Wheeling and dealing. Being a master of that is hardly a qualification to lead a progressive agenda. Her top five donors are: Facebook, Sslesforce, Amazon, American Hospitals Association, BlueCross BlueShield. Please tell me why these people have any incentive for the house to pass legislation improving access to public healthcare, regulating big tech and big data, getting rid of Citizens United? With Chuck Schumer and his ties to Wall Street added to that no regulation for financial giants either.
Please Bernie, run in 2020 and clear the swamp for good.
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are only marginally better than their GOP counterparts.
Our citizens stopped thinking and they have lowered their expectations so much that these type of leaders are not even questioned for their raison d’être.
3
This is not the time to kick out Nancy Pelosi. We need her vast experience and no one can come up to her. Time for the new people later when things are more settled. I am sure she will welcome a rest. Just not now.
4
The vote for speaker is mirroring the 2016 election in some troubling ways. It seems that women Democrats are being held to an impossible gendered double standard by progressives.
In 2016, HRC arguably had the *most experience* of any modern day presidential candidate to date & she lost to the *least experienced* man to ever run for the presidency.
Like HRC, Pelosi is being unfairly punished for simply being a woman with a long & successful career in politics.
The arguments against Pelosi made by new Democrats just repackage the inane argument of GOP voters that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Pelosi simply knows more about Congress than a freshman representative that barely won their district. Sure she’s made mistakes, but who wouldn’t have a few missteps on their record with 40 years at their job and not screwed something up every once in a while.
In my opinion, this just all boils down to insidious sexism within progressive politics. According to the Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren contingent of the party, Oprah is not experienced enough to lead the party, but women like HRC & Pelosi are “too experienced.”
7
While I am a progressive, I think the deal to open up more bipartisan participation is really important. I yearn for legislators who will work together to find ways to get to "yes".
Also, I want the Dems to avoid overreach that could make this victory short-lived. The truth is, we are a nation divided. That has taken and continues to take a huge toll on us as individuals and as a country.
I'll enjoy watching Nancy Pelosi enlarge coalitions and successfully address the neglected needs of those who are less wealthy, including those who need Social Security and Medicare reliably available. If she and the Dems can't do that, heaven help us. If she can, I believe we can whittle away at the persuadable portion of Trump's ~38% base that is learning Trump isn't really making their lives better.
3
I agree we need to groom new Democratic leadership as Pelosi and her generation get older. But these dissident Democrats' effort to sideline them altogether is incredibly short-sighted. Anger and indignation can only get one so far when faced with an immoral and selfish opposition party. And as we learned from the Obama era, sheer optimism and hope are also effectively stopped in their tracks when you're facing down a hostile and irrational party.
Like it or not, politics is about deal making which requires experience, insight and the ability to know when to give and when to take. These younger Democrats need to quit treating people like Pelosi as the enemy and instead learn from them as much as they can--keeping the useful lessons and discarding the rest in favor of the new generation's approach. It's irksome that these young Democrats have so completely bought into the Republican propaganda against Democratic strong women like HRC, Pelosi, etc. that they forget that these women are the very same people that paved the way to even make this incredibly diverse incoming class of Democratic congresspeople possible.
12
@EM
New blood is needed. Grooming of new leadership by a failed leadership is going to bring more of the same.
Ask yourself why we got into a situation where Trump is a President, McConnell and Ryan are the congressional leaders, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh in the Supreme Court? Who was the House Democratic leader? Who is the Senate Democratic leader?
HRC lost because she was a flawed candidate. Not because of her gender or her looks. She lost because she was not credible, she lost because she was hardly any different than the Bush clan and she lost because she was in bed with the 0.1 percent. She lost because she took 600k for two 45 minute speeches to Goldman Sachs while pretending to be for reform.
We want progressive leaders to implement a progressive agenda. Pelosi is not even close. It wouldn’t matter if she was 40 not almost 80. This has nothing to do with gender or age.
3
@Blunt
Why Trump was elected and the GOP is currently the state it's in has been the subject of numerous op-eds that continuously propose various theories: Fox news, white privilege, the economy, the Southern strategy, election of the first black President etc. Pelosi and her fellow long-time Democrats are not the cause of that mess.
Pelosi and HRC are not perfect but neither are they evil and corrupt as some alleged "progressives" characterize them. Some people on the left forget that Pelosi was instrumental in getting the ACA passed. While people complain that it doesn't go far enough (and I agree), the fact that it was passed at all is a monumental achievement in itself. Progress often comes not in leaps and bounds but in painstaking baby steps. It's easy to come up with ideals and goals but in our politics, it's difficult to implement them when you're trying to rustle up votes from congress people who represent varying and conflicting interests across the nation. It’s naïve and simplistic to think that a political newbie can achieve anything significant based on pure progressive ideals alone.
By the way, Pelosi has the overwhelming vote of most of the Democratic congress people who were themselves elected by their constituents. Alleged progressives trying to push Pelosi out are basically telling Democratic voters that they know better than the rest of them despite the majority support for Pelosi. That’s arrogance at best and tyranny at worst.
2
Always putting nation and party first. Good on ya', Nancy!
"She had previously argued that imposing term limits on herself would weaken her hand. But in agreeing to do so, she will pick up seven votes,"
Now we have a winner - weakened - but hey - It's Nancy and we all know how important $HE is!
1
Nancy Pelosi's promises to fight for lowering the Medicare age (or any other promises) are completely empty, If she implements pay-go rules - as she has indicated she will.
Nice. She gets to make promises to help the middle and working classes - knowing full well that pay-go will ensure their failure, no matter how hard she "tries".
"Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has made the public a big promise, vowing to handcuff her party’s progressive ambitions, including in the event that a Democratic president succeeds Donald Trump, by resurrecting the “pay-go” rule that mandates all new spending is offset with budget cuts or tax increases."
http://cepr.net/publications/op-eds-columns/pelosi-would-sabotage-progressive-agenda-with-pay-go-rules
With friends like this... Let alone *leaders* like this... Who needs Republicans?
4
Love the progressive agenda, but I also realize that with Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of the Senate that it's more pipe dream than reality. What I, a progressive Democrat, who is the same age as Mrs. Pelosi (78) wish is that she'd agreed to replace her two 79-year old lieutenants with younger, more energetic, progressive voices who would be ready to lead the party when she steps down. I know the ravages of age having a very sound mind, but a body that lacks youthful vigor, energy, and flexibility. Moreover, this is the time to bring in the next generation so that you can mentor them. That's the real change that may haunt the Democrats in the future when less experienced leaders will have to take the place of this geriatric trio.
9
Nancy Pelosi is one of the most effective Democratic leaders that we have. If she wasn't the Right Wing wouldn't spend hours upon hours attacking her. She knows how to get things done and she is a dynamo when it comes to raising funds for the Democratic Party. Yet, Nancy does need to mentor and bring along younger members of her Party. Here's hoping Nancy stays Speaker of the House and that she also paves the way for the next Nancy Pelosi to take her place. It will give the right wing someone new to go after in their endless quest to smear and quash the most effective fund raisers and contributors to the Democratic Party.
33
I have a feeling things will get interesting in a couple of weeks.
WHY would she make any type of a deal to assure the vote of ugly Dan Lipinski, Illinois' sole vote AGAINST the Affordable Care Act - also the sole Democrat vote against ALL legislation having to do with women's and LGBTQ rights ?
1
This just in: politics is compromise.
10
Such a pleasure to see someone act with intelligence and expertise after watching two years of a no-nothing, whining man-baby pretend to be president.
16
Off topic here but Nancy's hair looks great lol!
3
I don't care for the use of negative words like "arm-twist and wheedle" to describe Pelosi's negotiation skills. These are the types of words that demean women's skills at negotiation.
24
Oh please. I’ll give you wheedling. But arm-twisting is a physical show of dominance and therefore stereotypically male. We should be celebrating a woman capable of both.
1
I doubt she promised anything she hadn't already had planned. She could have easily just let the process play out and let others strong armed the so called "dissidents". By the way, a ridiculous word to use in this instance. It seems like an unnecessary characterization of young progressives as somehow deranged. Anyway, who else will do the job. My guess is that no one else has the ability or the will.
You need a speaker from a safe district because they will face huge amounts of criticism from both sides. The constituents of the speaker must be both loyal and intelligent. That leaves out most of the country. You also need someone who is capable of compromise if only within your own party. Someone capable of playing the long game. That leaves out most young politicians who want change now.
Democrats in general have an illness. An illness that makes them listen to right wing criticisms and somehow believe they are real and legitimate. I don't understand why they think republicans are fiscally responsible. Why they think republicans believe in the rule of law. Why they think Nancy Pelosi is a terrible person. The GOP screams something over and over and over and the weak DFL constituents for some bizarre reason believe their is validity to what they say. Nancy Pelosi's constituents don't fall for it. Thank You San Fransisco.
22
What? Nothing on climate change, the most pressing issue facing our world.
1
Nancy Pelosi gives democrats a bad name. She needs to go away as she's probably even more disliked by many than HRC was. She's in politics for herself, not because she cares. We need to vote people like her out.
2
@Coffeelover I have seen little evidence now or in the past to suggest she is "in politics for herself" much less that she is an outlier in either personal selfishness or personal lack of caring for other people.
16
Same ol same ol. Swampy politics as usual.
2
@William
It is not "politics as usual" but "politics at its best" that describes Pelosi's execution of politics.
6
Nancy Pelosi is just impressive. She works with her caucus like no other, her negotiating skills are some of the best, and she knows how to get out in front of a problem. She's the best of the best.
23
Is it really necessary to give away your"soul" just to be speaker again....maybe the "perks" are worth it.?
Since Ms. Pelosi has always been an effective voice for democrats this seems demeaning...
1
If anyone requires evidence of Pelosi's vast political skills, the many aspects of this "agreement" present the best evidence. It shows why Pelosi, despite the ruckus from her own caucus and the screams from GOP voters and politicians, remains the savviest politician of our current times. There are very good reasons why ex-Speaker John Boerner and Pelosi, whenever they were photographed together, were all smiles and yucks and why Donald Trump likely will not engage in stunts with the Boss again.
Four years? In 4 years, dissidents will have moved on. Some will take other jobs; some, sadly, may die; and some will find it's better to be friends with her than to challenge her. Four years from now Pelosi will face other inevitable questions, such as isn't it time to stay at home? Finally, in four years, almost everyone forgets the reasons they were so exercised in the first place, especially since, in four years, there will be a new President who likely will not be named Trump no matter how popular he thinks he is.
This "agreement" is Pelosi's love letter to her caucus, offering dissenters face-saving grace, since Pelosi had votes to prevail in the toughest elections politicians face, the election to lead your mates in the party caucus. For this, she implemented Tip O'Neill's first rule of politics, knowing how to count. Pelosi can count, she does not humiliate, and she knows what 4 years means. It means, among others, she controlls her departure, destiny, and legacy.
35
@Swimcduck
As you rightly point out, allowing others to save face is one of the great negotiating tools, in any and every type of negotiation, says this retired lawyer.
10
@Sterling Minor
I also learned that essential skill of not humiliating or denigrating adversaries in my 45 years of practicing law. No matter how dramatic public displays of revenge may appear, they gradually and inevitably shut off avenues of resolution. Trump could learn a lot from her, but his character denies him this opportunity.
4
She is an effective leader and strategist, but we need younger politicians. Seems like a perfect compromise.
4
@James Siegel I am 71--not much below the average age of the current Democratic leadership. I stand in awe of the old lions' unmatched political skill but doubt they can keep it up much longer. Senators in their 80's or late 70's might wonder whether they will survive to complete another 6 year term but I suspect members of the House always think they can go 2 more years. If they are not compelled to develop and then step aside for a younger bench, the party is doomed. Term limits might help. I applaud Pelosi (78) for facing up to it and chide Hoyer (79) for not.
I say 'Pelosi for Prez'.
The woman has moxi.
38
@JORMO
Except that she has WAY TOO MUCH BAGGAGE after politic-ing for 4 decades. Trump won cuz his baggage was tied-up, vacuum sealed. Obama won b/c he had no baggage after being a one term senator. Bush 43 won b/c he didnt have any political baggage. Clinton had baggage, but he won b/c he was so bipartisan. In fact, in many ways he is more of a moderate conservative than a liberal.
3
You have to hand it to this woman. She knows how to play the game and she'll be a heck of an effectvie speek.
48
@Bob Burns
Yes, she is a Specialist in this arena. She knows all the ins and outs of Congress. And yes, she is tuff:
In an interview once, she was asked how she stays focussed and strong for the Dems, "Eat nails for breakfast, don a coat of armor, and get ready for battle".
8
I fail to understand the "deal" that "limits" Rep. Pelosi to a "term" of four years as Speaker. As far as I understand, Democrats in Congress are perfectly entitled to vote her out and elect a new Speaker anytime they determine that she is no longer doing a good job. There is no "term" for Speakers, and this "deal" has no validity whatsoever.
5
@Chris Rasmussen
of course they can vote her out prior to 4 year limit, but what she is saying is that IF SHE IS STILL SPEAKER in 4 years, then she will step down.
Its an informal agreement-not contractual, a "women's agreement" if you will. And Pelosi has the chops and integrity to follow thru on her commitment.
13
@Chris Rasmussen
The problem is that they know that they are not and will not be able to vote her "out". So, they are begging her to limit herself and not contest voluntarily!
Some or many of the guys who extracted this term limit may not even get re-elected two years from now. Dumbo's. She should then say, sorry folks, the deal is off.. or the four year clock starts now.
@Chris Rasmussen
The speaker is elected by the whole House, which is why she needs 218 votes. It's true that the Speaker can change, as happened in the previous term when John Boehner was replaced by Paul Ryan. However, the new speaker still needs the support of 218 House members.
If the Democrats don't get a House majority in 2020 the agreement is moot and I suspect she might well retire in that event.
1
The real "art of the deal". In a good way.
I like Nancy Pelosi, but I also think that Democrats need to train up a new generation of leaders.
58
@cec
Agreed. But now is NOT the time to bring in a less influential and less powerful Speaker. We need Pelosi's strengths during the Trump impeachment. When she is done rallying the troops to cripple Trump, then we can talk about Leadership change in 2022.
17
@sec
And so much more
Many under-estimate Speaker-elect Pelosi at their peril.
She has mastered politics as played in Washington. And I have hopeful expectations that she can right this sinking ship.
55
None of these concessions appear to be things she would have been vehemently opposed to. Seems she codified things she would have approved of anyway. I hope this allows the new House majority to really get things done on behalf of the majority of the American people, instead of a special few, if they stick together and don't devolve into a carbon copy of the current fractious, muddled, spineless, and traitorous Republican majority. Personally, I am reassured Leader Pelosi will be Speaker for at least the next two years. She knows how to get stuff done!
45
Why does she need any "deals"? Why can't she win on her merits?
Democrats have no accountability, just entitlement. It's corporate business-as-usual against the interests of the People.
Pelosi has long been on the corporate payroll, just like Hillary.
She is the Republicans's best friend.
What she does best is step on Democrat turnout. Since the Democrats don't get that the People are anti-corporation (who are anti-People), and will not change, they will lose 2020. A vote for Pelosi now is a vote for Trump in 2020.
The Democrat Establishment would much rather have Republicans control the country, than represent the People.
A vote for Pelosi and her oldster Democrats is a vote for Republicans.
8
@Fourteen you're spot on. It's her and democrats like her that got Trump elected and could likely get him re-elected. She's too self absorbed to see the writing on the wall and wants this too much for herself. She doesn't care about the country.
3
The Medicare option at age 50 is a real winner
At cost please. Not subsidized
23
All Medicare benefits are subsidized.
5
@GCM
Nancy Pelosi's promises to fight for lowering the Medicare age (or any other promises) are completely empty, If she implements pay-go rules - as she has indicated she will.
Nice. She gets to make promises to help the middle and working classes - knowing full well that pay-go will ensure their failure, no matter how hard she "tries".
"Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has made the public a big promise, vowing to handcuff her party’s progressive ambitions, including in the event that a Democratic president succeeds Donald Trump, by resurrecting the “pay-go” rule that mandates all new spending is offset with budget cuts or tax increases."
http://cepr.net/publications/op-eds-columns/pelosi-would-sabotage-progressive-agenda-with-pay-go-rules
With friends like this... Let alone *leaders* like this... Who needs Republicans?
3