Jump to content
Pangloss

Pelosi Post-mortem

Recommended Posts

Politico has an interesting post-mortem on Nancy Pelosi's time in office. The main thrust of the piece is that while she's a heroine to liberals, she pushed too hard for a liberal agenda, not listening to the mainstream of the American public, which brought her right into the sights of both conservatives and independents seeking change.

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44598_Page4.html

 

In addition to the big proposals on health care, energy, financial services and the $787 billion stimulus package, she pushed through dozens of lesser known bills on raising the minimum wage, children’s health care programs, equal pay for women, hate crimes and other issues favored by progressives. Pelosi built a national fundraising network matched only by presidential candidates, raising more than $65 million this year alone. Despite saying she wouldn’t be like her GOP predecessors Newt Gingrich and Dennis Hastert, she amassed more power in the speaker’s office than seen since the days of such giants as Sam Rayburn and Joe Cannon, controlling everything from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to communications to committee gavels.

 

An iron fist in a Gucci glove, Pelosi embodied the Democratic majority in many ways, with a relentless – though at times politically tone deaf – pursuit of liberal ideals.

 

Despite tremendous personal charisma, Pelosi was a poor orator who failed to impress in public events or too often uttered statements that infuriated and mobilized her opponents. She refused to recognize that the country’s mood had shifted from 2009 to this year, especially in running up huge government deficits, and in the end, she proved unable to protect the freshman and sophomore lawmakers whom she had worked so hard to elect the previous two cycles.

 

What do you all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you all think?

 

That the words "moderate" and "conservative" are interchangeable in US politics. If there's any difference between them, it's "conservative" and "extremely conservative"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The really sad part of this is not that Pelosi lost her power or that democrats won or lost. what is really sad is that nothing will change. Two years from now all will still be shit and the republicans will be crying foul that they just haven't had enough time and the Dem's will be shouting vote em out they screwed us and the reality is you can't repair a sinking boat by changing Captains. This country has real problems that will not be solved by putting someone else in power, that revolving door does not solve anything.

 

To me the politics of most of my life have been more about getting power than using it wisely. How often do you see a politician change his mind for any reason other than personal power? When will a real leader come to be that will make the hard choices? NEVER, no one can survive in power by doing anything but running in circles and barking at the moon and getting other people to do the same to the same tune as you... As far as I've seen barking at the moon has no effect, my dogs don't even do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a member of this forum were to say that the terms "moderate" and "liberal" were interchangeable, and that the only difference between them was the difference between "liberal" and "extremely liberal", I think there would be a mountain of outrage from the members and a rush to declare that person extremely conservative and pounce on his or her every opinion. I'd be looking at reported posts daily, enclosed with regular accusations of "logical fallacies" and "rude behavior" all over the place.

 

But hey, that's what makes this place fun. :)

 

The really sad part of this is not that Pelosi lost her power or that democrats won or lost. what is really sad is that nothing will change. Two years from now all will still be shit and the republicans will be crying foul that they just haven't had enough time and the Dem's will be shouting vote em out they screwed us and the reality is you can't repair a sinking boat by changing Captains. This country has real problems that will not be solved by putting someone else in power, that revolving door does not solve anything.

 

To me the politics of most of my life have been more about getting power than using it wisely. How often do you see a politician change his mind for any reason other than personal power? When will a real leader come to be that will make the hard choices? NEVER, no one can survive in power by doing anything but running in circles and barking at the moon and getting other people to do the same to the same tune as you... As far as I've seen barking at the moon has no effect, my dogs don't even do that.

 

I agree, and well put. You're only missing one small thing: You just said that "nothing will change", which implies that something needed to change. You're right, it did. And there is only one mechanism that the voters have to instigate change: turn out the people in power.

 

If you believe the system is broken, as you clearly do, you cannot vote for those in authority. You. Can. Not. Because, as you yourself just stated, those who receive that vote will accept it as a "MANDATE", and then proceed to do all the wrong things.

 

Is there anyone here who really believes that had there been no turnover yesterday and the Democrats returned to power, or indeed given 60 votes in the Senate, that they would NOT have seen that as a mandate to push forward? Of course they would have.

 

Which is why this happened. The country yesterday SCREAMED at its leadership to change course. They hollered at the top of their freaking lungs in the only way they knew how.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a member of this forum were to say that the terms "moderate" and "liberal" were interchangeable, and that the only difference between them was the difference between "liberal" and "extremely liberal", I think there would be a mountain of outrage from the members and a rush to declare that person extremely conservative and pounce on his or her every opinion.

 

I think the term "moderate" is meaningless without a "moderate liberal" or "moderate conservative" qualifier. At least in America, people who self identify as "moderates" (such as yourself) are generally moderate conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.