world of 10 years ago is much different than today, and the party needs someone who has grown up with social media, attached to their iPhone, actually working in the gig economy, who can relate to the needs and perspective of voters of today.
1
I agree with the main theme of your essay, and only add that she has provided great leadership as the minority leader in her interact[on with the White House. My wife and I both agree that she is best qualified to be returned by the Caucus as the leader.
Today, the Times showed one of its great interactive maps of the seats that are competitive this November. I know this stuff, but it always shakes my sensibilities that there are not more seats projected to become blue. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/us/elections/house-race-ratings...?
Only 60 seats are projected to be competitive out of 435 and given that so few of the elected GOP officials have protested actions of the White House on incurring more debt to fund a huge tax break for the rich and the economic recklessness of tariffs that has hurt many GOP agricultural districts.
Everyone knows people vote for Democrats because of their commitment to Social Security and social progress and the historic leadership of Mrs. Pelosi in turning back President Bush's attempt to privatize Social Security. So maybe the new Dems don't know the history of this issue.
Now, the second theme of your essay that the news media is not properly reporting the baseless attacks made on Mrs. Pelosi. This is the mystery issue and it perplexes me because attacks should be a lead story about the GOP strategy. So, I theorize that the owners and editors of the news media suffer from negative gender or negative ageism discrimination.
2
Who is afraid of Pelosi? People who are afraid to think for themselves and/or are NOT v intelligent, like my step-mom (whom I lov, btw). People, like Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church, Dallas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Jeffress who needs "absolutes," no matter how irrational they are, like justifying locking children up in cages despite his church claiming to be a "mission" church.
I believe there are a few GOPers like my step-mom who are benevolent and follow Trump. But they are also ignorant, arrogant, insecure and desperate. If we are being honest, all of us, deep down, want "pat" answers....it just that some of us have the integrity, courage, and intellect, to know life is deeper than those pat answers. We seek wisdom.
4
I've seen a lot of Republican ads about Nancy Pelosi as a terrifying presence for the nation if she returns to the Speakership. It seems that all this fear and loathing - which unfortunately sometimes comes from her side of the aisle makes no sense.. Beside doing a good job what is the hubbub about Nancy Pelosi? The Prof I think has got it figured out and I would put misogyny at the top rational to vilify her. What the Democrats should do is put about out a thousand ads regarding Jim Jordan who wants to become Speaker and is a liar, coward, bully and an enabler of a sexual pedator.
8
"Then she was the key figure, arguably even more crucial than President Barack Obama, in passing the Affordable Care Act..."
Here's Pelosi's famous (or infamous) defense of said ACA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw3yoyIw3oM
I don't think that we should point at child molesters and human highway cones as our high bars to clear. Pelosi was also subject of a blistering "60 Minutes" piece about insider trading, which Pelosi defended as "Legal according to the law" ........which, of course, was passed by the same bunch of swell folks that make up the US Congress. We now should all know how this stuff works.
Anyone want to hear Hillary's speeches to the banks? This is the sort of normalized corruption that got Trump elected. The democrats have a chance - maybe the country's last - to get this thing right. If they haven't learned their lesson by now, then they run the risk of a split into a third party. Good luck with that in 2020. Pelosi must go. Time to get it right for the right reasons. Repeal Citizens United and start fresh.
One of the policies with the fast rising German AFD, ( I can almost hear your knee jerk eke out 'Racists) is the length of time public officials can stay in Office', so why not interview these AFD Doctors dripping with Degrees and their references to Bach
cantatas,..but I digress as the writer here doesn't, with his missionary zeal
for an octogenarian, or is that an septuagenarian, I know this would also apply to Trump; but I come back to one of the AFD policies and that is to limit the amount of time public officials can remain in Office and keep receiving money from the public purse. The billionaire Trump is exempt from leeching off the taxpayer. The point is where do these Pelosi people live (on money from the public) and do they take in immigrants to live with them and that question could be directed to the writer of this paean to Pelosi piece. I could be wrong but as they peruse I can just imagine the NYT
readers nodding approvingly over their cereals for there is nothing like a good serving of one dimensional hagiography for breakfast.
I have long believed that Pelosi is incredibly good at her job and mostly unrecognized as such - but I also believe that she should not be the “leader” of the Democratic House. She should step down because she is such a lightening rod. She can still effectively guide and mentor the next generation while working the levers is power behind the scenes. I think if she does this she will cement her legacy. If she insists on remaining the leader and it gets in the way of political progress, that (and only that) will be what she is remembered for.
So please Ms. Pelosi, step down and become the mentor. It’s the right thing to do.
4
What are you and your colleagues for and against? Are you looking into people in positions of power abusing that power or aiding them? If justice is "blind," why wasn't I informed that Linda Greenhouse was speaking at Chautauqua on this topic?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/opinion/supreme-court-labor-unions.html
Yes.. BUT ... She dodged 60 Minutes- Steve Kroft about her stock dealings...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Peojn4VZalU
2
The Germans have a word: "Feindbild", meaning "image of the enemy".
Nancy Pelosi is targeted easily as a "Feindbild", if only because Republicans disastrously (from their viewpoint) underestimated her uncanny parliamentary gymnastic skills. She ate their lunch with the Affordable Care Act, essentially that plan proposed by the Heritage Foundation in 1993.*
That she is a privileged woman from San Francisco, maddeningly composed at all times, only amplifies the antipathy hurled at her personally, irrespective of issues.
7
There's governing and then there's politics. The speaker/minority leader plays an important role in both. Ms Pelosi has been there a very long time, at a time when virtually all Americans agree that things need to change. Just like Clinton, the wife of a former president, she represents the past. Democrats have largely disavowed many of the positions they once held. Remember "The era of big government is over" (Clinton said that). Most Democrats think the biggest problem with the ACA is that it was not ambitious enough and too cheap. If your gonna change things in a big way, it better work very well and people better love it. Otherwise, you end up with big problems, like the ACA.
Why should a leader of the past be the one to take us to what we hope is a very different and better future? The longer she stays, the longer she keeps the younger folks from moving up.
3
"And it’s a sad commentary on the news media that so much reporting echoes these baseless attacks."
This.
It's pathetic how the media goes along with how the Republicans frame issues, no matter the subject.
3
Female leaders have present and past mentors;
Present mentors: Teressa May and Angela Merkel....and there
are also non-political examples of leadership; sic. Queen Elizabeth II...
Undaunting and savvy women who are not succumbed by male
bullying...
Yes...Nancy Peolosi...needs to pay heed to Tereasa May and
Angela Merkel...as far as her demeanor is concerned.
Nevermind the gender/pay heed to the qualifying aspects
of leadership....
Women have always been able to deliver a message, without
anyone wondering ...why is "she" saying what I would expect
a well informed male saying this same message..
It is the message that is well delivered...regardless of who the
messanger is...so PLEASE forget for an instant that this messanger is named Nancy …..never mind the she/he …
but mind the message given
2
If we could get Trump to call Pelosi a dog she would get reelected Speaker unanimously.
Since the R's haven't anything worthwhile to add for themselves it is obvious that they need a punching bag. And, being generally cowardly, they prefer a woman as their target. Hillary isn't available so Pelosi gets the nod.
They couldn't be more obvious if Trump tweeted it. Cowards all, and to them all (hopefully in November): Good night.
4
She is "divisive" because Republicans treat every Democratic leader as divisive. According to Republicans, Obama was the most divisive President in history. Why? Because the racist base of the Republican Party was enraged that the solidly centrist Obama had the gall to serve as President while Black. Enraged Republicans = divisive Democrats. See? If Democrats would only elect white people who enact the Koch Brothers' agenda, then Republicans wouldn't be enraged, and Democrats would be uniters, not dividers. You should know by now that this is how this particular game works.
5
Pelosi is blind to the fact that she is the biggest impediment to drawing people toward Democratic candidates. How to describe Nancy? She's like that real estate agent you couldn't wait to see the last of, who tried in vain to look 20 years younger than she was, and who probably drank too much. Nancy, do your country a favor and move on. Let some young(er), vibrant, better-looking, and better sounding democrat take over.
@Oswego Interesting that your critique gravitates immediately towards appearance. Time to check those implicit gender biases.
2
“Better-looking”???
Good heavens make a point, but if you want people to listen, maybe drop the sexist hooey?
1
I agree she is great, but this is such a small percentage of the false negative articles published by the newspapers today.
Count me among the afraid
Who is afraid?
The DNC should be.
Why? if you want to fire up a GOP rally, just mention her name, and you get your votes. People who vote GOP, do not like her. And every cheerleader article you publish about her, is dynamite that prompts more people to vote GOP, just because she is there.
You might like her, but to the GOP she is a gold mine, she is the reason many vote GOP. But the DNC continues to employ her, despite this being the reason why people are voting red.
Think about it.
1
I see we're yelling at Nancy Pelosi for inside trading, probably to deflect from the fact that Trump's first Congressional supporter just got busted bigly.
Here's a fair and balanced account of what actually happened, not that the shouters will care.
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1115/Did-Nancy-Pelo...
It's perfectly reasonable to say that Cingresscritters shouldn't be trading stocks at all. But to swear that she broke the law or was particularly unethical....no. Just stupid.
Oh, and Pelosi also did not, and does not, run the DNC, the convention, or even the DCCC. I realize that a lot of leftys badly need an alibi for their refusal to vote or their howling about Jill Stein, but nope.
6
Answer: no one.
2
Paul, it's a sad commentary on the state of our discourse that a former Nobel Prize winning economist has been reduced to a political hack shilling for the Democrats in every column. Where is your economic analysis of the issues facing our country? Your expertise has be lost to the mud slinging of politics in America today.
It's a replay of "San Francisco Democrats" and other cliches, e.g. "limousine liberal", "gay agenda", etc. Good for Krugman, especially today, and especially with no holds barred, to call it like it is about Pelosi's awful predecessors and successor! But it would be wise of Ms. Pelosi simply to say, "Look, I'm pushing 80, I might run for Speaker again and I might not but, if I do, it will be up to the House to vote for me or someone else." Duh.
3
Hear, hear, Dr. Krugman! Hear, hear!
3
Great column. I have become a "Paul Krugman Democrat."
4
Thanks, Mr.Krugman. This encomium made me take a close look at Ms. Pelosi's great accomplishments and fully appreciate them, which I have never done before.
.
And it reconfirms Republicans' desperation and cravenness.
3
You have to understand that demonization is what the Republicans do best. First they demonized Bill Clinton and his universal health care program (which is also when they began demonizing Hillary, who had a huge hand in its creation). Remember, also, that in 1994 the political consultant Frank Luntz advised the Republicans to describe Democrats and Democratic policies using words such as “corrupt,” “devour,” “greed,” “hypocrisy,” “liberal,” “sick” and “traitors.” It worked and they've been doing it ever since.
And let's not forget that the so-called Christian Right chose to demonize abortion, make it an absolute evil, and anybody who supported its legal availability into someone siding with the Devil. By so doing, they made it possible to excuse anything a Republican did or any policy a Republican supported, as long as he or she was "against" abortion. (Contrary to what people may think, this was not the position of the Southern Baptists before 1975, which in the aftermath of Roe v Wade originally held that it was a matter of individual conscience.)
Trump then took demonization to a whole new level. The way Hillary was depicted was inexcusable.
But the media itself is to blame. Demonization creates drama and ratings, and the mass media doesn't tell people when they are being explicitly lied to.
All that said, the Republicans have taken over rural areas. To the people there, Pelosi and the Democrats may represent the places that are doing well -- while they are left behind.
3
Of course they attack Pelosi as they attack Clinton or anyone with real persuasive power that opposes them. And they are so good at going low, lying, distorting, confusing, and misleading the millions of Americans that can be foooooled allll the time.
It is not okay to be a Republican. It hasn't been okay for a long long time. They want to make what should be US AGAINST THEM (the super wealthy) into US AGAINST US. Don't do it!!!
3
Say what you will about Ms. Pelosi, at least she knows how to count votes!
2
Where are the Democrats in office that give such a glowing endorsement of Nancy Pelosi?
She deserves their support.
But alas, there are far more cowards in Congress than just Ryan.
1
Dr. Krugman, you hit this one out of the ballpark! Too many "middle" Americans are frothing-at-the-mouth misogynists.
You took the bold step of listing some of Nancy Pelosi's achievements, and I am grateful to you for that. She, like Hillary Clinton, has held fast to her progressive values in spite of relentless attacks from rabid right wingers.
It is regrettable that some Democratic candidates feel obliged to separate themselves from a tried and true champion of liberal values. It suggests that they are cowardly, and we don't need cowardly in Congress.
6
If the only replacements for Nancy Pelosi are old white men like those in the Republican leadership, the Democratic party would be committing suicide to vote against her. As Speaker and then Minority leader, Nancy Pelosi always presented a more powerful image than the Republican leadership team. The tears of John Boehner and the smirks of Paul Ryan couldn't hold a candle to the poised image of Speaker/Leader Pelosi.
I sincerely hope that the next face of the Democratic party in Congress will not be another old white man using the tired language of political hacks so common to Republicans. Someone in the Democratic party had better be spending time looking at who will be the next Democratic Speaker. Whoever that next person is will have a pair of very high heels to fill.
4
What is sad about many of the comments, is that any critique of Ms. Pelosi, is often automatically rejected by as sexist of ageist, when in reality her record is one of very modest gains. The ACA is a corporate friendly version of real health care reform, Franks-Dodd barely scratched the surface of the real reform that Wall St. needs, the minimum wage is embarrassingly low and has been for decades, etc.
Democrats who call for her removal have legitimate concerns about her values and priorities and have little to do with her gender or age and in fact the Republicans find her an easy target because, her policy positions are often diluted by her close ties to corporations, otherwise she would have more vocal and passionate supporters who would to rally to her defense.
5
Dr Krugman, your last speculation is correct: the poor media coverage for Pelosi is because she's a woman. My wife, a long-time feminist, said for decades that there would be an African-American male president long before a woman, and she was right, illustrating the long road uphill for women. The coverage biases are obvious for all woman leaders, even the right-wing ones like Thatcher. One hopes that the current #MeToo and other women's movements can reframe those biases, and give us a positive archetype for women's leadership.
1
Thank you very much for a thoughtful article. Media is largely to blame for not giving credit where credit is due. Had they been doing their jobs instead of focusing on selling their stories, they would not have created a false equivalency between then candidate Trump and Hillary Clinton. They would have quickly found out what a sham candidate he was. Similarly, instead of focusing on Ms. Pelosi's achievements, the media seems to be continually repeating the same narrative the Republicans are feeding them: she is divisive, she is liberal (!), she is a true Democrat. And in this climate, where Trump supporters proudly wear T-shirts ranking being a Democrat as beneath being a Russian, that badge alone is enough to bring down a brilliant politician like Ms. Pelosi. Unfortunately, too many people including the independents would rather read a meme than an article, and that's how they vote.
5
Good article. I've always thought that the Republican's demonization of Pelosi was like their attacks on Clinton, more about fears of powerful women than anything based in fact.
2
Speaker Pelosi, in terms of actual achievements, stands head and shoulders above Gingrich, Boehner and Ryan.
The Republican Party legislators obstruct not only Democratic initiatives, but also their own. Their no-nothing Freedom Caucus fringe, thanks to the Hastert Rule, wields incredible obstructive power.
When will the working class and other lower middle class Republican and Independent voters learn that the GOP could not care less with respect to their economic well-being?
How long before Trumpuglicans see the light and stop defending Trump’s corruption, incompetence and cruelty? When will they realize that “at least Trump is not Hillary” just doesn’t cut it?
2
" ... thanks to the Hastert Rule, wields incredible obstructive power."
Bingo! But the key is not the Freedom Caucus. It is the Hastert Rule.
The only issues people seem to have with Nancy Pelosi are her age and sex- and that also applies to Democrats as well. Shameful.
Be grateful for her leadership and experience.
She also raises tons of money which unfortunately is a necessary activity to master in the age of Citizens United.
I will continue to support ms. Pelosi based on her performance and will not throw her under the bus due to age and sex. We already did that to Hillary Clinton and now look where we are.
4
Nancy Pelosi is symbolic of much that is wrong with the Democratic Party. The future is to the left of her and those of her ilk. It is one thing to be a conservative Democrat in rural Pennsylvania, and quite another in urban California.
1
Seriously, I fail to see that she has accomplished anything at all. More importantly, she obstructed a great chance to achieve meaningful & long-lasting immigration reform while giving the DACA immigrants a path to citizenship.
She is nothing more than an obstructionist. Her latest twist of calling McConnell a racist exposes her lack of character.
I just hope that one of the parties will seek a new set of political leaders capable of bridging the great divide! We Centrists would be all in, and we don't care if its a Republican or a Democrat!
1
Steve Bannon has said since the beginning that every house race will pit the republican candidate against Pelosi. They believe they can win that fight because they've been demonizing her for many years. The fact that she is an intelligent competent woman terrifies them but, unfortunately, in this country it is easy to demonize intelligent, competent women.
In the republican party the women have to run as men. Examples: Joni Ernst and Marcia Blackburn.
1
It is standing operating procedure when someone as powerful and successful as Nancy Pelosi has been in her roles as Majority and Minority Leader in the house that she would be used by the Republicans in this fashion
It is because the Republicans have done such a bad job of it every time they have been in this Leadership position and used their power to undermine social net programs, suppress voter participation, defend Citizens united, try to take away health care from those who need it, privatize our Social Security and Medicare, while giving a mind-blowing tax cut to the Wealthy and the Corporations.
By constantly picking at Nancy Pelosi they are just using her as a distraction, so their own heinous behavior won't come to light with their base.
This diversionary attack will come back to bite them come November.
4
Fine defense of Pelosi. She well deserves accolades for her work for our nation against all the fake demonizing from the GOP. Now the problem is with certain democrats running scared because they have bought the notion that their constituents believe the Republican rhetoric and so they are willing to dump her. No doubt, change is useful when it means replacing something that is not working well, but that is not the case for Pelosi. We need more of her.
1
Attacking strong Democratic women is a Republican party specialty. Needless to say, Benghazi! and the email offense against Mrs Clinton demonstrate to what extremes they will go.
But what is incomprehensible to me is how many Democrats fall for conservative tactics in this department, especially Democrats on the left. And in Nancy Pelosi's case, she has become the undeserved symbol of the sclerotic third way neoliberal arm of the party. While it's true the party needs new and younger blood, Pelosi should not be the first of the old guard to go. There's more than a hint of ageism and misogyny involved it seems to me.
2
For much of the right wing today, Pelosi is the unforgivable: a strong, pro-reproductive rights, outspoken, liberal Democrat woman. And the fact that she's powerful and over 65 makes them hate her even more. Put her in the same category as Hillary Clinton.
2
This is a good article--especially after I look at the comments, and realize that the criticism of Pelosi still amounts to, "She's a girl!" "She's all old and stuff!" "She negotiates and all!" "She won't take the fight into the bad guys' homes!" "She doesn't agree with me about everything!" "She doesn't thump her chest and scream like a REAL MAN!!"
Oh, and of course, "I'm clueless, but I like shouting a list of stuff I got from Rush!!"
I expect right-wingers to be like this, of course. But it is a bit discouraging to see folks who think of themselves as progressives and leftists say the same ridiculous stuff.
Sorry, and yes, corporatism. Yes, money in politics. Yes, she needs to prepare for her successors...which I'm sure never occurred. But leftists need to get over their chest-thumping ignorance about how Congress works (which amazingly, looks and sounds exactly like the Freedom Caucus' cheat-thumping ignorance) even more than they need to get over their Purity Pledges.
3
Politics is a game, and part of the rules is that the opposing side will undermine and attack your leader in order to seize power. The question is not if Pelosi is a great leader (which she is and I wholeheartedly support her), it is whether Dems are capable of controlling the narrative and getting word out about all the good she has done. I feel that this is a truth Dems need to wrestle with. The nerds who wanted to create bridges with faculty were never elected president of student council, it was the jocks who promised free pizza Fridays.
Thank you, sir, for shedding light on this. I have often wondered what the issue really was that is making her so demonized. Now I know. She's competent, female, with no scandals. Makes sense given our upside-down world these days. I greatly appreciate your enlightenment.
2
Right on, Professor Krugman. The fact that Republicans vilify Pelosi as shrilly as they do tells me that they are really afraid of her competence, strength, and ability to win significant popular support. Unfortunately, too many Democrats have jumped on the bash-Pelosi bandwagon the Republicans astutely built. This is a terrible country for smart women in politics.
2
Decades of Republicans' demonizing Hillary Clinton gave us a Trump presidency. Now, demonizing Nancy Pelosi......what will that bring us?
1
what have Republicans ever got to run on?
their basic policies are favorable only to the rich, and their politics consist of pushing one phony and divisive ploy after the other in an effort to hoodwink enough voters to carry elections, statistically against rheir own interests.
so: trumped up threats from immigrants, religion, abortion, voting fraud, Pelosi the monster, Hillary the monster, Obama the monster, bathrooms, statues, bakers, Communism, Socialism, any old ism - any distracting, obfuscating noise, repeated ad infinitum.
in 25 words or less, how are Republicans today any different from the French aristocracy before the Revolution?
let them eat cake. just make sure it has a same sex couple on top.
2
"A house divided against itself cannot stand. Or win in 2020."
Has it occurred to anyone that Nancy Pelosi is attacked not only because she is an extraordinarily competent woman but also because she is also an older woman? Just look at what has happened to Hillary Clinton as well. We need to face sexism and ageism when it is right in front of us.
1
At last, someone is stating the real reason. 10+ years ago when she became Speaker, I could only read the NY Times on Sunday when I drove to the nearest town to get the Sunday paper which was sold at a restaurant in the town. I was so eager to order my favorite breakfast--Howling Grits, orange juice, and coffee--and open up the section equivalent to the current Sunday Review. I hoped to spend the morning reading about this historic moment for women. Instead there was an article about group of conservative Democratic men who had been elected--the so called blue-dog Democrats.
Even the NY Times could not bring itself to recognize an historic achievement by a woman. I cried in frustration.
2
As a life-long democrat....I greatly appreciate her service and devotion to our country and fidelity to the Democratic party...but Ms. PELOSI is a walking billboard for the concept of term limits.The torch needs to be 'passed' like NOW!. Consider: given the 'dumpster fire' that is the TRUMP administration...the only possible rallying point for any remnant of the GoP, in future elections, is their visceral hatred of Ms. PELOSI. Eliminate that argument and lets "Make America SANE Again'...shall we.
2
Mr. Krugman. You are absolutely correct in all of your reminders.
But unfortunately, Nancy Pelosi has been the donkey in the Republican's party game for so long, that even ardent Democrats have a tough time seeing her on TV. Politics are often unfair and indeed the current attacks on the "Pelosi" Democrats is taking its toll.
That is why several who are running for a Congressional seat are already stating they are not in favor of a Pelosi House. That is why there aren't enough "hero" stories about Pelosi that might alter opinions. That is why Pelosi is an anchor weight in a sea that this disgusted with Trump.
Like many political careers, Pelosi's will come down to what is best for the country. And here, she would do better by helping to lift up her successor than by defending her right to the thrown.
The reality of November is the disgust with the swamp. Not the swamp that Trump promised to drain but rather the one that he created. Not that Pelosi is part of Trump's swamp, but she was and still is so much of the swamp in general: regardless of her convictions, votes and capabilities; but simply put, it is her time to move on for the love of country.
And while I would caution her not to pass the baton just yet, lest the other side simply jump to that bandwagon, her voice of support to a reliable second shortly after November would help mitigate the compromise she should make today.
1
@RichardS
I don’t remember Pelosi involved in a scandal so take it easy, please. Swamp is the propaganda tool invented by real swamp people. She may be an example of a few survivors who escaped relatively unscanted and could lead the charge to clean it up.
If we, democrats, can’t recognize it how can we defend issues that could be belittled by the right wing propaganda? Hide under the rock each time they throw mud?
Liberal wild socialists person!! Wants to assure everyone has reasonable health care, wants a humane and fair immigration process, wants to regulate Banks and others who are constantly looking for ways to make more profits at expense of consumers, wants to protect consumers, wants to assure fair living wages, wants to assure all who are eligible can get an education, wants to reduce global warming processes, wants to hold military responsible for spending demands, wants ethics in Washington ' wants a infrastructure program to rebuild the US . Yes, these are the programs this wild and crazy and dangerous grandmother wants.
2
Extraordinary achievement? How about extraordinary arrogance? There's more to a politician than the facts Krugman presents. Ask her about Tim Ryan and all those who seek to replace her, she dismisses them in a haughty way as insignificant. She is an out-of-touch coastal elite closing in on 80.
Nancy deserves SOH - but regardless of reason, she is perceived as divisive. Democrats will have a tough time winning the House with Nancy poised for ascension. Now is the time for Democrats to put pride in their pockets and hitch their wagons to the power of the blue wave. The wave’s driving force isn’t the sage wisdom of buttoned-up elders, but the fresh voices of America’s youth and minorities. We can’t miss this opportunity to harness a new cadre of true American patriots and reclaim the house. We must radically move to save our endangered Constitutional Republic. Now is not the time to ask what our party can do for us, but what we can do for our party.
1
For those who decry Pelosi's "progressive" Bona fides they never acknowledge that the house leader's power isn't infinite. And while I voted for Bernie sanders in the primary there is no comparison between the real accomplishments between Pelosi and sanders. Krugman does s good job enumerating them in the column along the republican pygmies who have also occupied that position.
3
As with Hillary, the right seems to despise powerful women for no reason other than they gained power. I do feel Pelosi should step aside, only to remove the "bogeyman" and leave the Republicans with nothing to run for or against.
But, then again, they are still running against Hillary, who as I understand, isn't our President.
The GOP. Proudly kicking dead horses for America.
1
Republicans make Nancy Pelosi an issue because she's (a) extraordinarily competent, (b) she's extraordinarily competent and (sin of sins) a woman, and (c) because the GOP is extraordinarily bereft of anything else on which to run.
6
The hysteria around Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton occurs because they are extremely powerful effective women. I have never seen a male politician evoke such deep seated ongoing hatred wherein the mere suggestion of the name evokes such high-fevered glowering and ranting and on such a personal level. Obama induced unequivocal and spontaneous hatred in many republicans merely because of his existence but he also had a compensating unequivocal support from his party. With Pelosi and Clinton, the party has always seemed reluctant to go all in and has never mounted a full-on counter-narrative to mute the hysteria.
2
@gems
Uhhhhh
Check out the popularity rating of a woman you may not have heard of. Michelle Obama’s. I think republicans have worked hard to demonize her. And yet.
Paul, you missed one huge accomplishment: the first woman in history to become Speaker of the House; second in line to the presidency and the highest office ever attained by a woman.
I was coaching a girls high school team at the time and remember taking a moment for the players to reflect on the history that Nancy Pelosi was making.
3
This is why I read Paul Krugman, not for economic theory, which mostly zips over my head, but because I always learn stuff. And, in today's edition, important stuff. Thanks for this, Mr. K. Now I know why the reactionary right hates Pelosi so--she's en effective representative for moderate and progressive views and policies. And that's why I read Paul Krugman.
2
Nancy Pelosi embodies traditional Democratic positions that have long been the core identity in Democratic politics. So if her policies positions are simply the Democratic norm, what make her so polarizing? I think her being a woman is one (the same way how certain segments of the population react to Hillary as well). The second is that she's represents San Francisco. If she never changed any of her positions, but she instead represented Columbus OH, she would be received a lot more favorably.
I find that her positions sometimes hew too close to normal Democratic orthodoxy and I wish there was more creative policy initiatives. But that's not her job. Her job is to lead the party, and make sure she can twist enough arms to get legislation and issues forward within the party, and when she becomes speaker again, in the House.
2
The first time I heard Pelosi disparaged was during the W. Bush campaign when a Republican acquaintance remarked, "Do you want Pelosi to become president?" I was astonished that she was being maligned. Of course, this was before the news picked up on it and it was just put out to Republicans.
Thank you, Mr. Krugman, for expiating the myth and also pointing out that the media has helped propagate it. I agree that it is time for the media to inform the public of her accomplishments and a decent human being.
6
If indeed the Democrats take the House back do they really want to put an inexperienced Speaker into the role? Perhaps it is time to groom younger leadership but starting out with no experience doesn't seem a good idea.
2
It is (perhaps) excellent history (or "herstory" if this to some's taste), but this is not a sound basis for understanding the key failing of the Democratic leadership crisis. The present leaders are, at best, locked into years of defensive position, almost perfectly idea-less. There's nothing quite as ineffective against the GOP's "bad ideas" as "no ideas" (to paraphrase Lewis Black).
Pelosi does not project a useful positive leadership role, no matter what Krugman enumerates, because her skills are (or have been) for inside-the-Beltway. This makes here an easy mark for the GOP and, even without their attacks, of precious little value to the Democrats in recruiting centrists, anti-Trump GOP'ers, etc.
For the good of the US and the Democratic Party, she should relinquish. I'd add for good measure, the same applies to her deputies, as well as Schumer in the Senate. Hugging the political past is no place to build a political future ...
1
Pelosi is not running for leader of the country. It. Is. Not. Her. JOB. To "project a positive leadership role." The only people she needs to do that for are the people of her district in San Francisco. Otherwise, her job as speaker/minority leader is ALL ABOUT "inside-the-Beltway" skills. That's what she needs to be judged on, not whether or not she's good at somebody else' job.
1
@CP
Funny that.
Since the inside the beltway JOB of a minority leader (which is not a constitutional JOB)
Is to help the minority party win elections.
But those who are unfamiliar with the anti party beliefs the constitution was written under would notbe expected to know or care about such facts.
Although at one time Pelosi was a razor sharp speaker, those days are gone. She now is the party's fund raiser in chief, working on behalf of candidates who support the status quo instead of working for changes so desperately needed. She represents a platform dedicated to big business that is devoid of anything that will spark the changes Americans want. . It is time for new leadership that actually wants to accomplish what people need instead of protecting lobby money.
1
I'll boil my thoughts on the reason down to one simple sentence:
Men don't like to be yelled at or told what to do by their mothers.
They will vote against their own interests in order to avoid that situation. Avoiding uncomfortable situations is cowardly but easy to do in the privacy of the voting booth.
7
Yes, Nancy Pelosi has big accomplishments whether as House Speaker or Leader of the minority Party in the House and we are grateful. But Nancy Pelosi's time as Leader has passed. She has failed to deliver a WIN for a very long time. Unless Democrats win it will always be a fight against Republicans. Playing defense is not enough. Party ideology alone is not enough. Democratic candidates need to win with issues that are relevant locally. And that could be liberal or conservative.
It is imperative for Democrats to be the majority. They have to WIN to take over the House ( as also the Senate! ). I disagree that sexism plays a part demanding her ouster as leader. Or she would'nt have been leader for so long. The recent wins by young Democrats indicates that Party ideology is not enough and they have taken an important page from the Republican M.O. to - WIN. Be local, but think national. Nancy Pelosi needs to pass on the baton to the new generation. We sincerely thank her for her services but now she has to retire gracefully.
3
Mr. Krugman also defended Hillary Clinton, another old establishment democrat targeted by the Fox right. How did that turn out?
I don't care if Nancy Pelosi is a good person who has done good things. She's currently a target and therefore a liability. It might not be fair but I'm not willing to risk the future of the country on some misguided loyalty.
If a fresh face means the democrats take back congress, so be it.
1
Dude, they're ALL targets, and therefore liabilities. No "fresh face" will avoid that fate for more than a week once they're in the public eye.
3
Any Democrat in a leadership position, especially a woman, is a target for abuse and lies by republicans, especially from males in power. McCONnell, Trump for starters.
5
Well argued, Mr. Krugman. Thank you. While I do applaud her service, I do believe that more dynamic leadership is called for in these times.
2
Let's all step back and consider the entire Congress. About a third of them look in the mirror and see the young person they were twenty years ago when they were approaching sixty. RETIRE ALREADY. There are young people who can take their turn at bungling our government. We do not need people as old as I am running things. Thanks go out to all the Republicans who who are stepping aside this time. My recommendation is for Representatives to announce in their debates this September to announce that they will not run in 2022.
2
Republican politicians and commentators have for years regularly and persistently characterized and defined Pelosi as 'far left', ' leftist liberal', etc. in speeches, campaigns, tv interviews and ads in their attempt to place her and define her as outside the 'mainstream'.
While their claims are patently not true, the attempt has been at least partially successful. Given this, and to maintain some balance in the struggle, it seems odd that Democratic politicians and commentators
have not turned the tables and regularly and persistently described Republicans like McConnell and Ryan and their views as 'far right', 'far right conservative', 'radical' and outside the mainstream.Parentetically, I would guess that 95% or better of Americans have no recollection of the attempts to privatize Social Security, i.e. destroy 'SS as we know it' as a viable entity, surely a radical and far right idea and outside the mainstream.
4
Thanks for contextualizing Pelosi's achievements. It would be difficult to guess what the GOP hates about her most: her gender, her success as a legislator, or her remarkable skill at fundraising.
5
I've always had and still do have great respect for Speaker Pelosi and her achievements. It's good to see her getting a bit of fair coverage. She stands head and shoulders above the other Speakers of recent memory.
2
Who's afraid of Nancy Pelosi? People who don't like her agenda and therefore her effectiveness at getting things done.
Democrats should be cheering somebody so effective, instead of concerning themselves with what her political opponents think.
I wish Democrats would run against Mitch McConnell, who has also been effective at pushing the conservative rightwing agenda, much to the detriment of the country.
We had eight years of Obama attempting, and failing, to build bipartisan consensus. Eight years of Republican reactionaries making gains in Congress.
The parties are too far apart for consensus. Republicans are the ones who declared war, and are working to undo the last century's progressive legislation. Calls for working together at this point are no different than blaming events in Charlottesville on extremists on both sides. There is no equivalency between Democrats and Republicans on being unreasonable.
8
The mission for the Democrats over the next three months is to get control over the Senate and the House. On average, 35% to 40% of the voters are locked into the GOP and no amount of campaign genius will change their minds. Ironically, a similar percentage of the voters are locked into the Dems and preaching to them will solidify their votes but not move the needle.
The key in the mid-terms is that 20% to 30% that are deciding how they will vote. I'm a staunch anti-Trump, conservative Democrat, and I know every campaign promise and every dollar spent must focus on voters that are "on the fence". I think that Nancy Pelosi, while perhaps undeserved, is viewed in a negative light by the undecided Americans. We need to keep her and the Clintons out of the spotlight.
2
I agree wholeheartedly. I am sorry to see Democratic contenders talking about how they won't support Pelosi. The Democrats cannot afford to waste talent, and Pelosi has proven herself to be a smart, pragmatic, extraordinarily capable politician. We need people who can get things done.
It would be a shame if the Democratic caucus were to push Pelosi into a premature retirement to score a few points with right-leaning voters who will never be loyal to Democratic goals.
I am all for new ideas and giving younger members a chance to step forward, but if they want to take the reins, they should first prove they know what to do with them.
9
Nancy is my hero. Has always been and will always be. Thanks Paul for standing up for her and for all women!
11
Pelosi has had a good run and she should retire. The Russia stole the election mania that is making fools of the Ds which could have dire international consequences is Pelosi's baby. Her and her 800 super delegate buddies have lots to answer to for the 2016 debacle.
3
Nancy Pelosi is my Congressional rep. And speaking for myself only, I can tell you that while I appreciate all of her past contributions for keeping the wheels on the social programs bus, I can also say with confidence that leadership isn't just about playing defense. The GOP has run roughshod over Congressional norms and is hellbent on winning at all costs. Pelosi, and her Democratic brethren in both the House and the Senate, are too busy appeasing their corporate campaign contributors than actually working for the people who vote to keep them in office. ACA is great. But it should have been universal health care that was never even debated. Dodd-Frank was great. But it should have been breaking up the big banks after the crash. So yeah. She been great at getting compromised policy through the legislative process. But I want to see her and the other Democrats finally leaning in to progressive policies, not apologizing for them.
8
this is a good, very reasonable position - in San Francisco.
but in America, not a winning strategy.
1
I think I'll take a pass on the whole my-way-or-DIE! strategery, what with it being exactly what Trump and loons like the Freedom Caucus are doing.
1
@ Pottree strange position. It's exactly the strategy that ousted Joe Crowley in NYC. And it's exactly the strategy that is winning more women candidates seats in Congress and in gubernatorial races. The problem with Pelosi (and Feinstein and Schumer and, and, and) isn't that they're anti-Trump. It's that they are not pro-working class.
Krugman forgot to mention the passage of TARP. Without Pelosi, TARP may not have been passed, the economy may never have recovered. And why shouldn't she continue as leader/speaker in the house? There is no one else who is better or even close.
9
Not to forget, Nancy was also the best vote counter when it came to legislation voted upon on the floor. Once she had sufficient votes, she would let representatives from reddish states off the hook, in order to help them being elected again.
Another fact was that she was the most successful big-money raiser for her party.
As proven in the last election, a far too large percentage of US citizens seem to be terrified by powerful women, women who have - contrary to the present occupant in the White House - a brain to boot.
Some Democrats running for election in November also insist that "fresh blood" - meaning younger ones - should replace the only women and most successful ever to boot, who became Speaker of the House and is now 78 years old, by declaring during their campaign not to vote for Pelosi as speaker should they win a seat in the House.
Do they not remember the great Tip O'Neill, one who had the gall wanting to introduce universal healthcare in the US, and who was Speaker of the House for 10 years from 1977 to 1987. He was 75 years old at the end of his speakership when Republicans won the majority in the House.
It is quite sad that some Democrats hide behind covert ageism, while Republicans use overt misogyny in their relentless attack against Nancy Pelosi.
11
It is sad. Those Dems will not be getting any help from me. They are the kind of politicians who induce apathy and discourage people from voting. Who wants to vote for people who don’t have your back and are not stand up guys (and they are guys).
Its interesting that Mr Krugman left out how Ms. Pelosi benefitted from investing in 8 IPOs who had legislation pending in Congress while she was Speaker.
There is a loophole in insider trading laws that allow that, and that is why there are that many members of Congress that get rich using the information that they get in confidential meetings with corporate leaders.
As a side note, she is a career politician that has been in office long enough. Not giving someone else a chance to lead can create a gap when she finally does decide to retire.
But why would she? She has made and will make a lot of money investing with information that the public does not have access to.
11
Nancy Pelosi is a force to be reckoned with and has been invaluable to the Democratic party for years. That being said, the 3 most powerful leaders of the Democratic Party are old. Chuck Schumer is 67, Nancy Pelosi is 78 and Steny Hoyer is 79. I hope they continue to mentor and advise the party, however it is time for them welcome and foster new and younger leaders.
5
I agree that Pelosi has done many good things for the country and personally I like her. And she certainly shines when compared to the Republican Speakers. I also believe that our country would be far better off if the current ratio of women vs. men in Congress and the White House were reversed.
But your analysis reminds me of the Monty Python scene where the black knight--having lost in battle his arms and legs--"but a scratch"--threatens to bite his opponent.
The reality is that Pelosi and Schumer have presided over one of the most dramatic losses of political power in modern history. Not only did they lose to Donald Trump--not just one of the worst Presidents in history--but one of the worst persons in America--they lost the Senate and the House, governorships, state houses, the judiciary, etc. Whatever happened to accountability?
It's time for new leaders to reinvigorate the party. If we screw November up we may not even have the teeth to bite back.
7
@rb
"time for new leaders to reinvigorate the party"
Well, it doesn't work that way in this country. It is all up to democratic base. American voter doesn't vote for something, he/she votes against something. That's how Dems got to power in 2006-2008. They voted against Bush, Iraq fiasco and financial meltdown. They won. Later, instead to staying firm in support of democratic majority, and continuing democratic agenda, they forgot about everything.
This time we have energy again. Against Trump, against corruption, against white nationalism. Democratic agenda is still the same, better health care, better and affordable education, higher minimal wage, infrastructure investments, etc.
She drinks her whisky straight.
6
And you are wondering why the 'media' does this to Pelosi ? Are you kidding me Paul ? You are working in the belly of the beast here at the NYT. Surely you have seen the stories published in your own paper. Everyone knows about these trumped up falsehoods because YOU GUYS CONTINUE TO REPEAT THE PROPAGANDA ! You hand the mic over to the GOP, you turn the volume up to 11 and you repeat the nonsense in an endless loop. CUT IT OUT !
9
Enlightening.
2
Speakers of the House by definition have to straddle the center, where ever the 'center' may be at any given point in time. They have to wrangle their own party's more 'wayward' members (Ryan and the 'freedom caucus' anyone?) while at the same time throwing enough bones to the other party to gain a solid consensus around legislation. And this isn't even getting into their dealings with the White House, no matter which party is occupying it.
Pelosi draws fire from progressives, who btw seemed relatively happy with the ACA, Dodd-Frank and the stimulus package at the time when she was working to get the votes for them. Could those laws have gone further? Sure. Would they have passed? Not a snowball's chance in hell. It's called consensus.
Why does Pelosi draw fire from republicans? Very simple: they're afraid of her.
10
Krugman must be kidding.
2
Pelosi is great at what she does. Doubts about her are doublefold: sexist and agist. That's about it.
5
You know what Nancy Pelosi is lacking....
"Whatever women do, they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily, this is not difficult."
Charlotte Whitton
4
I'm for Pelosi.
4
Thank you.
5
It's a pipedream that the democrats will win the 2018 election. The republicans have the voters so confused with their convoluted double-speak and talking heads on Fox News that I wouldn’t count on winning results right now. They have some intellectually challenged voters thinking that Pelosi is the devil incarnate despite her excellent record. They want to portray her as a worn-out old hag who is borderline dementia. Also, in Congress as elsewhere, women are not allowed to age gracefully like men. Don’t lose sight of the fact that the real long-term losers here are the actual voters.
4
The Republicans need someone to vilify, and are good at organizing a slime campaign.
3
Governing while female. Hilary’s only crime.
8
Once again, Krugman hits the bullseye. Pelosi is a giant among midgets...and that explains the Trumpublican attacks. Attack your opponent's strengths with lies and distortions to bring them down. Trump is a master of these attacks, but the alt right wing nuts have been doing this for decades.
The award here goes to the mainstream media for their complicity. They sat silent while the right wing attack machine savaged Pelosi with one lie after another. Hey, the MSM were bending themselves into a pretzel trying to appear balanced. They couldn't counter the right wing lies without defending some republican being unfairly attacked by the left. But there wasn't anyone getting that treatment...so the mainstream media did nothing. Pathetic.
What's hilarious is how the mainstream media is being treated by Trumpublicans now. They spent the last two decades trying to win over the right wingers and are getting a great big slap in the face for their efforts. The free press is the enemy of the people...the people who love to lie and be told lies.
VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS
6
Lets just suppose the Dems take the house! And the imposter and his sidekick go down in flames. Who would that leave? Pelosi finishing the imposters term. Justice!
4
Yes, an impressive career. BUT she was on the quarter deck for what could be the most egregious screw up in the history of federal elections. No corporation, no athletic team would stand for this kind of colossal failure without some sort or repercussion, like demotion or firing. Her team lead us into this potential lethal swamp of GOP primacy with complacent arrogance and myopic strategy. Each and every one of the DNC's leadership should be sacked and shamed on account of this monstrous failing. Term limits, please!
8
Republicans hate capable, strong women, who are not Republicans. You can bet on it every time.
5
Just this.
Pelosi for President!
2
"Pelosi is by far the greatest speaker of modern times." LOL. You almost got me on this one. At first I thought you were serious. I LOVE these Onion articles.
Oh, wait. OMG. That's Paul Krugman. He IS serious. The man who predicted that President Trump's election would trigger "a global recession, with no end in sight" and a stock market crash from which we would never recover.
The loons on the far right not only attack her as a woman but her district which is the evil San Francisco and these folks are terrified of that city. I am also thinking they are attacking her last name which to large swaths of this country is foreign sounding.
5
Thank you Paul Krugman. Finally!!
1
she is a clueless failure.
just another corporatist with her owners' interest at heart.
5
She is from San Francisco California. Culture war easy target and a woman.
3
I want Nancy Pelosi as President!
8
Paul,
Nancy violates one of the tenets of White supremacy - that White men are superior to everyone else. When women and non-Whites outperform White men, the backlash is fierce. Better to keep a lie propped up than deal with reality.
4
Bravo Paul! ....you got in a couple good slugs in that article. Couldn't agree more about Paul Ryan!
Every time the Republicans mention Pelosi, we should refer them to this article.
3
Pelosi is everything that is wrong with corporate Democratic leadership. Bernie Sanders fought for SS, not Pelosi. She does the bidding of her corporate donors. America is falling apart and Krugman says Pelosi is his hero? What is wrong with the left in America? Three cheers for corporatist warmongers!!! This is the last Krugman I will ever read. Change your editorial perspective, NYT.
5
@Shane Avery And what has Bernie accomplished? Pelosi gets things done. Same with Hillary. If Saint Bernie was so great, he would have won the primary.
Outsiders have the advantage of lobbing grenades over the wall. Establishment politicians must bow to the current order. Incremental improvements are what they can offer...not revolution. For revolution to succeed, you need a majority behind you. That's why Trump will fail. That's why Bernie would have failed if elected in 2016. However, if things are bad enough under Trump...if the economy tanks...2020 could well be the perfect time for the Bernie.
VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS
1
The short answer to the question in the headline is, "Democrats."
Pelosi yesterday called Mitch McConnell a racist for saying that he wanted to make Obama a one term president, thus proving convincingly that the false charge of racism is the last refuge of the scoundrelette.
I mean, really, are you people serious?
1
She may have been a powerful speaker of the House, and I know her job isn't to be a "speaker", someone who is the voice of the Democrats in the media, but that is indeed what she is often called on to do and on that she fails miserably. She comes across as bloodless, dispassionate and often incoherent (as in I can't even hear her).
I admire what she has done and yes, Republicans and not so few Democrats are against her because she is a woman. I voted for Hillary largely because aside from her qualifications, I didn't want the Republican smear machine to work. I didn't want her punished for the relentless and baseless investigations or for her husband's indiscretions. But, like it or not, she did suffer from those and now we are all suffering.
If the Democrats had a great communicator who can be called on to talk to the media (instead of Pelosi), I say, keep her and let her do her work in the House. But I don't see that being the case. And if she's all the Republicans have as a lightening rod, well, maybe we should not give it to them.
4
I agree with Mr. Krugman's assessment of Ms. Pelosi's leadership in the House of Representatives. I also share his opinion of the heinousness of the Republican attacks against her. But the Republicans are not the only ones who should be blamed here.
Why have Ms. Pelosi's fellow Democrats allowed this to happen? Why do none of them ever mount a stout defense of Mrs. Pelosi in both her capacity as a leader of the House as well as in her personal affairs? Moreover, what does it say about a integrity of those in party leadership that not only does not criticize, but in a de facto sense, sanctions fellow Democrats who seek office by running against the Party's own leader?
6
Thank you Paul Krugman for this timely, indeed overdue, and well written tribute to one of our most accomplished leaders and policymakers. It is beyond incomprehensible that Americans fail to see what is right before their eyes when it comes to assessing who deserves to lead in our government and who doesn't, particularly when it comes to capable and deserving women.
And shame on the media for feeding the stereotypes peddled by Republicans on Nancy Pelosi's leadership of House Democrats. We need more like her, leaders who genuinely care about the people of this country, not fewer.
6
I've had a small amount of exposure to Pelosi. She is, in many ways, a traditional politician. She can tap-dance and triangulate with the best of them if you ask her hard questions. This can be less than inspiring.
But she has indeed been strong and effective. Her caucus may diss her to the press, but then they usually vote with her. She can get legislation passed, given a chance.
If you are in a leadership role, you cannot always be sweetness and light--and women come in for hard bashing when they quit being Sweetie Pie and start being the Boss.
This seems to trigger Republicans in a way that is beyond rationality.
There is a female style GOPers do like: dumb and pliable, the ones who look pretty and repeat the talking points the Big Boys give them. (Sarah Palin, Marsha Blackburn...) Note that older women in the GOP don't do so well--when you stop looking good, what are you good for? A lot of senior GOP women were passed over when Sarah Palin was put on the ticket.
It is really kind of scary to me. It makes me wonder if a woman who really is willing to do the work can be elected to the highest office.
5
The thing about that "tap-dance and triangulate that can be less than inspiring" is that it's the one skill that's desperately needed for the leader of a legislative caucus. Other politicians can handle the "inspiring" part - the President or presidential candidate being the most obvious such position. But not every major politician can or should be like that, and this is the one position where that should NOT be the main consideration. Democrats who demand that she leave because she's not inspiring enough are completely misunderstanding her job.
2
Awesome story Paul.
3
In the January 2/9 2017 issue of the Nation magazine Eric Alterman wrote: "By relentlessly promoting this kind of false equivalence between truth and bull----, thoughtfulness and stupidity, the press sowed the seeds of the unimaginable disaster that our country and the world are about to reap in the form of Donald Trump's presidency."
It was, of course, a piece about President Obama and the press's need to question the thoughtfulness of his moves.
Tip O'Neill is still my favorite Speaker but probably that is due more to his personality than his effectiveness. Although he did help the Nation survive Reagan.
Like Hillary Clinton, Pelosi is considered divisive because republicans and their lap dogs in the press say so. She really was amazingly effective at whipping her caucus into shape and keeping it in line.
Perhaps we are seeing the 4th Estate finally finding their voices as "truth to power" instead of their obsequious scraping for "access". Perhaps reporters and editors and publishers are remembering that in a fascist state they are usually out of work. And in prison.
4
This same line of demonizing was used on Hillary Clinton, another strong women in politics including by the NYT and some of their pundits. I for one think that the Democrats need a fresh face but hope that it is a person as driven, accomplished and as competent as Pelosi and not like that fresh face republican loser Paul Ryan.
5
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, for reminding us of Pelosi's records and accomplishments. A giant among midgets, indeed.
6
Best Krugman column in a long time.
The question remains: why do Democrats allow lockstepping Republicans to frame the media debate? The net effect of this persistent inaction paints progressives as weak in the part of the electorate that does not follow the day to day skirmishes. This is the swing vote. Pelosi's(and Schumer's) failing is that they are not speaking out enough. If they don't want to be the attack dog, unleash other dems. Their silence is deafening. Compare it to McConnell/Boehner/Ryan when they were the minority party...whining and lying day after day in 2007-2011. Pelosi and Schumer need to step up and speak out relentlessly. Where are they? I never hear from them in the news.
3
Thank you, Paul Krugman. This is what "Me Too" is about.
2
Was she not one of the few to vote against the Bush lead invasion of Iraq?
1
Her wealth and that she is from San Fran also is held against her.
She has done well but her age and all the negative baggage should lead her to step down and pull strings and give counsel from the rear. She could be very effective and might like it.
3
Thank you, Paul Krugman, we needed that!
4
Of course it's because she's a woman. That's what cost Clinton some votes too. It's the religious right telling Trump no Transgender personnel. Next no women in combat and their big dream no women in the military. Barefoot and pregnant and stupid is the goal.
4
One sees in these comments the rising backlash among women to attacks on Pelosi, viewed as sexist. Republicans are in danger of infuriating again all those still stinging over Hillary Clinton's treatment. And that's not to mention the ageist offense to us seniors.
I encourage news and opinion writers to do factual comparative analysis of Pelosi's House leadership with that of her Republican successor, Paul Ryan.
6
I am sick and tired of the "because she's a woman" argument.
Yes or No, a woman won the popular vote in 2016? Plus, Jill Stein received over 1 million votes. And many progressives would have happily voted for Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, or Nina Turner.
So can we please finally put to bed the voter shaming, especially when it's contradicted by the facts.
If a "great" House Democrat leader can lose 1,000+ seats on her watch, imagine how many a bad one would lose.
Who are we kidding? Nancy Pelosi is only a "leader" because corporations give her the most money, which she then uses to buy House loyalty. Eliminate money from politics, and watch how quickly her "leadership" would vanish.
5
Thank you Paul K. This article spot on. Nancy is far and away the best legislator in Washington. Thank you Nancy. Attacks on her by the "crazed" Right their only defense for their huge and clear failure. Republicans are notably absent and AWOL at a time when their country needs them. Their silence says volumes. They are embarrassed and afraid - and very well should be. Contribute, register, vote - critical that we flip the House and Senate and take back offices at all levels of government. Time to pump out the septic tank. Flush the leach lines.
8
"...Pelosi is by far the greatest speaker of modern times and surely ranks among the most impressive people ever to hold that position."
Hardly. Under her tenure the Democrats lost their House majority. When she had the majority, she and the other Democrats allowed the Republican minority to set the legislative agenda. At least one outcome: the crippled version of Obamacare without the public plan, and with fines levied against non-subscribers. Impressive? More like a do-nothing, since all the legislative achievements during her term as speaker were essentially authored by Republicans.
2
Glad to see this column. I've often wondered what Pelosi has done that makes her so unpopular--as with Hillary Clinton, the criticism always seems vague and vicious and politically biased. The people who admire Trump for "telling it like it is" are seeing the world through a wildly distorted lens, but what's the excuse for hating Pelosi?
9
Good call Mr. Krugman, as it the double-standard sexism has long been obvious regarding all things Pelosi. She is tough and politically savvy, and deserves much more respect than she has gotten in most circles, and historians will likely rank her fairly high in the history of House Speakers. However, I am not sure she is the best leader for the Democrats in the House going forward, despite her accomplishments and experience. She is a lightning rod for the opposition, being a supposed stereotypical liberal (from San Francisco no less), similar to how Shumer represents certain stereotypes of a New York liberal. I have no issue with either person, but in such extreme times, common sense pragmatism should be part of the political calculus. This horrible version of Republicanism must be defeated at any costs.
433
You're right, but it bothers me when Dems say that we must pick a speaker who doesn't upset the GOP. Any effective Democratic speaker will become a "lightening rod".
6
@Samuel J. Schmieding "This horrible version of Republicanism" is aided by Democrats acquiescence to it. We are willing to throw our most effective leaders under the bus if the Republicans hate them enough. Look at what's happening to the FBI. All of the people who have been fired so far are lightning rods for a reason—they're effective.
6
1. Don't write so frequently, Dr. K. Slow down and think it out.
2. Violence and misogyny have been a long time part of America, not the only part. The Republicans were very successful in demonizing Hillary Clinton, a smart woman whom I didn't particularly like, but voted for.
3. Now they are using Nancy Pelosi in the same way- she's rich, arrogant, dangerous, etc. When they are asked to debate policy, they bring her up. The more that they harp on Pelosi, the more women they recruit into the opposition.
1
Mr. Krugman may rightfully find policy facts to support his positive pitch on Nancy Pelosi and his disdain for the GOP/media narrative. But he ignores her and the Democratic Party’s utter failure to turn their policy positions and successes into political victories. This failure is the Dem’s Achilles heel in this era of lies, fake Facebook accounts, and opinion-and -propaganda-driven political narratives dominated by the Republican Party and synchophants in the media. Unless the Dems figure out how to fight and win on this distortion-fueled political media battlefield, where identity is destiny, they will continue to lose elections.
2
I want to thank Paul Krugman for defending Nancy Pelosi. She is a remarkable woman who has supported programs that bring the US into the company of modern nations that provide their citizens with benefits like health care and good parental leaves, all things that strengthen any society. She did it with intelligence, and courage, and, I might add, just to be politically incorrect, equipped with a visage more agreeable to look upon than any of her gracelessly aging Republican critics.
2
Nancy Pelosi, in her position, is the Mother of all Americans and that mother instinct drove her to fight for the Affordable Care Act so all Americans would be cared for. That mother instinct, being so strong in her did great things. She should be entitled to grab the Republicans by the ear and drag them to the doctor's office because they sure are sick for not wanting Americans to be well.
Keep Pelosi in power and allow her to care for Americans like the Republicans don't.
3
Let’s say Krugman is 100% correct. Let’s say, too, that Pelosi has been unfairly targeted. It’s time to retire the target of these misguided Republican attacks. At this point, Ms. Pelosi has become a lightning rod those who wish to thwart progressive change, rightly or wrongly. It’s time for a change. For Ms. Pelosi to continue is becoming increasingly selfish and stubborn.
2
Thank you for this excellent, long needed analysis. Speaker Pelosi, like former presidential candidate and Secretary of State Clinton, has been a recipient of not so subtle sex-based negative press coverage that unfairly taints their awesome accomplishments. They've both broken the glass ceiling and many male reporters appear to resent their ascension, and many women reporters are the worst of all in their niggling sniping. And that sniping, constant and corrosive, is manna for opponents.
This column celebrates an extraordinary woman and the wonderful work she has accomplished, not because she is a woman, but because she is a leader. And her focus is on the entire United States, and the needs of our remarkably diverse population in all our states and territories.
3
It's easy for the GOP to scapegoat Pelosi. She's a woman. A smart, articulate and powerful one who they know can work for the people. Truth is, she can run circles around Paul Ryan, Gingrich and McConnell. Trump too. That's why they want her gone.
4
Thank you, Paul. It was always obvious to me that Nancy Pelosi didn't deserve the criticism heaped on her by Republicans and I wondered why her party wasn't actively coming to her defense.
Those lies that Republicans repeat over and over again seem most effective when aimed at women. They demonized Hillary over her use of a private email server--a minor transgression compared to Trump's litany of illegal or unethical acts throughout his life. Rep. McCarthy admitted that the Benghazi investigation was bogus.
Why is it that these deliberate lies are more believable when the target is a woman--whether it's Pelosi, Hillary, or Warren? Why is that? Why are women leaders held in contempt for strong leadership? I wish I could understand.
2
I hope nobody is afraid of 78 year old Nancy Pelosi, particularly Democratic members of Congress, who should seriously reconsider their top leadership, and its heretofore establishment, center right, points of view. We need new blood, and fresh ideas. We need to represent MORE voters. I don't care HOW much money she can raise. Most of us want the money OUT of politics, anyway, and Pelosi is the poster child for legalized bribery, no matter how she much refuses to admit it. I want Tom Perez out, as well. Our party needs to be more diverse, and more broad minded. Embracing progressivism will be the first step towards positive reorganization, demonstrating the clear difference between us and the nefarious Republicans. BTW, Pelosi is NOT a progressive. She is barely liberal.
5
The intelectual bankruptcy of the GOP is the reason they go after the person . They are becoming the Party of Hate . They don`t have arguments . It is telling that they won an election demonizing Hillary Clinton . They were helped by the mainstream media talking non-stop about her e-mails . Now they want to use the same tactic with Pelosi . I hope "the enemies of the people " learned their lesson from the last campaign .
2
Pelosi has many accomplishments, but her shrill, condescending personality gives me the shivers. I'll always remember her standing behind President Obama during his first two State of the Union speeches, jumping to applause with scowl as though she's rubbing salt into her opponents. Another remembrance was coming across as though she new everything during an interview with a well known journalist, trying to make him feel as though he didn't have the mettle. Republicans will defame any Democratic leader. We need Democratic leaders who will lampoon and laugh at them, making them feel the heat instead of debasing oneself with their hate.
1
While I'm all-in on the charges of ageism and feminism, I sometimes wonder why the Democrats just sit there and let one Republican after another step up and slap them, like that scene in the movie Airplane where passengers take turns smacking the hysterical woman. Why not take some of their talking points away from them, like having Pelosi announce she won't run for Speaker again? Or saying loudly and in public that the border wall is a waste of taxpayer money, and that Democrats will lead on a pathway to citizenship for the Dreamers while tightening border security?
4
@Capt. Obvious
Because no democrats (other than Obama) have a Twitter following in the tens of millions. Also, they speak sensibly and logically, and don't use ALL CAPS, which isn't going to grab the attention of our current info-tainment loving main stream media.
To paraphrase another movie, 'The Untouchables', they're bringing knives to a gunfight. Or maybe more accurately, a dictionary to a Mad-libs convention.
Comments to this article are really interesting and many reflect the backward attitude many Americans have toward women. One group wants to know what Pelosi's accomplishments are: in what world are you living?
While I wish that Democrats were grooming more next generation leaders, Ms. Pelosi has been effective and her chief "disqualification" seems to be that she possesses two X chromosomes (well, maybe also that she's from California and many just hate anything California). I suspect that this view also played into suppressing Hillary Clinton's vote total in the election and the ambivalence many have toward our allies who have female heads of state.
Maybe I'm "lucky" to have been raised by a widowed mother - I grew up seeing first-hand just how strong and capable women can be. I wouldn't wish this learning experience on others, but I'm constantly surprised how ingrained gender stereotypes are in our society. It's a waste of half our human potential, pure and simple.
2
The fact that so many Democratic candidates are willing to disavow Pelosi is just another example of the Democrats falling all over themselves to do the Republicans' bidding, while claiming to be "independent-minded" or willing to "shake the establishment." The Republicans attack her, the media keep spreading the smears, the "progressives" buy it. Same old, same old.
2
Yep. It's pathetic. The number of Democrats who fall all over themselves worrying about what Republicans think of them, and then worse, actually basing their politics on it. As if there were ANYTHING they could do that was ever going to make them happy.
We'd expect the GOP to be sexist. But what about the media? That's really the crux of the matter. The media is part of society and society is sexist so it's no surprise that the media reports in a way that endorses current sexists beliefs. But where are the Dem?. Why doesn't Schumer et al calling out the sexist treatment she gets from the GOP and media? Sexism is still sadly a covert part of our world. It must be named and confronted not run from (as Dem Conor Lamb did).
6
While I'm all-in on the charges of ageism and feminism, I sometimes wonder why the Democrats just sit there and let one Republican after another step up and slap them, like that scene in the movie Airplane where passengers take turns smacking the hysterical woman. Why not take some of their talking points away from them, like having Pelosi announce she won't run for Speaker again? Or saying loudly and in public that the border wall is a waste of taxpayer money, but that Democrats will lead on a pathway to citizenship for the Dreamers while tightening border security?
2
I tend to see the logic in most of Dr Krugmans posts but not with this one. Pelosi nearly single handedly destroyed the democratic party. When she took over rather than show any fiscal sense during the 2008 collapse seeme to be willing to fund anything. She ignored trying to hold any financial instututions accountable. ACA is the greatest policy failure in history. She ran with a republican health plan that the repubs ran from and left dems with no rationale for why it should be supported. It was the tea party rallying cry and it really marked the end of our party and any future progressive legislation. She needs to be tossed to the curb to give the Dems any future
1
Thank you! Nice to finally see somebody publicly defend Nancy Pelosi. She is a truly remarkable woman, and probably the Democratic Party's greatest asset.
5
A very accurate description of our recent GOP Speakers. I don't think it can be said any better that Ryan " In the final act of his political career he has also shown himself to be a coward, utterly unwilling to stand up to Trump’s malfeasance." He has accomplished nothing credible in his career and his legacy will be quickly cast upon the rubbish pile upon his departure.
1
Pelosi and Obama are two remarkably decent and effective politicians. Yet, nearly one half of the voting public have been convinced that they are not just misguided, but evil. The same people voted for Trump, but call Hillary Clinton "crooked." One has to laugh to keep from crying.
1
Character assassination = GOP "campaigning.
Give her credit, she works well with others, yet maintains principled in fights with the opposition when they simply smear her indiscriminately with negativity.
She and Steney Hoyer are the best House leadership team in modern history.
1
Pelosi cannot speak without stumbling over her words.
We need someone who can speak clearly and authoritatively.
Dems also must learn to count votes - gays and minorities
are consistently out voted by straight whites. I've heard the
in a few years argument through 10 losing elections. Get the focus off gays and minorities and onto middle class workers and values if you ever want to be the party we were until Nixons "silent minority" campaign which has in
one form or another consistently won elections for Republicans.
2
Pelosi is a remarkable woman, but her skill set is really her ability to work behind the scenes with House members.
Unfortunately, for her and the Democratic Party, the situation has changed.
The manipulative narcissistic con artist Trump has redefined politics in this country, not as a game of laws and governing in a democratic nation, but as as a very damaging PR game to effectively bury laws, ethics, justice, human decency, and fair play and replace it with his cult of personality, crony capitalism, and authoritarianism.
To deal with a bully, you need to out-bully the bully in the court of public opinion--which I believe can be done with Trump by playing a much better, stronger, and more constructive PR game.
But the sound of silence from the Democratic Party has been appalling, just when this country needed it most.
Pelosi is not the leader to do this, nor is Schumer. Neither is an effective public speaker, and the Dems need the youth vote on Nov. 6.
Lots of attractive, dynamic, mostly young Democratic politicians on the airwaves educating the public about what needs to be done and why. Sorry, but many Americans think pf politics as a blood sport and some form of entertainment.
If I were Pelosi, I would step down as Speaker before the Nov. election and take away one of the few pathetic rallying points the GOP has to win. Sadly, our Trump relatives have no respect for Pelosi and have drunk the poisonous GOP kool- aid.
Make the Democrats exciting again!
1
Professor Krugman: Thank you for your analysis...I hope you
will be invited to express your views about Nancy Pelosi soon
on PBS as well as CNN.
5
Data are always helpful. Thanks again.
1
White men are sticking together more than ever, even if the woman in the discussion is so much more than any man. Their time is long over due to be replace with the next generation of men who are not influenced by gender, color of skin or hair, beauty or number of children. They are more influenced not by who you know but by WHAT you know, and can you DO the job.
America desperately need these men to step up before the angry white older men take our country down to the point of no return.
THANK YOU!!! Every word you wrote is true, and deserves to be repeated over and over again.
And I sincerely believe that if Nancy were a man, the demonizing would not be there.
Nancy and Hillary -- one has done so much for the country, and the other could have.
I urge the mainstream press to use more of your careful consideration of people and issues--at the moment, their highest accomplishment is generally just being the non-FOX medium.
2
Opportunity knocks. Let the Republicans beat their drums for another few weeks about the evil Nancy and then she can announce before the midterms that she won't run for speaker. That'll pull the rug out from under the right. Taking one for the team would make her a solid citizen.
3
Granted Nancy Pelosi is the greatest Speaker of the House in modern history (a worthy follower of Tip O'Neill), but she is old (78 years of age) and rich, and it's now time for a new broom to sweep clean. Far-fetched as it may seem, the present lame-duck Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, could become our president and commander in chief if President Trump and his VP Mike Pence become suddenly incapacitated. Ms. Pelosi isn't a boogeywoman, she's deserving of kudos and laurels and a blessed California retirement in the ultra-safe Democratic 12th C.D. of San Francisco, CA. If Democrats sweep Nancy Pelosi under their Mid-Terms bus, they will deserve the defeat they won in 2016.
4
I have a problem with your "ageism" prejudice against Nancy Pelosi. Age has nothing to do with her abilities. Many of our nation's greatest thinkers and best guardians of our Constitution have been older. Nancy is a very wise woman. As to whether she should become Speaker of the House again, that's another subject for me. I believe both the House speakership and Senate majority leader should be term-limited for all parties.
1
It's called projection.
The Trump administration lies like no other, so it lashes out at fake news.
Republicans can't even pass their own "policies," so they lash out at Pelosi.
You hit the nail on its head, Paul. It is because she is a woman. It is part of the reason that Hillary lost the race to become President.
Sexism, like racism, isn't going away in this country. The greatest challenge women have in getting elected is, frankly, other women.
2
All the things you say about Pelosi are correct, Paul, but don't you think it is time for some fresh faces in the Democratic s leadership ranks?
2
"Does all this mean that Pelosi should become speaker again if Democrats retake the House? Not necessarily: You can make an argument for a new face despite her extraordinary record."
That's correct: you can make that argument, and since no one lasts forever, it is in fact important for Democrats to keep an eye out for alternatives and/or start grooming them (or becoming them) themselves.
But it's also kind of important that you not get rid of a person with a record like Pelosi's simply for the sake of "a new face" or because she makes Republicans cry, which are pretty much the only reasons anyone ever provides. I'll start taking the "dump Pelosi!" crowd seriously when they can tell me who they want her replaced with, and why they think that person would do a better job. Right now, they can't even do the former. And mostly they don't even try. It's all "she needs to go! ... SOMEONE ... will replace her! No, I don't know who. But I'm sure it'll all work out! Somehow!"
2
Whenever I hear someone refer to the ACA as Obamacare, I always ask them "Do you mean Pelosi-care?" Because, more than anyone else, it would not exist without her.
Why has everyone forgotten how Obama pretty much abandoned the push to pass it right before it was successful?
2
We need to recognize that Republicans have a genius for campaigns of propaganda smears. We should have learned that from the sad example of what happened to Hillary.
1
Barney Frank once described Nancy Pelosi's speaking style as 'not good'. She sometimes would wag her finger at and scold her colleagues like they were unruly children. She raised five children before entering politics full time. Minor points of style that made her seem tone deaf politically. She remains the highest ranking woman and Italian American in our nation's history. She did a great job. I hope she continues as Speaker when the Democrats take back the House.
3
But you don't mention that the ACA had no public option and was written by the insurance companies. Nor do you mention that Nancy Pelosi was on board with changing the way COLA is calculated for Social Security payments--an idea from the right wing Peterson Institute. The problem with Nancy Pelosi is the same as the problem with HRC and no, it isn't their gender no matter how much the loyal NYTimes commenters want to make it that. It's her policies--they have become Establishment Third Way policies calculated to appeal to the donor class. If the Democratic Party can't go back to being the party of the Middle and Working classes it is doomed. Pelosi, like the Clinton's (and the Obama/Joe Biden wing) wants to promote social progressive ideas while pushing economic policies that favor only the wealthy. That worked for a while, it won't ever work again.
1
This is so totally ridiculous. Pelosi may be a good person. Who knows? But a great leader?
All of her so called accomplishments occurred when democrats held the presidency and overwhelming advantages in both houses of Congress Her “accomplishments” were so controversial that Democrats quickly lost the house despite the ongoing financial disaster created by Republican policy.
Idle idol worship
2
I agree that Pelosi was a very effective Speaker, and I suppose a lot turns on what you mean by "modern," but what about Sam Rayburn and Tip O'Neill? Just sayin'
Republicans don't do policy, they love to make fun of the way a person looks or suggest their gender or the color of their skin is a danger to the country. Nancy Pelosi is an elderly woman, the perfect target for Republican politics, the politics of ridicule and fear. Unfortunately their tactics work with many self identified Republicans who are angry at everything and Nancy Pelosi is a perfect target for their hatred. She has been an outstanding public servant but perhaps it is time to submit to ignorance and allow some new blood to carry the torch, change for the sake of change may be the best strategy for success. Considering the current political environment, winning is far more important than principle.
2
Its the same phenomenon that prevents much of America from understanding the damage that Trump is doing to the US - the right wing echo chamber that idolizes everything he does while quite literally demonizing everyone who dares speak against him. The damage that the likes of Hanity et al have done is unimaginable; I think of him and his ilk as traitors to the US.
3
According to a recent Times article, woman now make up 55% of the US electorate. Fifty-five percent! A full double digit lead over th other gender; so called, men. Now I'm well aware that 52% of white American woman voted for Trump nearly two years ago, and one of th main reasons was simply a dislike for Hillary Clinton in general. (Despite her standing up to Putin and fighting for issues related to motherhood and children.) Today, I truly believe, a significant segment of these same white-woman voters will not vote again for Trump. But as Dr. Krugman stated many times here, it's been woman in government that we often need to turn to in preventing th repubs from taking this country over th cliff. I'm not particularly fond of Sen. Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowsky but in many cases they look more like moderate Democrats than repubs.
So why aren't the Democrats marketing this factor more often? Woman are listening!
1
I think Ms. Pelosi has done an excellent job, but I also think she would do well to relinquish power should the Democrats regain control of the House. It is time for new blood and it will help if the Democrats remove such a tried and true target of the thoroughly corrupt and dishonest GOP (Not that her removal will keep the GOP from turning their Big Lie Machine on the new Spearker). If someone new does take over the speakership, I would hope that Pelosi will remain in the House and serve as a valuable adviser to the new Speaker. Of course, there will be those who will accuse her of running the show Wizard-like from behind the curtain. But that need not be credible if the Democrats are transparent in their dealings and decision-making.
If Ms. Pelosi did decide to retire from the House, she could leave having served admirably and effectively for many years. She is due a huge thank you for her service.
338
@Ellis6
If Nancy Pelosi retired the GOP would just choose another target for their lies and vitriol. I live in San Francisco, so Nancy Pelosi is my Congress rep. Most of us here are quite happy with her.
It says a lot about the GOP and its mindless followers that they have created a scare figure out of a 78-year-old grandmother who's been married to the same guy since 1963, and did not do fulltime political work until her youngest child started school.
6
@Ellis6 New blood? That reminds me of criticisms against Hillary Clinton: flawed candidate. Why new blood when the old blood has been more sustained in her effectiveness than any other speaker in recent history. Quit listening to the Republicans. And quit listening to people who just want to take her job without earning it.
6
@Ellis6 Agree completely. Everyone who deserves a turn for Speaker, or a chance at a turn, should get a turn. Nancy's had her turn, has overstayed her welcome, and I'm tired of GOP weaponizing her to diminish Dems. Please exit stage right, give Republicans one less weapon. New leadership is needed, and inevitable, the sooner the better.
Unfortunately, Pelosi has been MIA, similar to Schumer, in being able to daily and visibly loudly oppose Trump and his handlers' attacks on democracy. This is the time when those vaunted leadership skills are essential, and being able to wrestle air time and have a sustained presence on the airwaves. She may be a great parlementarian and legistlative in-fighter; but we need very visible leadership at this time - instead, there appears to be a vacuum. She also is vested in maintaining the old order, and that is pretty much how the democratic party has managed to remain in such disarray post-2016. There really is a need for succession planning, as in any successful enterprise, and there appears to be no successors among the younger generation of politicians on the left being anointed and sent charging out with the mantle of the D's. Professor Krugman delivered what should be the eulogy for a great politician; instead of attempting a rallying cry - in the latter, this article falls short.
2
As the saying goes: "Hard work will kill a man but just make a woman tired". It never ever ceases to amaze me that a woman in power receives very little press attention and when she does it is patronizing to say the least. The world needs more women to take the lead and speak out for themselves. The world needs to educate women because it is educated women who can and will ultimately make the difference and ensure a safer, more equitable society and a stronger middle class. Left, right or centrist. It does not matter. Women will make the kind of difference that Nancy Pelosi has made, unnoticed or dismissed. More women need to run for office and get elected. More women need to sit on corporate boards. More women need to be given the opportunity to take on relevant and important positions of leadership. If you want to balance the budget talk to a single mother who ensures her children have the necessities of life and balances her chequing account every month. If you want to get along in this world with other cultures and people who are different from us then observe how a mother helps her children resolve an argument - without threats of violence or unilaterally imposed trade sanctions. Too simplistic? I don't know about that. Seems to have worked for the survival of civilization. the hand the rocks the cradle rules the world.
The Republicans are sure to keep the house in their hands so Nancy Pelosi will remain the former speaker of the house. The Republicans are certain to win in the upcoming midterm elections which is good news for the American people. They have been reaping the rewards from the Trump administration and are most likely to vote Republican. They are seeing more take home pay in their checks due to lower taxes, a robust economy, job growth and their lives are rosier. With this additional money they feel confident enough to spend again and put it back into the economy.
What is not to like? As they say, if it is not broken, don't fix it. President Trump and the Republicans are sure making America great again and they could not be more pleased. He promised and he has delivered.
Amen! The Republican leaders are simply the leaders of what is now the Putin Fan Club and American Billionaires Club.
Who needs Republicans.. when any liberal with a brain would want her gone? Unless you're of the opinion that a coach who loses every year in record fashion , and never wins, is what you're looking for, and that handing the right wing it's biggest majority in a century is what we wanted, then it's only the big money manipulators like the NYT who support her. She's very profitable for them while we keep losing.
1
This Republican Congress and Senate has few if any talents, but they are good at slander and hate speech. It's in their bones, their dna, the water they drink and the air they breathe. Their kind has been around since the crucifixion of Christ.
Ms. Pelosi is a perfect target for hate-speakers. She's female, smart, tough and she's been around the block. She also knows a crook when she sees one. Republicans hate people like that.
Is it time for Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer to step aside ? It probably is. They've done their work and they deserve praise and honor. They should be the mentors for a new generation.
2
I'm pretty sure no one is afraid of Nancy Pelosi.
I love Nancy Pelosi.
There, I said it.
3
Right wing propaganda spent 30 years to demonize Hillary Clinton and last 10 years to demonize Pelosi. Unfortunately, many Americans fell for it. The chant “lock her up” is as unhinged and despicable as it gets. It reflects on those people as headless monkeys entrained to do whatever the master says.
The worst of it is that some liberals also fell for this scam too. What democrats need to do is to stand firm and reject lies about these women. That is the only way to undermine the effect of propaganda.
What democratic condidates need to do is to be more rational and not automatically reject Pelosi. If the question pops up whether they would support Pelosi for the speakership, the answer is easy: “I wil support Pelosi if her agenda is good for my district”, and go straight to issues, like health care, infrastructure, corruption in DC, etc. which obviously would place them and Pelosi on the same side. Any question on Pelosi should be the opportunity to go to issues that reliably are good for the country.
I often ask republican friends and family members “what in the world specifically is so evil about Nancy Pelosi?” They just stand there mumbling, with stupefied looks on their faces.
3
“The average household headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits, which is 41 percent higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household,” CIS’s Jason Richwine divulged.
But of course nobody is talking about this. The Liberal Democrats keep importing immigrants and we the taxpayers keep supporting them.
$6,234.00 X 12 months = $74,808.00 per family per year!
Nancy did not pass the litmus test. It is all over for Pelosi. We need someone dedicated to developing the new generation of Democrats. Pelosi is too power hungry to do that for the Democratic Party. Get rid of her. Thanks, Nancy. Buh Bye. You are too greedy and we need leadership ...not greedership.
1
"Looking at modern House speakers, then, Pelosi stands out as a giant among midgets."
While I vividly understand the message of this passage, I think you could have used an equally effective, less offensive word choice. You are using "midget," as an offensive word, to deride people. This is unprofessional and undermines your credibility in the eyes of many readers.
Pelosi stands out as a giant among ants. (Now you have alliteration!)
Pelosi stands out like a giant in a kindergarten classroom. (Now you are also commenting on their intelligence!)
To those who would defend the use of the word "midget," please check out the FAQ section of the Little People of America's website. Thank you for reading this.
If the Democrats haven't figured this out by now, I guess I'll have to give them a winning strategy for the upcoming election.
The Republicans have nothing, as this article summarizes, except the animus toward Pelosi. As Krugman points out History will judge her a giant among midgets; Nancy has nothing to worry about there.
SO!!! Keep her front and center attracting all sorts of invictive and rabble rousing from the Repubicans running for office. They have no other platform.
Then, on, pick the day in October, have her step down to pay more attention to her family. It will be her last great act.
And she can sit by the warm fire, purrring and feeling blissfully wicked.
1
Oh there you go again, Mr. Krugman, letting facts get in the way of a convenient narrative!
1
Thanks Paul Krugman for this article that has generated a lot of healthy and informative discussion. I'd like to see a full-blown piece on Pelosi that takes into account these Krugman points and points discussed in the comments section.
NYT? WaPo?
You need to invent and then focus the public's attention on an enemy that you can claim threatens your existence, just as Orwell presented it in "1984". Thus, the Republicans' invention of the evil Pellosi monster. They did this with Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.
Paul Krugman for president anyone?
Thanks.
1
greatest speaker ever -- love Nancy Pelosi!!!
I think Ms Pelosi was a good Speaker of the House. However, as a leader in her party she desperately needs younger voters to engage and to feel that the Democratic leader will be there to support their vision as well as the more traditional Corporate wing that Ms. Pelosi represents. She has chosen business over her voters.
This coupled with her outward resistance to confrontation with the Republicans has made her a less attractive candidate for Speaker should that opportunity arise in the near future. It's the old, "I think I'll bring a nice bunt cake to the next gun fight with the opposition".
Every now and then the Democratic voters want to see someone in their leadership willing actually wage a dirty war with people who only know dirty war.
2
As a life long Democrat I agree with you, Dr. K. And her list of accomplishments is impressive - especially compared against the republican hacks who lie and cheat the American public at every turn.
But she is 77 years OLD. And I can say that - I am old as well.
Senior citizens have to make way for new blood in a way that is planned. Hanging onto power at age 77 is planning for an emergency replacement instead of planning for the future.
2
The comparison of the Speakers is eye-opening! Also, I love the question, "Just what has she done that is so terrible?" Can't say that I've ever heard a fact-based answer. Thanks for the article.
4
Resistance to Pelosi is not necessarily about age or gender, but time. Time in office - 30 years! The very definition of a career politician. Time to make room for another generation of leaders.
2
Not afraid, just tired of. Zero to do with being a woman in power. Past her prime. And are the Dems even capable of producing new people to lead? And I don't mean a blithering and clueless Democratic-Socialist.
Trump made her a target and the others follow. Like sheep. As simple as that. Since she's not a white man it comes naturally to both Trump and most Republicans to believe she does not belong.
1
Anyone wondering why Pelosi is called divisive should just read how during an MSNBC interview the other day she called Mitch McConnell a racist because he asserted that "The most important thing we can do is to make sure [Obama] does not succeed." McConnell may be loathsome, but in no way can his statement be seen as racist. Pelosi is too careless with her words. It's time for her to step aside.
I am sure that Ms. Pelosi cries over her bank statements, as she sits on the front porch of her Napa Valley Vinyard Estate....mournfully not comprehending why all these deplorable people resent her Great accomplishments, her great sacrificies for the betterment of humankind(and the DNC,Inc a registered corporation that has little to do with actual "democrats").
2
"So this seems like a good time to remind everyone that Pelosi is by far the greatest speaker of modern times ..."
Sure, if "modern" is anything past 1994. The hyperbolic praise wears a tad thin once Professor Krugman defines the term many paragraphs later in his OPED piece.
One would think the term should connote occurring within the last fifty years, but with America's shrinking attention span, "modern" apparently can mean anything since breakfast.
2
The right-wing media play on the prejudices and general simple-mindedness of the low-information voter with easy to remember slogans and catch phrases.
That's why they use "Nancy Pelosi!" "Benghazi!" "Venezuela!" (two years ago it was "Spain and Greece!") "Anchor babies!" "Tax and spend!" "Persecuted Christians!" and other words and phrases as cues for their justifiably angry but not at all knowledgeable rank-and-file to focus their anger on precisely the wrong targets for their anger.
2
The only thing the Republicans are better at then the Dems is painting the Dems as demon seed through deception. The Pubs have mastered the art of the con. It is that simple folks.
1
If their names were Nate Pelosi and Harry Clinton, Nancy and Hillary would be hailed as great leaders. Misogyny, pure and simple, is behind the criticism.
1
Dems need new blood. Pelosi should stay in the House, and mentor a new speaker.
2
The significant fact about America's attitude towards Nancy Pelosi is the inappropriate visceral revulsion and hate directed against her. Paul Krugman could write a similar article about Hillary Clinton's accomplishments and the ensuing "inappropriate visceral revulsion and hate" directed against her. In both cases the emotional hatred is incommensurate with the alleged transgressions. Taken together these articles would indicate that the American public detests women who are strong leaders.
1
"...what’s so radical about protecting retirement income, expanding health care and reining in runaway bankers?" Everything about those socialist obscenities is radical, in the eyes of the Neanderthal gangster capitalists running the country since the advent of the Reagan Restoration.
1
“You have to pass it to find out what’s in it” Yes, she is a genius.
1
And if she had said that, your endless repetition of the same far-right nonsense would make sense.
1
@Shamrock, I remember tRump's campaign promises too! Mexico will pay for the wall! He promised! Healthcare will be so much better! He'll prohibit lobbyists! China will fall, humbled, to our feet! Yes, he's a stable genius. Oh, and here's the full link to Ms. Pelosi's much-maligned quote. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the-bill-to-see...
If you use your same sarcastic standard, mr. trump doesn't exactly cover himself in glory, but I expect his promises are soothing balm to you.
I always wonder which political leader is fully appreciated by the public.. Especially today and especially if it is woman.... We nearly had a woman President, Hillary Clinton. And, I read Pelosi is too old.... But we never hear anything about Trump's age or Bernie Sander's age or Jerry Brown's age.... Why don't we hear anything positive younger political leaders like Julio Castro or Cory Booker, or, another woman, Kamalia Harris and more..... It was a revolution to have Nancy Pelosi, (globally) a good speaker of the house when we had a black man for President.
5
Conservatives always bring a gun to a knife fight. It is time for the Democrats to stop playing nice. If Nancy can take the battle into their homes then she can stay. If not, then get new blood.
5
I have read accounts of life in the Soviet Union. Back in the 1930's--as Stalin was tightening his iron grip on the country.
And he too had a bogeyman.
Leon Trotsky!
Yes, there WAS a Leon Trotsky. Exiled from the USSR in 1929. Assassinated in Mexico City in 1940.
Yes, he and Stalin DID have policy differences. To say nothing of a profound mutual antipathy.
But this meant nothing to your average Russian. In 1935. In 1939. Whenever.
By that time, he had simply become a painted devil. A leering villain for the virtuous comrades to throw tomatoes at. Or punches. Or knives.
The real man (so to speak) had long since vanished.
Think TED KENNEDY.
Think HILLARY CLINTON.
Think NANCY PELOSI.
As ever, Mr. Krugman, your points are powerful and well made.
But the real Nancy Pelosi--just like the real Hillary Clinton--has all but disappeared. Replaced by a "painted devil"--a "leering villain"--an "abomination of desolation" lurking in that dreadful shadow land of the far left.
The Republicans are oh! so good at that. I hate to use an odious neologism like "demonize". . . ..
. .but right now no other word will do.
The GOP--the "Grand Old Party." They excel at "demonizing"people. A dreadful talent!
And oh yes! I agree. The Democratic party DOES need new blood. Younger faces. Younger men and women.
But the way you have vindicated THIS woman and her record. . . . . .
. . . .marvelous!
Thank you.
4
Pelosi is wily--give her credit for that, at least. Just yesterday, a reporter threw her a question--about the role of Socialism in the Democrat party. She artfully dodged it.
1
Trumpsteres need a villain. Pelosi is very effective
and I note that NBC has mounted a campaign
against her.
She is tough and the Rs can't stand it
word
1
The bottom line is she's great....
The GOP is terrified of her...and so try to destroy her
5
In today's political climate, we should make Nancy Pelosi bigger and scarier. The Government Owned by Putin (GOP) paint her as the scariest person in the world. Good. Let Nancy scare them some more. It was probably Newt and Rove that created the Pelosi Monster narrative. In every GOP ad here in Ohio's 12th District, Nancy Pelosi is a GOP dog whistle. Good! Let them focus on her and Democrats can focus on destroying Trump. Secondly, all the work that needs to be done to make this country America again. MAAA!
I think that the reason the right wingers attack Nancy
is strictly because she is a strong woman,a type that
they dislike because it goes against their belief that
men (particularly white men) should be in charge of
everything.And Nancy does not fit their world view of
a woman's place in society.
6
The GOP/Republicans are NOT afraid of the prospect of a "Speaker Pelosi".
They are terrified of a PRESIDENT Pelosi.
If the Democratic Party becomes a majority in the House...
....and if the Trump-Pence cabal is impeached....guess who would become president?
3
Very well said Mr Krugman.
Don’t forget Republicans constantly drawing out the last syllables of her surname into a sneer. They do that so consistently that one has to conclude there’s an entry in their manual about that, like their use of the term “the Democrat party.”
2
I agree.
She is the greatest leader the Democrats can follow. Democrats need corporately owned millionaire who has prospered using initial public offerings from her billionaire friends, and a voice for illegal aliens, NAFTA, LGBTQRS and whatever other gender(s) and sexual proclivity groups definable.
Please, all criticism of her is based on her gender. Don’t let her go.
Thanks you.
1
Thank you, Paul. Would you do me just one favor? Would you please walk around the newsroom, find every reporter that ever referred to Paul Ryan as a “policy wonk” and slap some reason into them.
Thank you.
At Last! I've been begging the DNC to do just this--point out, at every opportunity, that Republicans attack Pelosi because she scares them. Don't knuckle under to an attempt to do just what Republicans do to any woman of accomplishment--vilifiy, turn her into a witch like figure. Republicans turn any appearance of a woman in the public space into a walk of shame, and we shouldn't help them do it.
2
Thank you Dr. Krugman for speaking out in support of Nancy Pelosi whom even the Times at times falls victim to Republican lies demeaning one of our finest public servants.
5
She will alway be remembered as the House Leader who proclaimed to the world in th final passing of the Affordable Care Act that we would all find out what the bill entailed once Congress passed it. Well, they rammed it down our collective thoats and guess what? We still don't know what it all entails beyond the costs passed on to our dear children, grand-children, and their progeny: insurmountable debt. The word "affordable" in ACA is an outright lie. The same can be said about "care" and "act."
1
There are plenty of reasons to criticize Pelosi from the left, starting with her refusal to hold Bush administration officials accountable for their war crimes and illegal war.
Perhaps if the Bush team had faced consequences for their malfeasance we wouldn't have such a lawless President now.
2
For the Republicans, Speaker Pelosi's principal flaw is that she is a woman.
6
@Pat Choate Also, as far as Republicans are concerned, Pelosi's second greatest flaw is that she's a strong woman who doesn't suffer Republican fools gladly.
Finally! High time we give Pelosi her due. Dems should be championing and adoring this capable, savvy, powerful woman for all she has done.
All of the HRC and Pelosi haters should get a clue: this is what misogyny looks like.
6
Wonderful — thank you for illuminating reality yet again and giving credit where it is due. There are few more striking contrasts in politics today than the competence of Nancy Pelosi and the brutishness of Donald Trump.
1
All well an true but it misses the big point. The biggest danger to democracy is leaders who don't know when it is time to pass the baton. They litter struggling democracies around the world and they litter our Congress. When your core leadership is all in its late 70's the only thing that can follow is policy atrophy. That goes for both parties.
As to Democrats, sure Pelosi has been a good leader and Clinton was the better candidate but both have been around too long and collected too much baggage. Why are Saunders and Biden even in the field for 2020? The answer of course is money, the obscene amount of money that people like Pelosi and McConnell raise and thus make themselves unassailable.
It would be great if both parties employed an "Candidate Retirement Age", i.e. you cannot run again after say 72? Forces them to constantly develop new blood. The lasting legacy of Obama is his failure to develop a follow generation of leaders.
"The biggest danger to democracy is leaders who don't know when it is time to pass the baton."
That is not even in the top fifty biggest dangers to democracy. FDR didn't pass the baton until he was dead, and he was easily the most successful president of the last hundred years - not only that, but one who left the country far more *democratic* (in terms of a system that empowered and responded to the voices of ordinary voters rather than entrenched elites) than he had found it.
"I'm tired with this toy, I want a new and shiny one" isn't an argument.
I salute the achievements of Nancy Pelosi. After the mid term elections, it would be best for her to retire as the leader of her party in Congress. She is part of the old guard now and it is time for the Democrats to put the defeats of the Clinton campaign behind.
The country is in need of a fresh start. Trump's election was in part a cry for change and put aside old politics. That has been a disaster.
Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi should take on the role of mentors for a new generation to lead the party and country. They are all in their seventies and have had their turn. There are no strong candidates for future leadership while they hold on to power.
1
Nancy should cherish the republican hate because it shows how effective she is against their ploys. Personally, I find her to be too conservative. She is Clintonesque; more republican light than full throated liberal.
152
This country is TERRIFIED of tough, powerful women.
941
@Deb Paley
But based on actuarial tables they have only another 10 or 11 years to be terrified of this tough, powerful woman. And who is the woman who has been groomed to take her place?
3
@Deb Paley
conservative male politicians certainly are....
1
@Deb Paley I respect your opinion, but what makes you believe this? I'm sure it's hyperbolic, right? I certainly respect the heck out of my boss, and she's the head of a major hospital. Are you talking about politics only? Sorry to interject, but I was curious where you draw the line at powerful women. Also, it seems odd to be speaking for over 330,000,000 people. We have more powerful women in charge of industry and politics now more than ever before, and I see this trend continuing.
2
As leader, she lost the U.S. Congress to a bunch of thieves and Republican sycophants. Her interests are for herself and aimed at getting reelected. Time to go.
1
no one is afraid of her, we just despise her craven politics of money without representation.
1
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have personality deficits that are similar to Hillary Clinton's. Politics has always been a game appearance, style and charisma over substance. Sadly, people appreciate politicians "who they would like to have a beer with" or who look good in a suit or who can energize them with a speech. Presidents Clinton, G.W. Bush and Obama are examples of this. Clinton was smooth, good looking and had a common touch, G.W. Bush was hard to hate, he had the "aw shucks" demeanor and the black sheep of the family orneriness, and Obama was polished, intelligent and charming. Do any of these things make you a good president? Of course not, but they are what get into office and get the press to write good things about you.
1
“Pelosi has been untouched by allegations of personal scandal” I do not hate NP I believe overall she has been a great public servant, no $40K phone booths. However to say she has been untouched by scandal ignores the facts of the November 2011 60 Minutes report on how members of Congress, herself included, have personally benefited from insider trading and specifically in NP’s case being able to participate in Visa’s IPO which is rare and impossible for the general public to avail themselves. Again NP broke no laws but she has violated the spirit of insider trading laws. The Pelosi’s added 100 million dollars to their net worth over 2 years
2
After Ronald Reagan was elected, I stopped being a Republican except to vote for Bill Frenzel for the House and Arne Carlson for governor.
Given the current attack dog Republicans, calling Reagan St. Ronnie doesn’t seem far off the mark.
While I agree with everything let's not forget that Gingrich, Hastert, Boehner and Ryan are extremely low bars to clear.
1
So true, in every detail! Bravo P. Krugman!!! Just as bad as the media are the wannabe House speakers from the Sanders crowd, who join in the right wing accusation that Pelosi must go because she is divisive, even though any one of those Sanders clones would be to the Left of Pelosi and therefore an even riper target for Republican attacks. No good deed (and, in this case, no string of good deeds) goes unpunished, nor has fear of being a hypocrite ever closed the mouth of any aspiring ideologue.
4
As great as she is, she needs to retire and pass the baton to a younger person. Please vote in November.
1
But Dr. Krugman, how could the Republican propaganda machine resist? As a woman she helps consolidate the misogynist vote. As a centrist liberal, she reaffirms the worst fears of the evangelicals and gun rights crowd. As an older person, she assaults the sensibilities of those looking for more phyically attractive candidates and her pictures can be chosen to reflect her as a crone. And as a California native, what more need be said.
No, I am afraid Ms. Pelosi is damaged goods until such time as America decides it wants to get beyond the election criteria used to choose an elementary school class president. Given our current "president," I do not see this occuring any time soon.
1
It is indeed sad that Progressives, Liberals, Democrats, let alone old-fashioned moderate Republicans, increasing accept the practice of demonizing some female Democrat-du-jour.
It's the Republican 5-minute hate. They always need to manufacture one. It goes back at least as far as young Nixon using "pink down to her underwear" successfully on Helen Douglas (and think about the idiocy of that slogan -- the "down to" ... in other words she wears pink clothing but isn't pink underneath?)
And then as to the Democratic succession as house leader -- it's like the moment when the old male lion gets knocked off by the successor. It's not pretty, often "nature red in tooth and claw."
But all you young whiners out there; nobody gives it to you because "it's your turn." You need to prove you are stronger, more capable. And so far all we've seen is a bunch of children petulantly demanding that a child run the household because mommy won't let them eat ice cream and watch TV, rather than doing their homework.
Call me back when you actually have a real adult for the job.
The GOP goes after any woman who has or wants power, because that’s who feels threatening to the white male and self-hating female “base”. Hillary Clinton was very popular as a Secretary of State; the GOP propaganda apparatus only successfully demonized her when she sought the power of the presidency.
With that said, it’s time for the Democratic leadership to bring in new blood.
Every word was spot on. Pelosi not only was a great Speaker, but she should be acclaimed Speaker again. Perhaps though if is time to cement her greatness: destroy the Hasert rule?
Pretty scary to see the many attacks on Pelosi from those who would normally be considered sensible Democrats. First disconnect is that they are doing the bidding of Fox News helping trash those who have been taken on in character asassination (add to Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Bernie Sanders). I often wonder when hearing attacks on these prominent Democrats if the goal is to gain personal power without regard to the overall progess of progressives, or if it is yet another Russian calculation that the best way to insure Repub victory is to micro divide Democrats. Wake up and recognize that Democratic success is the thing progressives need. Divisiveness is a tactic of Trumpians.
2
“Facts are stubborn things”
To be honest, Dr. Krugman, you had me at “first …. she played a crucial role in turning back George W. Bush’s attempt to privatize Social Security”.
1
As a Navy Vietnam veteran ('65-'69), retired federal prosecuting attorney (1995-2010), and lifelong Democrat (I worked in George McGovern's 72' presidential campaign and many others), I'll be curious to see how the mainstream media (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and PBS) that helped elect Trump, covers the Republicans' warped version of Ms. Pelosi.
Indeed, I would argue that no one should be surprised when the same networks, and their highly paid "journalists", never mention during teh campaign any of Ms. Pelosi's accomplishments as Speaker. Indeed, in light of their pathtic performace during the 2016 campaign it should be expected.
1
She really has done a great job for the Democrats. The Republicans have been out to get her for years now, but for no real reason. (Or is the reason because she is not young and she is a woman?) When the Democratic politicians use her as their punching bag, they are in fact being manipulated by Trump and his Republican party of thugs and liars--or for those Republicans who know how bad Trump is but stand quitely on the sidelines, lets just refer to them as what they are--cowards.
When someone tells me he/she “hates” Hillary Clinton, I respond, “Please tell me exactly what she has done that makes you feel that way.”
No one has been able to answer, other than saying “Benghazi” (at which point I remind them that something like 11 separate investigations found she had no culpability for that tragedy, while the GOP denied about $200 million in emergency security funding requested by the State Department just months before the attack).
I’ll be using the same question re: Pelosi haters in this election season.
That said, I think Speaker Pelosi should make way for a younger Congressperson who will appeal to millennials. I’m just saying...
1
It’s a sad comment on Democrats and the Press that they let Pelosi and for that matter Hillary Clinton get their characters assinated by Republicans. In Hillary’s case they used bogus scandals like Benghazi ands E-Mails but with Pelosi they don’t even have that. Calling her ultra left while Democrats call her too conservative. Someone should run ads to set the record straight, they just hate women in power and they both fight to save Medicare, Social Cecurity and Health Care for all.
Not sure about the gender claim. I am a liberal and I find Ms Pelosi and Mr Schumer equally repulsive. They both are part of the TWO PARTY destruction of the American experiment of Representative Democracy. As warriors for their PARTY they acquire a stench shared by Mitch and Bohner/Ryan.
2
There is a small chance here for significant heroism. Why is Paul Ryan retiring? Presumably, at least, as a best option for his career, for making money, and some dissatisfaction with his position. So, why go out with a whimper? Why not go out on a truth-telling platform and go down in history as one of the few, one of the few in the era of Trump, to say - Enough! America cannot stand for this, this era of Trump. If he is afraid of retaliation, suck it up. Nothing of real consequence is ever attempted and achieved unless you are willing to put your job and reputation on the line. Trump may go after Paul Ryan, but history would record Ryan as a hero, and in the near term "the people" would flock to his defense. Truth still is "out there". We miss the truth. Folks will see it, appreciate it, and Paul Ryan will go down as having a core of decency, true American pride, and a conscience. He could achieve a "greatness" that has alluded him. He ran as a VP candidate. He rose to Speaker of the House. Do these mean nothing in the scheme of things? Yes, without integrity. C'mon Paul. Show your Midwestern roots, make them proud in Janesville and the world. Put on your Pelosi big boy pants. Be the hero.
Ms. Pelosi needs to stay right where she is. After helping Obama protect Wall Street from the economic disaster it created - and assuring the Banksters actually received bonuses for the catastrophe they caused, she continues to be the perfect corporate shill.
It's pretty obvious: the more scared of you they are, the more nonsense they make up to demonize you. And if you're a woman, double that (because they're scared of women, too).
2
Says something that they've spent very little effort demonizing Bernie Sanders, not just compared to the "establishment" Democrats like Clinton and Pelosi, but even compared to fellow "progressive" stars like Warren and Ocasio-Cortez.
The Republicans are a vacuous party. Their only selling point is that they are "tax cut virtuosi." They can cut taxes (Bush and Trump) with their hands tied behind their backs. They can cut taxes all day long, primarily because they hate government and have governed, esentially since Reagan articulated it, as the party who thinks "government is the problem and not the solution."
During elections, they take the country through the constant lie that taxes are unnecessary, unfair, or even evil, and must be reduced, a priori, as much as humanly possible. They win elections on that shallow and easy platform, instead of acknowledging the intellectually honest position that revenues are needed to fund the government, and that the argument should be, rather, about how much government is needed. Instead, they pump the cuts, demonize Democrats as leftists, liberals, communists and socialists, throw in a few cultural issues (Guns, gays (anti-gay), God), and surprisingly win a lot, considering their shallowness and lack of ideas.
How do they win? By demonizing a person like Pelosi, a person they would most likely not find in their church pews - a woman, no less. This election was as much about ending the potential "reign of terror" of a black man and a woman as it was about anything else. Those two are not liberals - don't lie! Don't kid yourself: these groups are literally fueled in their disdain of Pelosi. This is a deep culture war we live in.
1
Watching the GOP attack Pelosi is like deja vu all over again—only last time they had Hillary Clinton in the crosshairs. If, as Mr. Krugman points out, the only weapon the GOP has is to demonize the strong women in the Democratic Party, it’s mission critical for the media to NOT take the bait and make sure we hear the real story—not the “fake news” the Republicans have made up to smear and take down another good soldier.
Please give us more articles about the good work good public servants like Pelosi are doing and stop giving so much space to the bullies and narcissists of the GOP. I understand their unending audacity makes a great story but the media —including The NY Times—has given far too much real estate to the Republican Party and far too little to the Democrats who are waging war on this disastrous administration.
4
Yes, it was and is just because she is a woman.
2
This Nancy Pelosi who famously said "We must pass the bill to see what's inside the bill" the walking deer in headlights when asked questions on any given subject. That Nancy Pelosi? It was time she left the capitol and enjoy her millions made while she has been a civil servant. How does that happen by the way. Leaving a millionaire while serving in office?
Hail, Nancy Pelosi! She got the job done and she'll do it again! Don't throw out her wisdom and years of experience.
1
As part of their propaganda scheme, the Rightwing Noise Machine and its GOP minions personalize their memes so as to put a face on their shrill fears. This Emotional Boogeyman Technique works on children and the ill-informed, among others. Pelosi's turn is coming back.
Thank you, Paul, for this fine and necessary column. It's good to be reminded what excellent work Pelosi has done, especially when the GOP attacks her endlessly. The comparison of her record with the GOP speakers is especially damning.
1
Granted Nancy Pelosi is the greatest Speaker of the House in modern history (a worthy follower of Tip O'Neill), but she is old (78 years of age) and rich, and it's now time for a new broom to sweep clean. Far-fetched as it may seem, the present lame-duck Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, could become our president and commander in chief if President Trump and his VP Mike Pence become suddenly incapacitated. Ms. Pelosi isn't a boogeywoman, she's deserving of kudos and laurels and a blessed California retirement in the ultra-safe Democratic 12th C.D. opf San Francisco, Californial. If Democrats sweep Nancy Pelosi under their Mid-Terms bus, they will deserve the defeat they won in 2016.
1
She's also a prodigious fundraiser for the party.
We all know the reason why she is rately given the credit she deserves. People don't value women leaders as much as men, and that goes double for older women.
3
You never see Republicans running on what a wild-eyed lefty Chuck Schumer is. But a powerful woman? That’s viscerally repulsive to a large swath of Americans. Just a little thought experiment: If you are one of those people who really loathes Nancy Pelosi, I’d like to suggest that you concentrate on which policies she supports or opposes that cause you to feel that way. Now, see if Chuck Schumer supports or opposes the same policies. If he does, do you feel the same way about Senator Schumer? With the same level of intensity? If you don’t feel this way about Senator Schumer, why do you think that is?
If our media imagined themselves as junior high coaches or teachers, perhaps they would present Nancy Pelosi in perspective instead of echoing partisan attacks.
House minority leader Nancy Pelosi aptly personifies the typical all caring Democrat. She is the essence of what a Democrat is, just like a loving mother loves her children she loves and cares for all Americans. What does that say about those who vilify her?
2
Special Delivery to Paul Krugman: THANK YOU for saying what has been crying out to be said for a very long time.
Music to the ears!!
Are you listening, Speaker Pelosi?
1
Whether it’s something you like or not, until the Dems put forward a party leader not from a coastal metropolis, it will always be possible to belittle that leader as a cultural lefty. That’s enough of a taint that the conversation is over for a significant amount of the populace. She’s demonized as a SF liberal, and for Obamascare. Not fair you might say but that’s the reasoning. The article misses a few other things too. The repubs can run on judges and they will push that harder than anything. These are the touchstones. Pelosi is a commie they’ll say, and we got your judges.
PK also fails to point out the deficit decreases that cooperation between Newt/Clinton and Boehner/Obama brought. Those were broadly popular moves at the time whether you like it or not, and whether hindsight says otherwise about the outcomes.
So, no, she’s not GOAT. But she’s also not a pinko. She’s also not a liar (Ryan) or a cheat, and those are some pretty good things. But the article misses the point about house race repub campaign scare tactics: it’s all about her being an SF elitist and about abortion and judges, for those campaign hucksters.
The real story this fall is whether Dems has the guts to relentlessly campaign against family separation. The images of that governmental failure ought to be the centerpiece of messaging.
What a topsy-turvy through-the-looking-glass world. While the spineless Republicans refuse to stand up to America’s malevolent blowhard leader, the spineless Democrats refuse to rally around one of America’s most effective-ever leaders. Finding some courage would benefit them both, and us.
2
"Or maybe it’s just the fact that she’s a woman — a woman who happens to have been far better at her job than any man in recent memory."
Finally - the truth.
1
I love Pelosi...... but very few in the middle do. If the Dems keep her as their out front image they will lose to Trump in 2020.
"Or maybe it’s just the fact that she’s a woman" Yes, apparently! However, Democrats are strangely disengaged from the attitudes of the heartland of America. Democrats appear to be a “wine sipping” East/West Coast political party, not a national political party. Democrats come across as “soft” on the immigration issue be it legal/illegal, protection of sanctuary cities, the ridiculous Diversity Visa Lottery, and basically lax immigration law enforcement, even idiotic demands to eliminate ICE. Democrats lost its identity with its base with Bill & Hillary Clinton. Clinton sold the Democrats to Wall Street and Corporate America and then they both enriched themselves. Pelosi is TOXIC in the heartland; represents everything that is resented that the heartland despises, a multi-millionaire, San Francisco liberal. While agreeing with Prof. Krugman, the reality is that the Republicans will beat the Democrats over the head with Pelosi in 2018/2020!
"I'm not a member of any organized political party.... I'm a Democrat." Will Rogers
Rep. Pelosi does more for the American electorate in ten minutes than the Fellow Travelers of the Putin/Trump Fan Club have done in their entire lives.
Thank you for this piece, Professor.
Time for a new generation of leaders.
1
Well-said Paul, and it needed saying .
1
The last paragraph sums it up:
"It’s a sad commentary on Republicans that they have nothing to run on except demonizing a politician whose track record makes them look pathetic. And it’s a sad commentary on the news media that so much reporting echoes these baseless attacks."
Welcome to the Brave New World in which Money and Propaganda turn day into night and black into white.
I can't feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi when my own nation has been subjected to such relentless, baseless attacks for over 40 years, even by her own party chief in the shape and form of Hillary Clinton. The hostage crisis, in which no Americans were harmed, is supposedly more horrendous than the Saudi planned, financed and executed bombing of the Twin Towers and the Pentagon??? Yet Trump has been kissing the latter's backsides and threatening Iran with Hellfire and brimstone!
So, Professor, back to Nancy: She is merely just another victim of this new age in which truth is whatever Money decides it is. This is the Robber Baron, Capitalist ethos.
The Democrats desperately need a young, dynamic and fiery orator who can drown the Republicans in the Truth. (Pelosi doesn't fit that description).
And then maybe Iran and the U.S. can square away our differences and start a new chapter in a region decimated by players in The Great Game.
2
Ahhh, yes--here comes Krugman again--the nation's "debt-splainer-in-chief".
For the 8 years of Obama--as the administration was busily doubling our national debt--there was Kruman--excusing, pooh-poohing and assuring us that debt is actually good--an investment, he called it. In fact, when Obama's 900 billion stimulus program failed to pull us out of a recession, his expanation???....."it's not big enough".
And anyone who worried about our massive debt was given the derisive title of "Debt Scold".
Don't worry, said Krugman: the U.S. borrows in dollars--we are the word's reserve currency--therefore we can borrow, print and spend to our heart's content. We were told, as long as there is no inflation--all is good. In fact, anyone who raised a red flag about our obscenely mounting debt was just a conservative luddite who failed to understand Krugman's high-level economics.
But now Republicans hold the reins of power. Suddenly, debt is to be worried about again. Magically, we're no longer the worlds' reserve currency--or maybe inflation has reared its ugly head? Nope--none of that has changed--except that Trump is now in the White House.
Krugman has now flipped his hat around backwards. Instead of berating the debt scolds--he has become America's largest example of such. Hypocrisy at its finest.
One can only think Krugman's Nobel Prize was earned by the same level of merit as Obama's.
1
"And it’s a sad commentary on the news media that so much reporting echoes these baseless attacks."
And its even sadder yet that her party "leaders" won't speak out like you just did!
3
The ACA, the stimulus plan, and the Dodd-Frank bill were each such "half a loaf" measures that I'm not sure all three together make a baguette. That was what she accomplished in two years with a supermajority, before presiding over almost a decade of heavy attrition amongst House Dems. Compared to the GOP punchlines you referenced, Mr. Krugman, she is a giant. But she's no Tip O'Neill. I'm pretty sure that making this midterm election a referendum on Nancy Pelosi is a loser for Democrats. Let's look to the future, please.
1
Her center-left, have-it-both-ways-ism is what younger and lefter people dislike about her. Stop using misogyny as the excuse, that's deflecting.
The stimulus didn't go nearly far enough, even you've said that Paul, and the ACA was great but another half measure; and Dodd-Frank was yet another centrist/Wall Street lobbyist Frankenstein.
It is time for the Boomer generation to move aside, with heads bowed in shame at their inability to preserve the gains their parents afforded them. All but a few of the Millenial and late Gen X generations are faring WORSE than their parents.
If you don't get the rage and validate it Paul, well, I'm not surprised.
At this rate, the Times is becoming WSJ lite, with insincere "social justice" sops sprinkled over a status quo offering that preserves economic privilege. Stop prancing and get to changing the world like you should be.
1
I trust Pelosi far more than I trust renegade Democrats in Albany.
This column changed my opinion about Nancy Pelosi. Thank you!
Time for Pelosi, Hoyer & Clayburn to become the mentors for a new age of Democratic party leadership. They did what they could with some good success and an equal amount of failure, but it is time for new younger (in younger I mean in their 50s) leadership to grab the reins under the watchful eye of Pelosi, Hoyer & Clayburn.
I don’t know which is more tragic and infuriating - the Right’s demented and sustained, fully funded, creation of a demonic enemy, or their Followers’ unquestioning acceptance of this grotesque cartoon.
Millions of dollars spent on bald propaganda, or the apparent success of this propaganda?
The Right needs to invent demons, and has the financial resources to sell them. But must so many of our fellow citizens be so vulnerable to propaganda, so bereft of critical thinking skillis, so in need of empty validation?
The selling of Demon Hillary and Wicked Witch Pelosi have been successful because millions of Americans are incapable of independant, clear- headed thinking, and need to hate an “Other” in order to feel good. The Right has just the product to fill this desperate need.
America has a bad habit of letting older women be treated as objects of horror. Last week after Gretchen Whitmer's victory in Michigan's gubenatorial primary, the Detroit Free Press ran a comic depicting her as an unwanted bride, with deep wrinkles and other grossly exaggerated signs of aging dominating the caricature. Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi are treated the same way. Most criticism amounts to an unflattering picture given as proof of an insult. "How dare this woman be alive! She's too old to be a sex object! Recoil in horror!"
And yet this blatent sexism and agism is allowed to masquerade as political opposition. We need to call out this shameful behavior forcefully.
1
The last line is the key line for me: "And it’s a sad commentary on the news media that so much reporting echoes these baseless attacks." Nancy Pelosi is from my district and I have continually voted for her. I support Congresswoman Pelosi. I think she does a lot of good for San Francisco and for the country. Over and over I see her demonized by the political right in nearly pornographic terms. Am I wrong in having seen a Red State campaign ad where a candidate shoots her image with a rifle? I am certain I've seen unflattering photos of her with the slogan "San Francisco Values" attached. Why all these bigots are afraid of San Francisco is another subject, but I want to thank Paul Krugman for reporting the truth about Ms. Pelosi who deserves none of the hateful, ignorant propaganda being constantly spewed from the rear end of the Republican party. Also, I agree the press should be ashamed for so often repeating and magnifying it.
2
Too many of our fellow citizens aren’t paying attention
Exactly right, attacks from the right would happen to any high-profile Democrat. Look at Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, for example. These days, message-makers on the right seems well-versed in game theory, while the left plays seems to get sucked into their game, denouncing those like Pelosi who we should instead champion the pro-societal values she has fought for. Instead of taking the bait by reacting to every story and meme, empowering a base of blowhards in ever-shrinking GOP, we need to stand up and defend the values we believe in. Instead of reacting to message-makers on the right, we need to act according to our values and to play our game on our own terms.
1
Notwithstanding being a woman, Mrs. Pelosi never resonated with me as a mere citizen. I don't find her to be particularly articulate when she speaks about issues, and when she is finished, I feel particularly unconvinced. Maybe inside The Building she has a garment with a big "S" on the front and thus, is a force to be reckoned with. But as a guy in a neighborhood in a Midwestern State, I am particularly underwhelmed with what I see and hear from Mrs. Pelosi.
1
@Kiwi Kid, underwhelmed is one thing, and I am fine with that opinion. Visceral hatred not just of Nancy, but all powerful democratic women (which you do not express) is quite another. The media described Hillary as "flawed." Duh, we all are flawed. Watching and listening to her in November 2015 absolutely annihilate the right wing kangaroo court that was trying one last time to destroy her career, convinced me she had the internal core strength to be a fine president. My fellow americans? Either they missed this altogether or heard fox critique her performance and praise the likes of Trey Gowdy. Elizabeth Warren gets the same treatment. I hope and pray that the dems run a white straight male in 2020 or we are dead in the water. And I am a 60 something feminist who has dreamed of a woman pres since I was a child!
Thank you for calling out the media on this. Day after day we heard about Republicans - Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and always Trump, no matter how vile and corrupt. At the same time most of the news about Hillary was how much the Republicans hated her and endless repeating of their made up claims against her - Benghazi, uranium! The same is true with Pelosi. All we hear from the media, including the Times, is how much the Republicans hate her and what a liability she is to the Democrats. Part of the problem is the Democrats, who seem unable to get any kind of decent messaging, but a large part is the media's endless focus on Republican hatred with no mention of her successes that stimulated it. Wake up NYTimes, you are part of the problem.
854
@Eero
Excellent post. Thank you
4
The real question is how have the Democrats, with so much more to work with, better people, better policies, better records in office and just in general positions shared by the majority of Americans on most issues, managed to lose so many elections.
The answer, in case it's not obvious, is that Republicans make people feel good about themselves, while Democrats make people feel bad about themselves.
The day Democrats can overcome this flaw, they will rule for 50 years and the world will be a much better and safer place for everyone ...
1
Kudos to Pelosi, but it is time for her to mentor another if we are to keep leaders in the que. The elders in leadership just can no longer continue their paternal brow raising in the company of their colleagues, especially the gen next minority. Pelosi's age and public face do not serve the party well any longer. Saying so is not ageist, nor sexist, but like Feinstein, she needs help in recognizing it is time to concede and give sway to those behind her. Queen Elizabeth lingers while those behind her wander about the grounds. We need an infusion of new leadership.
Nancy Pelosi IS phenomenal. She is an asset beyond setting a capped value on. BUT, she, like many other seasoned and competent members of Congress could absolutely turn the tide this electoral season by doing this:
Not run for the leadership again. Do I want her expertise and experience? You bet, and we all would benefit from it. However, she and others should be supporting and grooming the next generation of leaders, acting as mentors to guide them in gaining that same expertise and experience that was moving our country forward so well before the era of Trump.
An added bonus is that the GOP would then have NO platform to run on in November!
Thank you.
The right looks for converts; the left looks for traitors.
Don't blame the victims! Vote!!
2
Nancy Pelosi would boost her party's chances across the board in the upcoming mid-terms if she would announce - now - that she will not attempt to return to the Speaker's chair if the Democrats win a majority .
I am a life-long Democrat, and agree with everything Paul Krugman says in this article. But, it's time to move on from the octogenarian leadership in the Democratic Party. Of course the Republicans are going to demonize whoever the Democrats elect, but the Party needs fresh blood in it's leadership. By the way, I am close to her age.
4
Yes. it's the woman thing. Nancy Pelosi has done a great job. I thought she was amazing as speaker.Diane Feinstein is another one the Democrats are pushing aside. She did something miraculous going around the head of the Judiciary Committee releasing the transcript of the interview with the head of the company that produced the famous dossier I hope the young woman I have heard about from California might be a contender to hand the baton to. I would like to see another woman speaker when the Democrats take back the House.
4
Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Krugman. Representative Pelosi deserves a great deal of credit.
4
Listen to Ms.Pelosi for any amount of time...and it's her hesitant, stammering cadence that gives a distinct reticence in her delivery. While this might seem superficial, its also important for voters, and belies her background and ability.
But it is that same fluttering cadence that makes her hard to listen to. As a Dem official complained, "she's like listening to a senior version of a valley girl, you want to grind your teeth".
Might be politically incorrect to say but speaking does count...and she does not exude leadership gravitas. But neither does Schumer. We desperately need a sea-change and no one appears to be on the horizon yet.
7
No doubt Ms. Pelosi's gender is a factor behind those who vilify her. Still, like many Democrats has she shunned the former bonds the party had with blue collar Americans. As a party leader she has lagged behind in responding to ever growing income inequality. She was right to defend immigrants - better to have taken the floor to question why wages for working Americans have stagnated for decades or why higher education that used to be relatively affordable now requires years of economic bondage.
Americans need higher wages. Democrats have to move beyond the party that just offers a better safety net.
3
"It’s probably also worth noting that Pelosi has been untouched by allegations of personal scandal..."
Untouched? Pelosi was middle class when she began her $196K/year job with congress. Now she sits on a $200 million portfolio thanks to her, shall we say, *timely* investments on IPOs.
Watch her meltdown when asked about her Visa investment while important credit card legislation (later defeated by Pelosi) was being considered by the House.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Peojn4VZalU
Remember the "swamp" that Trump talked about during his campaign? Both Trump and Pelosi are part of that swamp. The only reason the Republicans never attacked her on insider trading was that they engage in it, too.
So much so, that, in the spirit of bipartisanship, congress had to water down the STOCK Act in order to keep the gravy train rolling:
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496734/how-con...
9
While this is very superficial, Ms Pelosi has a way of speaking that can make others not actually understand the content of what she is saying. Mr Krugman is so right about how well she has done promoting the legislative process but her PR personna does not appeal to a lot of people.
2
What do Republicans have to run on? I agree that the reality of their accomplishments is bleak. But with a president unconstrained by reality, they will run on whatever rosy fantasy he makes up.
While Pelosi was a key leader of the Democratic Party, the Democrats lost the House and lost nearly 1000 seats in legislatures at the state and federal level, lost governorships, and lost the presidency to Donald Trump.
Winning and holding the House is actually Job One for the minority leader.
Building the party nationwide is the job of Democratic leaders, including her.
She has accomplishments, yes.
She also has a massive record of failure.
Let’s not pretend that her failings are just made up.
8
Great article! I think Nancy Pelosi has been painted by the same brush that was used on Hillary Clinton. Strong, uncompromising liberal women seem to favorite targets of the far right GOP and the far left extremists as well. I really hope she will be the next house speaker, and that calm, maturity, righteous ethics, common sense, decency and intelligence will be restored to American politics.
3
Finally! But why did it take so long? And why does Paul Krugman not mention the democrats who are running against Pelosi? That is by far the biggest problem. Watching them being manipulated by the the soul-less republicans into rejecting perhaps the greatest speaker ever, has made it hard for me to have any faith in them or to respect them. Do they not know their history?
I can't forget the brilliance and energy Pelosi demonstrated while getting the ACA passed. She was always able to clearly articulate the issues in interviews while somehow mediating between opposing groups. It was a tour de force performance and I don't remember seeing anything like it before or since.
The media has not treated Nancy Pelosi fairly. And, let's face it, the media has tremendous power. There is no question that ageism and misogyny is at work. Let's not wait until the future to realize it, finally, the future is now. We can't have younger politicians (and journalists!) disavowing their debt and relationship to the best of the democratic party.
If we do, we, and the future, will be Trumped.
15
The Democrats should be afraid of Ms Nancy Pelosi. In politics you're either an asset or handicap. It matters not the laurels you're earned, what long illustrious and successful career you have behind you, it only matters how effective you are in the fight today and tomorrow. Ms Pelosi was feared and respected by opponents and her side rallied behind her leadership, but no more. She is at least six years overdue for emeritus status.
3
Great article but what Krugman does not describe is how the so-called progressives have colluded with the far right to bash Pelosi, and Hillary for that matter. In doing so they helped to give us Donald Trump. They have also given the conservatives a generational lock on the Supreme Court. If progressives want a blue wave in the upcoming midterm elections they can't tug from the fringes to break up the Democratic Party but should move the party from the center. That is the way to victory.
15
@Martin I totally agree. These folks are sounding more and more "entitled" as they scream for younger, new blood. Just as being older doesn't disqualify one from public services, being younger is not an automatic qualifier. I hate to say it, but I am beginning to think that the far-right term of "snowflake" may be applicable in some cases.
4
Martin,
You have illustrated the issue.
The center isn't progressive nor moving left. They are happy to be status quo, establishment. Same old, same ol'. They are happy to cast dispersions and blame, whilst denying any malfeasance of their own. They, you, the centrists, are responsible for where the country and the globe are right now. Those you call, so-called progressives, can't afford to wait for centrists to open their eyes, or die out. When we do vote with you everything remains the same. Centrists have had control for decades now and things have not gotten better. You want to win? This might be a good time for you to move Left. Staying center right is a losing game. Many are done with that .
G'luck, see ya in Nov.
Thank you Paul Krugman for this wonderful editorial!
I have long admired Nancy Pelosi
as a miraculous gift to the American political landscape.
Both as a woman, who has raised a large family, and as a person who has stood by the American people, and a person of exceptional values, she is unmatched.
She has self confidence and obviously has good self esteem. This bothers some people who are threatened by this Wonder Woman.
How great to see her lauded instead of torn to pieces to suit some party’s desire to look better.
21
Women will vote in droves for a new U.S. Congress. And trust us, when we do, we will want to see a woman as Speaker of the House. If not Pelosi, then a woman from the deep Democratic bench of leaders that she has mentored who will use their power to work on behalf of working families and against all this corruption that currently plagues our country.
4
I am sorry so many Democrats treat her likewise, because they don't believe a well qualified woman deserves a position that a man could have.
5
@Andalucia Sorry, but I see no criticisms from Democrats in these readers' responses that have anything whatsoever to do with Ms Pelosi's gender.
I think it's Nancy's mannerisms that irritate white men more than her successes or failures. Here is one bit of criticism I would offer Pelosi and Obama. Was the ACA so important that it was worth the Republicans taking control of the House and Senate with the appointments of conservative justices and Republicans as the opposition party to everything else Obama tried to do? Personally, I don't think it was at least not at the time it was passed.
1
During the campaign for election, affordable healthcare was a signature issue for Obama. And it has been for Pelosi, too. I would suggest that it was the most important issue for many people, which is why so much was put into getting it passed, even in a flawed form. I know that it is why my family voted for Obama.
I have been saying for a long time that Pelosi is a masterful party leader, and it is appalling that so many of my fellow dems have fallen for the Republican and media meme about her. Even more than Hillary, she is a progressive and has been so for far longer than many who would disparage her.
1
@dbl06 I think the folks who got insurance and medical care might disagree with you.
@SyIt was and is flawed. I respect your opinion but would you agree it was the reason the Democrats lost the House and Senate?
"I mean, it’s true that she’s a political partisan — but no more so than any of the Republicans who preceded and followed her."
No more than is normally expected for a person at her level, really. A Speaker of the House is SUPPOSED to push for her party's priorities and help rally her party's legislators. It's not the only part of the job, it shouldn't override all other considerations, but it IS part of the job. It's not like she completely shut Republicans out of the process as they did to Democrats in the AHCA - she reached across the aisle to them multiple times, they simply weren't interested. Too busy "making sure Obama is a one-term president," in their own words.
Pelosi's partisanship is only unacceptable if you think it's horrifying and unacceptable for a politician to fight for the things that she promised she'd fight for to the people who've been electing her all her life. This is normal behavior for media pundits, though only when applied to Democrats. But there's something surreal about the number of *Democrats* who think "partisan" is a valid slur, not only on Pelosi, but on their politicians in general. If you're going to vote for politicians because they promise you things that you think are important, only to recoil in shock and horror when they try to deliver on their promise, because in doing so they made Republicans cry, then... quite frankly, you are too dumb to be talking about politics.
15
While Nancy Pelosi has been and will continue to be demonized by the haters, the exact same playbook worked well with HRC - having been attacked consistently for over 30 years, being portrayed in a very negative (and mostly) inaccurate way.
The Democratic party must stand tall, articulate their story and contrast it with the haters party line, as was done in this article.
If it were anyone else were holding Pelosi's position, particularly if a woman or person of color, they would be on the receiving end of equally negative depictions, regardless of their accomplishments. That sums up the haters only way to play the game.
6
What Nancy Pelosi did in the pasr in her role as Speaker doesn't matter now. She is still the face of an old leader. Babe Ruth was a wonderful ball player in his youth, but would anyone have hired him when he was in his 70s?
2
This wins the World's Worse Analogy Award.
1
@joyce: Really? You think that the reason there are no 70 year olds playing professional baseball is simply because of their age? This comment is pure unalloyed age discrimination.
1
@joyce
Your analogy is totally bogus. No, Babe Ruth would not be hired as a ball player in his 70's, but he might very well have been hired as a coach or manager and that's far more analogous to being Speaker. I might also point out that Pelosi is not resting the laurels of her past. She is still doing the job and quite effectively.
1
Paul didn't mention that virtually the first thing Nancy Pelosi did in 2009 was raise the minimum wage, which had remained stalled and stagnant for a decade under GOP legislatures, while corporate profits were soaring. Her first act was to give an economic boost to America's lowest paid workers, then she gave them healthcare. All that and more in two years. Yet the so-called working class demean her and vote for Republicans who are complicit in their own demise. Truly, those workers voting for Republicans are uninformed and deplorable. Pelosi and the Democrats, including HRC, were their champions, but they were too blinded by Fox News lies, and racism and misogyny, to see that truth. A lying faux billionaire 6-bankruptcy grifter who never paid an honest debt was to be their saviour from the liberal takeover of America. Right. Keep voting GOP America, and keep dying from self-inflicted wounds.
8
Nancy Pelosi has been a true American Hero, a patriot through and through, and a caring spokesman for a successfully balanced approach to politics.
She is someone with a spine. Her attackers, cowed by her mastery, are one and all spineless.
They will no doubt gang up on her the way they did on Hillary Clinton, fearful of a woman with power who knows how to do the right thing, and clear the obstacles of all opposed to her central vision.
I fear we will not see another like her in our lifetimes; we need a Young Pelosi, to pick up the banner she has courageously carried for a generation.
Better yet: an army of them.
May I see that before I die.
9
Nancy Pelosi also oversaw one of the most stunning congressional defeats in modern history. Losing both houses to the opposition and also entrenching long term structural deficits so deep Democrats are still digging their way out. Add to this her consent and support for the 2016 primary shenanigans that ultimately brought us Donald Trump and handed both houses to Republicans again. I'd say Pelosi's record is a little more mixed.
She has also proven utterly incapable of improving her public image. The media coverage is intentionally absurd. However, that doesn't change it's efficacy. Pelosi has become a liability to her party despite her record, good or bad. She seems woefully indifferent to the fallout caused by her own media persona. She no longer controls the message and that's a big problem for Democrats.
Finally, we need to talk about the Democratic hierarchy. The party has a gigantic problem when public figures aren't reaching the upper echelons of leadership until an age when they should be retiring. It's not ageist to say an 80 year old shouldn't be working a full time job. I'll extend this same criticism further down the line too. The only reason Trump's age wasn't more of an issue in 2016 is because everyone on the Democratic side was the same age or older.
It's an honest criticism to say Democrats have an age problem. Get some more people like Lamb and Ocasio-Cortez Start grooming them for leadership fast. Sorry but 80 is not the new 40. We don't have forever.
5
It is a sad commentary on the Democrats who have failed to defend her.
9
What irks me is how Democrats are joining in on this sexist disparaging of one of America's great legislators. They say they will not support Pelosi because...because...well just because.
Democrats have to learn to stick up for people who are being attacked by Republicans. The same Republicans who keep elected unqualified Speakers for decades.
15
Quality in the Writing and Quality in the Subject. Thanks for the Quality!
4
" Impeachment is off the table". That condescending statement, without the slightest thought of explaining WHY in 2006, is a reason I and thousands of progressives/liberals/sentient beings are wary of Pelosi. She raises tens of millions, but Bernie raised hundreds of millions. Her TV appearances leave one wondering why she is so valuable, she doesn't do well in interviews, and I agree with an earlier comment about her patrician attitude. She was the main mover and shaker behind the ACA, but where is it now.
The Dems have some young talent. Schiff, Tim Ryan, Swalwell. Let her teach them, but it is time to move on.
2
@johnnyd -- I also agree about her patrician attitude. She is well regarded by coastal "elites" (her choir), but I suspect that she doesn't come off well among the working classes of the midwest and south.
1
@johnnyd writes, "She [Pelosi] raises tens of millions, but Bernie raised hundreds of millions."
Apples and oranges.
Pelosi raised $40 million plus for other democratic candidates last year and $16 M more in Q1 2018. This money was given to the DCCC to support Democrat congressional campaigns.
In 2015-2016, Sanders raised over $200 M, but it was for his own presidential campaign. That money was not spent to staff, advertise, or otherwise support democratic congressional candidates.
More recently, a few democrats, like Beto O'Rourke, have used the Sanders donor network to raise funds ($6M), but the Sanders' political operation parallel to DCCC, i.e., Our Revolution, has contributed substantially less funds to democratic candidates. Sanders himself is feuding with the DCCC, and hasn't apparently supported it financially.
1
@johnnyd
You may agree or disagree with her position on impeachment, but I fail to see how it is "condescending". In fact, in my opinion, it is absolutely the correct position AT THIS TIME. However emotionally satisfying it might be for you there would be little political advantage and it could very well backfire in a big way. We won't be any better off with Pence as President or with Trump as a martyr.
1
Your concluding paragraph could also apply to Hillary Clinton. Republicans have shown they are shameless in their demonizing of extraordinary, competent, and effective female leaders.
14
Nobody's afraid of Nancy Pelosi. Ditto for Hillary. Double ditto for Maxine Waters, triple dittos for Pocahontas. Therein lies the problem. Once you allow yourself to be defined by your opposition, you'll be playing catch up forever. They've all become convenient piñatas regardless of their impressive credentials.
While this is an obvious oversimplification of the situation, I believe there's more than a wee bit of truth to it. Yet this supposed fear factor works for both sides of the aisle. Think Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin. Both love 'em or hate 'em politicians.
1
Palin and Bachmann are poor comparisons - neither ever showed the stature, intelligence, capacity for work, credibility or even the concern for the welfare of the country and its people as Pelosi, Clinton, Jordan, Lee etc or even Republican women like Collins, former Senator Snowe or Murkowski.
Republicans are afraid of strong women, that is why they promote the type of women they do. Those who won't challenge male hierarchy like Palin, Bachmann etc. Women they can call 'hot' who can be considered sex objects, not women who know and talk knowledgeably about policy and who know when to charm and when to twist arms.
@Guido Malsh Neither of your examples are worth a moment's thought. There is a real good reason that neither of those people have been heard from in years
She is a great leader. Republicans don't know how to lead because they are lapdogs to the Kochs, Mercers, Sinclairs, and let us now add Putin.
I hope she can find some worthy young Democrats to move into leadership positions. The The Democratic leadership in Congress averages over 70 years old, and that accounting for Conyers now being gone.
1
Pelosi's eight-plus hour speech for Dreamers was another fine example of bringing caring strategy to government process.
11
Well said, sir. Thank you. The scapegoating of Nancy Pelosi by a cadre of young (and older) democrat candidates has been shameful and divisively demagogic in it's pandering to perceived support by an electorate all too mesmerized by republican propagandizing. Should (hopefully) the democrats re-take the house, the matter will be addressed forthrightly. But, for primary candidates to campaign on ostensibly removing her from the speakership before the battle is even engaged is yet another sorry example of the democratic party stupidly shooting itself in the foot. Enough!
Again, thank you for this column.
SL
4
Don't you think that a little rejuvenation would help the Democrats?
Sorry, but the past of Nancy Pelosi is of no relevance to the future - times have notably changed since GWB...
And one more thing - 78 yrs is enough for retirement and no longer enough for politics - look at the current president.
4
Regarding her accomplishments, she was a Dem speaker when Dem policies were being enacted and idiotic Repub policies were being opposed. OK. Was it her unique political gifts, or just the fact she was the Dem leader sitting in that seat at the times? Some of both I suspect but I'm no insider.
But the present crisis is about far more than her accomplishments, even if we don't quibble about them. I get it that in a perfect world you don't let an irrational idiotic minority dictate the terms of debate. But far from living in a perfect world, we live in a country in existential crisis heading down the road toward worst case scenarios that you don't need to be much of a student of history to anticipate. I say you take every single talking point away from the idiotic minority, and if that means that a septagenarian politician should step aside and hand off to a new target who at least for the time being is not a dog whistle to the irrational idiotic minority, then so be it. I think Ms. Pelosi is a patriot and I think she has and/or will figure this out. But meantime, in response to her assertion that "I'm worth it" my answer is "no ma'am, you are not."
1
Now idiotic Republican policies are the law of the land. Happy? I'll take Pelosi any day over the failed and feckless GOP alternatives.
1
The GOP has pushed the Democrats around for the past 50 years. We need leaders who will fight back, Nancy, I hope that will be you.
10
Her lack of scandal should make it easy to run against Trump corruption.
2
She needs to take one for the team.
Pelosi's idea of democracy is "you'll vote for who we tell you to vote for" and through this brilliant strategy she has presided over the Democrats losing ALL THREE branches of government, despite holding a nationwide numerical advantage! Way to go!
1
attacking a powerful woman no doubt resonates with part of the Republican faithful; there is Bengazi and Pelosi to show how dangerous Democratic women are.
But deep down the personal attacks are just modus operandi for the Right. Demonize the opponent, get the base seething with anger, then go ahead and do what you want after the election.
Anyone remember swift-boating? The base hated Kerry as much then as they do Pelosi today.
2
Great article. She would make a great President
1
Dr. Krugman, the problem is not Speaker Pelosi's achievements; they are and would likely continue to be remarkable. Nonetheless, there are two real problems with Ms. Pelosi.
The first is that up until recently, she and the Democratic party have let the Republicans control her narrative. You'd never know that Ms. Pelosi was *not a 'wild-eyed leftist' because there is no counter-message. Shame on the Democrats, but there is nothing they can do at this late date to undo the endless acid of right wing invective and rehabilitate her image. This should be a warning to Democrats; do not let character assassination go unanswered. Go in hard and go in early with the countermessage.
The second has been Ms. Pelosi's inability to rhetorically outdo her bombastic detractors. She is calm and didactic and therefore has no reasonable chance of being heard when the floor is held by simpletons with memorable catchphrases. This problem belongs to Ms. Pelosi.
Michelle Obama to the contrary, the "high road" is littered with the bodies of Democrats turned out of office. It's not enough to be successful, you have to be forceful, eloquent, and self-promoting. Are Democrats getting any of this? Finally?
1
Thank-you, Paul Krugman. This massive disconnect between Republican smear and the people they attempt to tear down truly must be resolved by diligent reporting which has been sadly and shamefully lacking.
Finally, someone supporting a true American patriot.
Thank you, Paul.
1
The Republican anathema to Nancy Pelosi is the political translation of this legal maxim: "When the facts are against you, pound the law. When the law is against you, pound the facts. When both are against you, pound the table."
Championing policies relentlessly crafted to comfort the comfortable and afflict the already aflicted, Republicans project demonic powers onto Ms. Pelosi. They do so because they need nothing so much as an enemy to rouse their pliable followers, the sham of a tax bill and destructive trade policies having been exposed for what they are. Gays, guns and God are a bit long in the tooth and not the bright, shiny objects of the past.
Robert Mueller's investigation is not a witch hunt. It is more of a WARLOCK hunt. The Republicans' actions are most certainly a witch hunt, in which they are calling out their witch Pelosi amid the coven of rising Democratic women on the crest of the coming wave.
Dr. Krugman should be out giving speeches to the voters, especially those who get all their information from Fox News. Here he is preaching to the choir.
Finally!!!
Speaker Pelosi is the most effective speaker the Democrats have ever had. That is why Republicans despise her and make her their boogey"man". They are terrified she will become speaker again and actually get things done.
7
She’s tough and a woman - people still have a hard time with that combo
1
Every once in awhile, someone has to state the truth.
Krugman does it.
Thanks.
In your next article could you give us a run down on the young guns that want to replace her, unless they've already been defeated in the primaries. Let us hope any potential speakers have the acumen and political savvy of Nancy Pelosi.
1
It is interesting that the Republicans have decided that after demonizing Hillary Clinton, they should demonize someone who is i) female, ii) not very charismatic, iii) highly competent. Hmmm. OK, we get it. The Good Old Pale guys do not like smart women. I just hope the electorate can see through this flim flam.
2
"It’s a sad commentary on Republicans that they have nothing to run on except demonizing a politician whose track record makes them look pathetic."
OK, that's what they did to Hillary Clinton, and, alas, successfully as it caused any number of bien pensant Democrats to stay home in November 2016 because the Republican smear machine had succeeded in convincing them that she was somehow a worse alternative to Donald Trump.
But Krugman should someday write a column about what the Republicans, in their boundless lack of shame, are trying to do to Nancy Pelosi!
Pelosi was never on the covers of Time or Newsweek when she became the first woman speaker ~ but Boehner was, because ??
She said she'd have retired had Hillary won.
Pelosi gets guff from some on the left, too, for not being far enough left.
As the New York Times is providing delayed recognition of influential women who did not have obituaries in their time, it's nice to have some belated appreciation of Pelosi.
4
It is unfortunate that it is Krugman who chooses to remind us of Pelosi's accomplishments. Where are the Democrats? Where were the Democrats? In the advertising world, if you don't brand your product, your competition will....and not favorably.
Perhaps someday the Democrats will wake up to this fact. And then again, perhaps they won't.
3
When GWBush and cronies lied their way into the Iraq War, Pelosi “took impeachment off the table”. There was no determined serious investigation by congressional committees of the decisions by the the Bush admin. We needed “to move forward “ .... and look where we moved to.
This. And add to the list of sads: the Democrats who turn on Speaker Pelosi and join the chorus of Republicans who want to diminish her record and see her gone. The Democrats do it to polish their "progressive" cred, the Republicans because she's effective, and even worse, a woman.
Let's not forget her oft repeated "Impeachment is off the table." Perhaps we could have suffered less under that other republican con man George W. Bush who was clearly guilty of treason (war under false pretenses).
1
Every election cycle the right dusts off their old Pelosi photos and liberal bashing phrases to campaign against her “brand.” She is an easy target in red states. She is a woman and a liberal. Yet her actual record of accomplishments speaks volumes about her commitment to health care, the environment, social justice and improving the lives of average Americans. No wonder the right goes to such extremes to vilify her.
1
Nancy Pelosi is glorious. She's the one who held the Democrats together and delivered Obamacare to America. There should be statues erected of her, and schoolchildren should know her name and of her power. The Republicans attack every strong woman Democratic politician, and stupid, ignorant, people (including young Democrats) believe that pernicious baloney is true. I'm sick of watching the concentrated attacks made upon women leaders who don't sell their vote to rob the world for Republicans.
1
I saw NP on MSNBC this week, she is not a moving speaker .She has been be a great Speaker of the House, but the D party needs a firebrand who can go toe to toe on dueling interviews with Trump. Eliz. Warren can do that, and this week Michael Avenatti did it too. Many of the long serving D’s just parse their words too much. I completely agree with Avenatti that the D’s need to hit back harder, (obviously with facts not made up junk like Trump) but to be scathing with thetruth.
I want to see the NYT and the other MSM cover Avenatti as often as they did Trump in 2015 and 2016. That means that the story about Avenatti in Iowa from 8/10 should still be on the front page of the website , not buried where I had to search for it.
3
Thank God! Someone finally said it. Aside from her gender, I have not read a single criticism of her that refers to ANY action by her as Democratic leader. Nothing. Oh, yeah, she supports Democratic positions. There's that.
5
No ones afraid of here but Dems and republicans just want her to go away.
It's certainly unfair that Ms Pelosi is labeled as "divisive" and "difficult" because she is a woman. But let's not forget that she's ancient and a career politicians. Sorry Baby Boomers...but young blood, please.
1
I'm still waiting for the "clean Congress" she promised us.
Yet another spot on analysis. Too bad so few Americans read real news and real commentary.
Thank you Professor Krugman. You a calm voice in the midst of a storm.
You hit the nail on the head: "maybe it’s just the fact that she’s a woman — a woman who happens to have been far better at her job than any man in recent memory." Nothing more need be said.
In other words we're dealing with the same two points that seem to forever be laid at our doorstep - white males can solve everything and woman - and staring us in the face once again are too much of the one and woefully little of the other.
Women have come of age since they started in the 1970's gaining traction to lift our country out of the ridiculous morass we find ourselves in. And the one area we have never given them the opportunity - "governing." What sweet irony that women - the group that the president always considered his plaything - is now signaling his demise. We don't need fawning of this president. We do need women and quickly.
Certainly Pelosi has done some things. But that is merely partof her job and precisely why her constituents elected her. Despite her individual and signal accomplishments, the two-party system is irreparably broken, corrupted by its utter dependency on lobbyists' money. Those of us who actually read the Federal Register know how securely the multinationals hold onto their hegemony of the United States, regardless of which shambolic party projects its personality cult holograms and pretends to rule...
1
It's the same anti-woman rhetoric used against Hillary Clinton.
We are still back in the 19th century.
Dr. Krugman is defending the past, in vain hopes of sustaining Status Quo. A Status Quo with its foundations cemented years ago, circa 1932, as the New Deal.....now the Old Deal. USA has transitioned from its Socialist Era. Socialism basicly only valid for an Industrial Scale Mass Production Central Planning type economy.....but ill suited for what is now Established in the Modern Era.....the Distributed Electronic Peer-to-Peer Global Economy....the grows more complex by the minute......once a Uni-cellular "American" Standard Global Economy....its now fast evolving into a Multi-cellular Network of Trade Unions that must enforce various standards amoung themselves....alternately competing and cooperating with one another. People like Krugman and Pelosi cannot comprehend this....as they come from rigid training that was necessary decades ago, they can no longer adapt to Modern Times.
Ms Conway on ABC Sunday morning gave away the GOP's "Grand Strategy" for Nov., bury Mueller under Steele, save America from the Socialist menace, and stop Pelosi.
While pointing out that she is primes inter pares among past Speakers is all fine and good, the election is about the future. Contrasting her to Trump in the future is not a good play because Trump is surrounded by too much Old Noise, and GOP House candidates can say 'grapes to grapefruit'.
However, since Mr Jourdan has jumped the starting gun, and has a juicy record to mine, there is the compare and contrast to work out. Who would most Americans prefer? Force GOPers to talk about who they will have. Fog the issue until it disappears in favor of real concerns.
(Socialism is perhaps a harder nut to crack...how about three billboards outside every big town. Based on like, for SS, 'these geezers didn't save enough, why should we have to pay? Social Security is SOCIALISM (IT IS!). The GOP will kill it'. And such, forcing the GOP to answer.
And socialism goes byebye as an issue
As for Steele, if a meeting in Trump Tower equals collusion, what do serial secret file dumps to Steele equal? Run, don't walk, from such a Grand Strategy in this election.)
The Republicans are not good at governing but they are masters of demonizing their opposition, especially women, as Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno could both attest.
1
Yeah ... simple and true!
Amazing how hard it is to say that in the current environment.
2
Bravo to you and brava to Pelosi for the courage of conviction that is lacking in the Republican Party and their sad leaders
Thanks Paul Krugman for generating much informative discussion. NYT or WaPo, how about a substantive article on Pelosi that takes into account these Krugman points and points discussed in the comments section.
Demonizing and smear tactics have been the GOP stock-in-trade since as far back as FDR.
@Unconvinced: The great mystery is how such transparent dishonesty and outright sociopathy endures and metastases.
The attack Ads of GOP against Nancy Pallosi is the reflection of state of American Culture - at least a major section of WAPS culture. Hate woman, specially accomplished women. It is necessary to look deep inside this psychological impediments of this culture. Historically no other culture has used woman as objects as it happens in America, and there is no shame for this crime. The elites of the WAPS culture fight for human rights and equality of woman in the world, release reports of failure of other cultures but American WAPS culture never looked to its state of mind. American Corporations earned millions of dollars by perfecting this act of woman as object. As women become now visible on political leadership - the same culture is extending to political strategy. No rational analysis can change it - it is a mental disease. Nancy Pallosi is one of the great speaker of the house, but to large section of white voters her crime is she is a woman.
Nancy Pelosi may have done a great job, but at the end of the day the Democrats must have someone out front who millennials, minorities and other voters, can relate to and get excited about.This is not Nancy Pelosi.Trump got elected because he fit this description.The Dems. need their own version of the Trump approach.Still possible with a good platform and good ethics.