So what?
Last time 63 said they would vote against her….
When the vote came to the floor?
Only 4 stood up to be counted ….
Nancy Pelosi IS gonna be the next Speaker for the Democrats next year…..
Even if the Republicans are making her the poster women for their supporters to worry about…
Pelosi was speaker from 2007 to 2011. If Democrats successfully take back the House and elect her as speaker, she would be the first to win the gavel back in over six decades. (Rayburn was the last, in 1955.)
Despite the opposition, there’s still no clear alternative to Pelosi. Many candidates in the undecided category said they’re waiting to see who, if anyone, comes forward to take her on — and only one could-be-contender has done so publicly so far.
Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio, who challenged Pelosi for leadership after the 2016 election, indicated this week that he may consider another bid. “I’ve not closed the door on it,” Ryan told MSNBC.
Pelosi has defended her stewardship of the Democratic caucus. “I’m a master legislator,” she said last year, adding that the millions of dollars the GOP has spent “demonizing” her to voters shows that she’s an effective leader.
And while NBC’s research shows there are a sizable number of Democrats opposing Pelosi, the procedure for electing the leader can still provide an opportunity for stances to shift. After the 2016 election, 63 Democrats opposed Pelosi in a closed-door caucus meeting — but only four voted against her on the House floor…..
image…breitbart
She’s had a good run.
She ought to see down.
Attack ads on Nancy Pelosi have tripled this year, since that black guy is gone from the White House and Hillary is off walking in the woods, what else have the Republicans got? This is unprecedented and sexist to its core.
https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/What-Republican-attacks-on-Nancy-Pelosi-are-13147051.php
Why do Republicans hate Rep. Nancy Pelosi so much? It’s not a difficult question to answer – at least it wouldn’t be, if we could bring ourselves to be honest about it.
Just as they have for the past 15 years, Republicans are running ads around the country trying to convince voters that Pelosi is reason enough not to vote for any Democrat, so horrifyingly evil is she. But when you ask them what exactly their problem with Pelosi is, they end up saying ridiculous things like this, according to The Post:
“Jesse Hunt, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said GOP officials saw no evidence in Ohio that Pelosi attacks have lost their potency.
“‘When Nancy Pelosi becomes a central part of the discussion in any race, that is something we’re winning on because we’re not just talking about her, we’re talking about her policies,’ Hunt said. [. . .]
“But Republicans say that, in the eyes of voters, Pelosi’s name is shorthand for extreme liberal policies – even those she does not personally support.”
Yes, that’s what Republican voters are thinking when they hear Pelosi’s name: policy! It’s all about policy!
Just like Republican voter-suppression tactics are really about the integrity of the ballot, laws imposing draconian regulations on abortion clinics are really about protecting women’s health, and when President Donald Trump attacks football players and LeBron James and Maxine Waters, it has nothing to do with race.
Can we stop treating this lie seriously once and for all? We all know what’s really going on. The Republican attack on Pelosi is about conservative identity politics, full stop. It’s partly the same kind of ugly misogyny that has driven conservatives for years, and that comes out whenever the prospect of a woman yielding genuine power rears its head. Women who display ambition are judged harshly, particularly by conservatives; it’s no accident that Bernie Sanders, whose policy ideas are much more opposed to conservatism than Pelosi’s, inspires nothing like the venomous loathing on the right that Pelosi and Hillary Clinton do.
And it’s partly the us-versus-them conflict that has animated every Republican campaign for a half century. Democrats, they tell voters, aren’t like us. They don’t share our values; they’re elitist and alien and threatening. Those ideas can be expressed through issues, but what they’re about is cultural affinity: The Republican candidate is one of us, and the Democratic candidate is one of them.
Unfortunately, many reporters fall into the trap of believing the ludicrous claim that the attacks on Pelosi are at bottom disputes about whether there should be more tax cuts or what kind of health care system we should have, just as they believe that if the GOP is airing a thousand ads attacking Pelosi, then it must be working. Yet, there’s no evidence for that either. If you ask for such evidence, the answer that you’ll get is, “Well don’t you remember that race that the Democrat lost after Republicans ran all those ads featuring his picture alongside Pelosi’s?”
Yes, we do. But there have also been plenty of races in which identical ads were aired, and the Democrat ended up winning.
Why does the former constitute evidence, but the latter doesn’t? When Republicans air ads criticizing Pelosi in a House race and lose, for some reason we don’t see stories headlined, “Attacks on Pelosi Fall Flat.” Those races – and there are lots of them – are just assumed to have turned on some other issue. But if the Republican happens to win, then the assumption is that the ads were devastatingly effective, and Pelosi was the reason the Democratic candidate lost.
Oh, but aren’t her approval ratings terrible? Indeed they are, almost entirely because she is universally reviled by Republicans, who watch Fox News and listen to conservative talk radio, where they imbibe a constant stream of attacks against her. But what you may not know is that the most unpopular congressional leader in America is not Pelosi but Mitch McConnell. How many Republican Senate candidates have been quizzed aggressively about whether they’ll support McConnell to lead their caucus and whether voters will reject them if they do?
To be clear, I’m not arguing that whether Pelosi will continue to lead House Democrats after this election isn’t a worthy topic of discussion. More than 50 Democratic candidates have said they’ll be supporting someone else (even if no viable challenger has yet emerged) to lead their caucus. But as The Post’s David Weigel (who has been on the ground covering more House races than probably any reporter in America) points out, when Democratic candidates have said they won’t be supporting Pelosi for speaker, it’s almost never about ideology. Instead, they say the time has come for a new generation of leadership (Pelosi and her top deputies are all in their 70s). It’s telling that many of the candidates who have taken that position, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib, are to Pelosi’s left on issues.
So, if Pelosi does end up losing her bid to lead the Democrats, it will have nothing to do with policy. The truth is that despite some differences here and there, right now, the Democratic Party is remarkably unified on issues. Their agenda is going to be basically the same no matter who is the speaker (if they win control of the House) or the minority leader (if they don’t).
Republicans will continue to attack Pelosi from now until November, because they have few better ideas for how to convince voters to send them back to Congress. In some places it might work to get their base to the polls; more often, in all likelihood, it won’t. But either way, we shouldn’t buy for a second that the reason they do it is because they’re trying to say something about policy.
Not one example of sexism can be found. Not one quote in which she is attacked for her gender can be found. Not a single one.
As we all know though, Pelosi’s political problem right now is mostly with Democrats. Democrats are the ones running ads in which they say that Pelosi needs to stop down and they won’t vote for her. Conor Lamb ran those ads. Danny O’Connor ran those ads. Sexists one and all?
Not to mention Democrat incumbent House Members like Kathleen Rice and Linda Sanchez?
Are they sexist?
Keith will perhaps now proceed to attack those women for their looks, but that’s ok because he is not “politically correct” just like his model Donald Trump.
Sexism and racism just simply isn’t yelling the N word or calling a woman a bitch. It is the more subtle labeling of a person as “other” something the Republicans have taken to a new science over the last 50 years.
After all, how many Republican Senate candidates have been quizzed aggressively about whether they’ll support McConnell to lead their caucus and whether voters will reject them if they do? Or, for that matter, is there a leading female candidate to be the GOP leader in the House? Nope, just a guy who enabled a sexual predator, a guy who cannot remember that he spoke to a group of white supremacists, and a guy who cannot keep his mouth shut.
The focus on Nancy Pelosi is self evident. Republicans have worked hard to make her different, make her “other,” just like they worked to do the same to Hillary Clinton. Although I will admit that they haven’t gone after Nancy’s pant suits — not yet anyway.
I don’t think we should forget that the Republicans tried very hard to do the same “other” labeling to President Obama. John Sununu once famously said, “I wish Obama would learn how to be an American.” What could be more other than that — not an American — wow!
And that old fat fuck said that with a straight face.
This is about conservative identity politics, pure and simple. Pelosi is elite, she’s rich, she’s too radical (although other Democrats are far more liberal), she’s toxic, she’s out-of-touch, she, she, she……
What she is, is effective.
And Republicans can’t stand the fact that she gets things done, even now in the minority, while Paulie Ryan stands around holding his dick.
This whole conversation started because we heard repeatedly from our Republican friend here that the “pundits are saying Nancy may be denied the Speakership.” Following up on the theme that “Democrats are in disarray.”
It’s a ploy to change the subject and not talk about the failures of this Administration and the failure of Congressional Republicans to put a check on him.
Just last week Devin Nunes confirmed that the main objective of the Republicans in the House was to protect Donald Trump. But, but, Pelosi…..
In the Republican Trump era that anyone would deny the Republicans enable racism and sexism is simply laughable.
james and Keith are off on their own island with this without any facts or concrete examples to sustain them. I hope they don’t get too sunburned.
Racism and sexism is like pornography, I know it when I see it.
How anyone in this age of Trump could try to defend or justify the racism and sexism of the Republican Party is beyond me.
Especially on this anniversary of Charlottesville. You remember, “there are good people on both sides” after a Trump supporter ran over a woman.
And, when those Young Republicans marched with Tiki Torches chanting “Jews will not replace us!” Only makes sense that the Republican running for the Senate in Virginia is a white supremacist.
This is a Party that has used racism and fear to win elections for 50 years. And, we’re arguing over the fact that they are using sexism now?
Donald Trump has a history going back to him and his father denying housing to blacks trying to move into thier buildings….
He does NOT disavow the white nationalist’s that show up at his rallies for noise making and muscle….
If it quacks like a duck?…..
Step
Really? If they get the House back she’s one of the reasons why – fundraising and good candidate recruitment.
Compare her to Boehner or Ryan, who’s been more effective?
I’m not denigrating her.I have no problem with here.
She’s pushing eighty years old.
She’s had a good run.I just think it would be better for the party to have a younger person in the position.
I’ve seen it suggested here that if the Democrats take control she may symbolically be elected Speaker and then shortly thereafter step down.
That might be a fitting finale,
As Keith points out?
She has raised a TON of money for party people earning a lot of IOU’s….
She’s done a great job as speaker and even if she steps down as leader tomorrow Republicans will still run against her. Hell Ocasio-Cortez isn’t even in Congress yet and right wingers are trying to make her the face of the Democratic Psrty.
I do think 15 yrs in the leadership role is enough.
I thought it was time for Dick Gephardt to leave that position too after he was there a
dozen years or so.
Oops I was wrong. Gep was only in the Dem leadership posotion for 8 yrs.
I think it would be nice for someone younger to replace Pelosi, but I agree with Keith that she has done a good job. Note that some of the opposition to Pelosi is coming from Pelosi’s left. One thing that Pelosi does well (in addition to fundraising and recruitment) is that she represents the party well. Ultimately, the party needs to unite in 2020 – like it did in 2008 and 2012 – and someone like Pelosi can help do that. Obviously, the party can’t have someone who is hostile to progressives, just as it can’t have someone that doesn’t represent a lot of Democrats like Cortez. The party needs a leader that both factions are comfortable with – and that is the only path to victory in 2020. So I am still comfortable with Pelosi continuing as our leader.
I can agree with Pelosi leading for two years…
If the votes are there then she should be voted out….
Ocasio-Cortez isn’t gonna be a option so soon…
Three quarters of Americans and half of Democrats believe she should step down.
http://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/401175-poll-three-quarters-of-americans-say-nancy-pelosi-should-be
I don’t see how she gets around that, unless the Democrats have like 245 seats. She is far more unpopular than Trump and if I were a Democrat, my perspective would be that I would want someone a little bit younger and a little bit more focused to be the person taking him on every day in the news as Speaker. Thank her for her past service, but if you watch her press conferences, she has started to slip a bit. That’s eventually going to happen to almost everyone.
Maybe they make her “Speaker Emeritus” or something for two years or a few months, but I think that somebody else is actually going to be the top Democrat in the next Congress. If the party were to announce that now, Democrats would immediately stand to pick up a bunch more seats, but that’s up to them.
You are probably correct – although I don’t recall seeing a recent Pelosi press conference.
I don’t fully understand why Republicans hate her so much.
Part of it I think is jealousy. Nancy’s a fighter. Their last 3 leaders have all been wet noodles. Paul Ryan is about the most useless waste of space in the Capitol. And that’s saying something!
Z?
Republicans will ALWAYS find a Woman Democrats to vilify to the base….
Be it Pelosi or Clinton….
Look at their caucus in both Houses of Congress, look at Trump’s cabinet….
Women and Republicans do NOT mix well….
She’s not any more “hated” among Republicans than Newt Gingrich was among Democrats when he was the top Republican in Congress.
Polarizing, ideological politicians attract critics. That’s the way it is always is.
Newt was NEVER peddled like Republicans throw down against Obama, Clinton or Pelosi….
Republican’s cruise on fear and hate…
Democrats do NOT…
Well not until Trump arrived in the White House…
Newt has been gone awhile now so maybe my memory is faulty, but I think Pelosi is more hated.
Hey CG?
60% of Americans don’t want Trump to be President, eh?
Pelosi’s tenure as Speaker will be determined by voted WITHIN the US House…
He batting average is damn good….
No, it’s not. Opening Day of Congress, with just two exceptions, seems to always find her handing the gavel over to a Republican Speaker.
Once again this discussion feeds a Republican talking point. I watched two of their consultant talking heads yesterday claim she will cost the Democrats seats this year. Of course they couldn’t name the districts.
Republicans have always been good at beating up on women, especially successful women, and they can usually count on some women to go a long. Successful women are considered elite or arrogant, and since there is no “old girls club” to help other women along its difficult (even today) to achieve success.
I have already compared Nancy to her Republican counterparts — child molesting, philandering liars, and drunken failures.
Nancy is a good Catholic girl from Baltimore who started in San Francisco politics by volunteering to stuff envelopes. She married once and well, and there has never been a hint of scandal surrounding her.
But more importantly she can hold her caucus together and deliver legislative victories (unlike Boehner or Ryan).
What’s not to like? Can you say misogyny? Because if a man, especially a Republican man, had Nancy’s accomplishments they would be heralded as another Sam Rayburn.
We hear she’s elite, when I see successful, and out of touch, where I see a loving grandmother who takes her grandchildren with her on the weekends.
While Republicans have consistently failed at governing and holding Trump accountable, they have been brilliant at creating negative media narratives. The have done so successfully with Nancy. It’s true.
But this election will be about placing a check on Trump and the corruption of the Republican Party. We will lose if we stand around and discuss the pros and cons of a Pelosi Speakership.
Amen Keith…..
We can’r discuss whether Pelosi should be speaker?
Actually the opposite is true. If we solely focus on Trump and his GOP enablers, then everything we say is seen as biased and is disregarded, You and James should know this.
I have no problem with continuing speaking about the House Minority leader…Soon to become Speaker…
Who said anything about not discussing Pelosi. We should.
My point is that we also fall into the Republican trap of a discussion that would never happen to a man in her position. You do agree that the Republicans have demonized Pelosi right? And now we are discussing, before leadership elections even take place, her replacement. When she has an important job to do. That’s a distraction from the corrupt group that controls Congress and the White House. And instead of talking about Chris Collins and Wilbur Ross, we are taking our lead from GOP talking points.
And everyone here is biased, and we only have so much time to contribute to the conversation.
I’d rather talk about why Gym Jordan isn’t under investigation than talk about the squeaky clean Democratic Leader of the House.
It’s pretty obvious why the Republicans are doing this.
I guess I’m not convinced that Pelosi is being attacked because of her gender. You said the same thing about Hillary and I felt there was much to criticize there – even though relative to Trump, Hillary is a saint. With that said, I am still not satisfied that I understand the GOP hatred of Pelosi despite comments by Scott, you and Corey. Maybe you are all partially Right?
Maybe you should ask a Republican and find out. The common response is usually, “I can’t stand her” with little or no explanation other than she’s “elite.”
Whatever that means.
Maybe a good way to look at it is the visceral reactions to Obama. Republicans have told me, “he’s the most racially polarizing President we have ever had.”
I took that to mean because he’s black.
I think the same unhinged emotions can be directed at women in power.
After all she will be third in line for the Presidency.
But that doesn’t Explain how people like Susan Collins got nominated by her party in the first place.
Sorry, don’t see your point.
There are several Republican women serving in Congress (but the vast majority are Democrats) and Collins isn’t Majority Leader. She doesn’t have a target on her back.
Yea
Collins has no leadership spot….
Collins is Chair of Homeland Security Commity.
Part of the reason there are more Democratic women Senators is that women are more likely to be Dems in the 1st place.
True that on the more Democratic women….
I think that — while there is a difference in style and tone partly based on Nancy Pelosi’s own style (since she is a woman) — one should remember how the GOP treated Jim Wright, Harry Reid and Tip O’Neill. Or — before they pre-endorsed invading Iraq in that ghastly 2002 Rose Garden event — Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle.
In the absence of a sitting Democratic president or an official Democratic Party presidential candidate, whoever leads the Democratic conference (caucus) in the House or Senate becomes for Republicans the titular and thus automatically evil and corrupt Democrat leader.
Visible, ideological Congressional leaders always get flak, especially when there is not a President of their party, that is absolutely true. It would be sexist to assume that Pelosi should not be granted the respect of being held to the same standard.
Whatever one thinks of Newt Gingrich (and I have not been a fan in many years), nobody received harsher treatment from the media or opposition as he was during the time he was Speaker.
Since I worked in the House during the time that many of these individuals were serving as leader of their particular caucuses Dave, I can remember nothing reaching the level of negative attack that would compare to Nancy Pelosi.
Putting aside the fact that other than Tip, Nancy has been the most successful Speaker in our lifetimes.
Was Tip the topic of Republican attack ads during his time in office?
You know better, and you know why they go after Nancy Pelosi.
There were most certainly attack ads featuring rotund actors playing Tip O’Neil done by Republicans in the time he was in office.
Democrats did the same with Gingrich and long before he was Speaker, had an ad in which an actor designed to look like Paul Ryan pushed a lady in a wheelchair off a cliff.
I cannot think of one example where any actor has ever portrayed Pelosi in an ad.
Just about every political junkie has heard of or seen this ad
https://www.iagreetosee.com/portfolio/rnc-attack-ad-1980/
I do not remember Democrats EVER going after anyone as hard as Trump has ….And yes during the campign he also went after his own….
It seems like Hillary and Pelosi have been the escalation of the GOPer effort to demonize Democrats and their women….
How foolish of me to forget — what the Republicans really need to hate is a Kennedy, any Kennedy.
Far more toxic than their attacks on Nancy Pelosi. Although no more toxic than some Republicans’ attacks on (for little articulable reason) Barack Obama or (IMHO not without justice) the unelected Rev. Al Sharpton.
By far, the most effective Republican mailers in the 1980’s and 1990’s to extract money from their supporters were those raising fear of and antipathy to Ted Kennedy. [The fact that at one point he held a secondary leadership post in the Senate Democratic hierarchy was purely incidental and secondary. ]
And by far the most effective target of similar fund-raising mailers for the Democrats in those decades was Jesse Helms. [Of course, Donald Trump so greatly, blatantly and justifiably exceeds any earlier target of Democratic fear and loathing that he’s in a different constellation, if not galaxy.]
And maybe more women are Democrats because of how Republicans treat women in positions of power. When Susan Collins becomes Majority Leader of her Party in the Senate then comparing her treatment with that of Nancy Pelosi might be more appropriate. You yourself know how racist the Republican Party can be, why is it so difficult for you to see that they can also be sexist.
Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution has hailed her as the “strongest and most effective speaker of modern times” because of her success in securing stimulus funding in 2009 and overseeing the passage of the Affordable Care Act the following year. As Peter Beinart pointed out in this month’s Atlantic, “even after being relegated to minority leader when Republicans took the House in 2010, she kept winning legislative fights. In the summer of 2015, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Republican Party launched a mammoth lobbying campaign to kill Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran. Pelosi quickly secured the votes to prevent Republicans from overturning the agreement, thus checkmating the deal’s foes.”
Pelosi’s record of success is a marked contrast to her Republican counterparts’ during the same era, ranging from Dennis Hastert to Tom DeLay to John Boehner to Paul Ryan. They presided over a Republican Party that theoretically should have been more unified than the Democrats, since it is more ideologically homogenous, but is in fact riven by factional fighting. Ryan’s feeble leadership today, marked by only one major achievement (the 2017 tax cuts) and an increasingly hollow ideological agenda, is representative of the larger GOP failures of this era.
Pelosi is a Democratic powerhouse in an era where the two parties are dividing along gender lines. This is not just a matter of the gender gap among voters or Donald Trump’s long history of sexism. Democrats are much more likely to have female lawmakers than Republicans are. A third of all Democrats in Congress are female (78), whereas just 9 percent of Republicans are (26). “Democrats, even though they are outnumbered by Republicans, have three times more women in the two chambers,” Politifact noted.
Republicans are, of course, attacking Pelosi because they think it’s a winning strategy. Her liberal track record makes her especially unpopular in Republican-leaning districts, where Democrats are hoping to pick up seats by fielding more centrist candidates. But it’s not clear that these attacks work.
Congressional leaders have long been broadly unpopular because they’re among the most visible figures in Congress, which itself is broadly unpopular. This is especially true in the House, which is the more divisive of the two chambers because the small size of its representative districts—relative to statewide Senate seats—tends to produce more extreme candidates.
You guys got Keith’s back from dissing Nancy….
How did Keith’s repeated insults towards the weight and physical appearance of Jane Sanders improve the status of women in politics?
That didn’t take long now did it?
But please stop deflecting. The attacks on Nancy Pelosi are absolutely sexism. That’s a fact.
If Nancy were a male leader the same things would not be said about her.
Republicans want to foster the “Democrats are in crisis” story line over Nancy.
They got nothing else to run on.
Can anyone link to a specific quote from any significant person about Pelosi that includes mention of her gender?
I will be waiting.
Whenever Keith insults a Republican woman or in the case of Jane Sanders, a Democrat woman he doesn’t like, he goes after their physical appearance.
.K. = DJT
and in the case of African-Americans that Keith does not like, he uses racist nicknames, such as the one who chose for Ben Carson.
and of course Keith explicity exhibits his sexism, misogyny, and white privilege when he deliberately misgenders politicians he does not like such as Lindsey Graham.
What does the fact that I have never been politically correct when describing individuals with whom I disagree have to do with the fact that the Republicans have an organized sexist campaign against Nancy Pelosi??
A silly deflection.
But, I will continue to describe lawmakers that I consider to be Uncle Tom’s to their own community is disparaging ways.
Why wouldn’t I do that? Republicans can be so hypocritical and self righteous.
An example is unable to be provided of anything sexist ever being said about Pelosi in the realm of the normal criticism that political leaders have.
Keith is affirming that during his long career, he has trafficked in racism and sexism. The candor is appreciated and should be remembered.
CG?
I digress….
List the names of strong GOPer woman in the Trump era?
Dana Rohrabacher wins for dumbest congressman.
He’s also a Russian stooge as is Rand Paul.
Having been around Republican thought for a long time, Nancy Pelosi has never been at the top of the list of most “hated” politicians. She might barely crack the Top 100. DSD certainly raises a point about the Kennedys.
And as far as Presidents, I do not think that Obama was ever personally disliked by conservatives anywhere near as much as Bill Clinton was. (and Hillary was far more disliked than Obama too among Republicans, but that mirrored the view of the whole country.) As for Clinton, a lot of the older Republicans have died out perhaps since those days, but there was something about him having been a baby boomer draft-dodging womanizer who lied shamelessly that really irked Republicans far above Obama. But many Republicans seem to no longer have an aversion to those traits.
Actually ?
It was the hate of the “Clintons’ plural …..
That did NOT stop him from having good number before his impeachment and even BETTER numbers afterwards….
As for Hillary?
After 2008 ?
Her numbers also jumped up….
But her 2016 run HAS hurt her numbers among ALL Americans….
Problem with this theory, Nancy is the last person standing.
Haters gonna hate, and Republicans need someone to hate and spread fear about.
Just wait until our Republican President gets going.
The issue is that a lot of Democrats clearly believe that the party is weaker because she is still standing. It’s a matter of counting votes, and she probably is not going to have them. It will have nothing to do with Republicans.
And here we are back to the original Republican talking point, “Democrats in disarray.”
There is no evidence that Nancy has cost any election defeats, it’s a Republican wet dream since they are running out of boogie men. Who else can they beat up on?!
They want us to talk about this rather than the Orange Scrotum in the WH and his Republican enablers in Congress.
Too often Democrats comply, but as Nancy said the other day, “just win” and that’s the real fear here right?
No one counts votes better than Nancy, the reason she is so effective and back to the reason the Republicans hate “that woman.”
In regards to the deliberately unproven and unverified accounts of opposition to Pelosi being “sexism”, I would point to the example of Michael Madigan in IL.
He is a senior citizen white male and has been around far longer and has been far more successful and far more powerful than Pelosi, despite the fact that he is by far the most unpopular political figure in Illinois (all that matters I suppose though is that he gets reelected his own district).
Every single Republican campaign and basically every single Republican ad in Illinois talks about Madigan and getting rid of Madigan. It goes way beyond any targeting done to Democrats because of Pelosi in Congressional races probably tenfold.
That can hardly be sexist, so is it anti-Irishman?
Keith makes a Good point….
While media may be running the anti-Pelosi story to the GOPer’s delight I repeat this…
The last time someone tried to displace Pelosi?
Over 60 of the party faithful said I ‘ll help defeat her….
When it came time too stand up and be counted?
Only FOUR stood up….
Nancy Pelosi WILL be the Speaker again if the Democrat’s get a majority in the US House….
Bet on it….
That doesn’t make any sense. For one thing, you are confusing the behind doors conference vote, only among Democrats (think of it as being a primary) and the vote on the floor featuring the whole House you see on CSPAN (think of a general election)
63 Democrats did vote against her in the “primary” last time. That has nothing to do with the floor vote. If she is going to fail to become Speaker (assuming Democrats have 218 votes) it is going to happen before it gets to the House floor.
Clearly, she fell well short of having the votes to be elected Speaker last time.
The concept this year is that more Democrats are expected to be elected, but a lot of them are saying that they will not vote for her in the conference election and that the party needs new leadership.
You have just about every Democrat running in a politically marginal area who refuses to commit to voting for her and now you also have the safe left-wingers such as Ocasio-Cortez and Talib saying they will oppose her.
In the final tally CG?
FOUR voted against her….
Ya just did the Trump EC vs the actual vote….
He, he, he…..
You can’t have it BOTH ways….
You don’t understand the point of discussion which makes interaction with you on those various topics impossible. Sorry.
Yea?
Democrats are so in disarray that they have done pretty damn good in Special Elections…
They have a boat load of women candidates running for office in a country that MORE women vote then men…
They are MILES ahead of Republicans in overall fundraising…
They have TONS of candidates running, and some places unopposed ….
Yea…
They are in disarray ?
Oh, and the Republicans ARE the ones starting to run around with their hair on fire politically worried about HOW many seats they will lose and have Nancy Pelosi as Speaker…
Yea?
They are in disarray ?
GOP to weaponize Pelosi and ‘San Francisco values’ in key CA House races
…The anti-Pelosi ads typically raise the spectre of her returning as speaker should Democrats flip the 23 seats they need to recapture the House. Several of the California races are key to determining which party will control the chamber for the next two years.
The attacks have driven dozens of Democratic candidates – 44 challengers and seven incumbents, by an NBC News count last week – to promise not to vote for Pelosi as speaker should Democrats prevail.
Pelosi’s favorability rating is low nationally (29 percent) – much like that of GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin (30 percent) and Congress itself (16 percent) – and Republican operatives say they are targeting her because their internal polling shows she is particularly unpopular in the areas of California where the competitive House races are being run.
Link….