Pelosi: “I Don’t Think People Want A New Direction”

220px-nancy_pelosiWe recently discussed how Democrats seeking the removal of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi were called “sexist” for merely seeking change after the disastrous 2016 election. Democratic leaders engineered the primary selection of Hillary Clinton despite polls showing that voters did not want an establishment figure and had deep seated misgivings about Clinton’s honestly and integrity. One of those leaders who has been most criticized over the years has been Nancy Pelosi. However, democratic members overwhelmingly elected Pelosi again as minority leader in what was seen as a slap in the face of those who want to see serious change in the party. Within a couple days of her reelection, Pelosi went on the air to declare that everyone is wrong and people really do not want a new direction. They want the same leadership like her to pursue the very same course that has led to historic losses under her leadership in the House. It was the same dismissive logic applied by the Democratic National Committee and Democratic leadership (including Pelosi) in engineering the nomination of Hillary Clinton, the ultimate establishment figure when polls showed an overriding preference for an outsider and record low favorability numbers for Clinton (particularly on issues of honesty). The question is whether the obvious anger inside and outside the party will galvanize into continued opposition. The establishment seems to be betting on people forgetting about serious reforms or wanting other options than the current duopoly of power held by the Republicans and Democrats. Retaining the very same leadership in both parties may be just what reformers had hoped: a clear signal that any changes in Washington will require the continuation of the popular movement seen in the last election.

Pelosi appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday and was asked: “What do you tell Democrats who want a new direction and then, go to you, what are you going to do differently?” For those who fear that the Democratic establishment is protecting its own power rather than the party or the public, the answer was chilling:

PELOSI: “Well, I don’t think people want a new direction. Our values unify us and our values are about supporting America’s working families. That’s one that everyone is in agreement on. What we want is a better connection of our message to working families in our country, and that clearly in the election showed that that message wasn’t coming through. But we are united in terms of the security of our country, which is our first responsibility. To be smart and strong and not reckless in how we protect the American people, strong in how we protect our economy.”

After losing what was viewed as highly promising election for the Democrats (in part due to the selection of a candidate that Pelosi pushed), the answer seems to confirm that the party remains the domain of the party elite and not the voters.

Just to recap: the Democrats lost 63 seats in 2010 and, while the election of President Obama picked up seats, they were defeated again in 2014. She was retained despite polls that showed her as the least popular figure among the Democratic leadership. Many believe that Pelosi, 76, and other leaders are both unpopular and associated too closely with the ruling establishment in Washington. Some members have grumbled that Pelosi seemed clueless in blaming Comey, millennials and others after predicting on election night an easy win for Clinton, a Democratic takeover of the Senate, and a significant gain of seats in the house. Pelosi and the other top Democratic leaders will be in their 80s when the Democrats have another serious chance at retaking the House. (Notably, Joe Biden suggested today that he also will be back and is seriously considering a run for the presidency in 2020 when he will be 78 years old).

Saying that the election was simply not educating voters or getting their message through is basically saying that voters are misinformed about the wisdom of the Democratic leadership. The fact is that Hillary Clinton spent a record amount on the campaign and twice the amount per vote spent by Trump. The Democrats had the bigger campaign, the greater campaign coffers, and the overwhelming support of the media. Yet, Pelosi says the problem is that voters did not understand their message rather than the message itself (or the messengers).

Pelosi also dismissed widespread criticism of the Democratic leadership over the last two decades in pursuing the same unsuccessful course and messages. Here is the exchange:

DICKERSON: “Here’s my question, though, Democrats since 2008, the numbers are ghastly for Democrats. Democrats are down 10 percent, in the House down 19.3 percent and in governors 35 percent. The Democrats are getting clobbered at every level over multiple elections. That seems like a real crisis for the party?”
PELOSI: “You’re forgetting that we went up so high in 2006 and 2008, and let me just put that in perspective. When President Clinton was elected, Republicans came in big in the next election. When President Bush was president, we came in big in the next election. When President Obama became president, the Republicans came in big in the next election.”

That spin ignores that the Democrats have, over that period, lost a massive number of seats and made them little more than a passing irritant for the GOP in the House. For many, the interview highlights why Pelosi has been so unpopular in polls for over a decade. The leadership is refusing to accept that they are part of the problem or that there is really widespread discontent after the ultimate outsider just secured a historic upset over perhaps the greatest establishment figure in the Democratic party. Washington however views elections differently than the public. Leadership positions protect fixed interests for members who want committee positions, campaign funds, and other benefits. Even a losing leadership can supply those benefits if you are inside the tent. So one has to use a translator in such interviews. What Pelosi really meant is that “I don’t think that establishment wants a new direction” and she is clearly right.

200 thoughts on “Pelosi: “I Don’t Think People Want A New Direction””

  1. Thank God.

    The Hard Left Democratic Party gave us Obamacare, and many other job killing measures.

    I hope they stay the course and alienate enough people that we have some time to clean up this mess. People need help now. People whom the Democratic Party could care less about. I live in CA where I’ve experienced my fair share of Pelosi’s influence.

    1. “The Hard Left”…..Don’t think so. It was Joe Lieberman and the insurance companies that gave us Obamacare. The left wants single payer. Looks like Obamacare may be hanging around after all as there is no consensus as to what to replace it with.

      1. It was Joe Lieberman and the insurance companies that gave us Obamacare.

        Usually you’re lot insist it was Robert Rector and Mitt Romney gave us this tar baby. Today’s lie from you is, I guess, a step up from total mendacity.

      2. Obama and his hench people like Max Baucus gave us Obamacare – the only Dem for single payer was Dennis Kucinich. Dems in the pocket of the insurance industry.

  2. It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them. FDR

        1. Not necessarily fake news. There’s a lot of weird stuff going on there. People too afraid to touch the story…

    1. Elena,

      Actually, she is. She has advocated alliance with nations such as Saudi Arabia, an nation which beheads more people in a month than ISIS. If you want to argue that SA is pro-gay and pro woman’s rights I believe this will be a difficult task. If you think white phosphorus used on civilians with the US’s blessing is a good thing, then carry on!

      1. an nation which beheads more people in a month than ISIS.

        Saudi Arabia executes a median of 82 people a year in a territory about 3x as populous as the ISIS stomping ground in Iraq and Syria. These are generally people convicted of homicide, and most of the remainder are people convicted of rape or drug trafficking. People beheaded are sedated beforehand.

        1. Elena – she is the leader of the disloyal opposition, that is all. And, as we all know, she is a drama queen and a media whore.

          1. Paul S, Guess she should stay on then since we have a narcissistic drama king president that tweets all day. Do you think that behavior is more unbecoming in a female?

            1. Elena – have you seen his daily schedule? The man is meeting with everybody or calling everybody.

      2. Kevin McCarthy is the majority leader and Paul Ryan is the Speaker. Do you even keep up with their positions or just focus on Nancy? Seems like many like to demonize the few women leaders while the men remain untouchable.

        1. Someone was mean to a girl. Poor little diddums.

          No one has ‘demonized’ Shelley Moore Capito or Candace Miller. Some of us have little time for Paul Ryan or Hal Rogers.

    1. The dems are just not as good as conning people as that old “faux” populist Trump is.

      1. They elected Barry O twice didn’t they? He is the ultimate con. Read his bio on the White website and tell me that isn’t the flimsiest resume you have EVER read of a two term president? How dare he call Trump unqualified.

        1. Yes, Barry Soetero / Barack H. Obama is the biggest con ever perpetrated on the American people. He’s a fraud. People know it in their guts. Hence, the gutting of the Democrat party under Obama.

    2. “After Donald Trump ridiculed Wall Street on the campaign trail, the President-elect tapped former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. executive Steven Mnuchin to be his Treasury secretary and billionaire investor Wilbur Ross to lead the Commerce Department. Trump even met with Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn inside Trump Tower.

      It would suit Tilson just fine if voters who backed Trump because he promised to rein in Wall Street are furious now that he’s surrounding himself with bankers and billionaires.

      “I can take glee in that — I think Donald Trump conned them,” said Tilson, who runs Kase Capital Management.” Democratic women just can’t compete with the billionaire. He commands more attention and no matter what he does his followers fall in place.

  3. The Botox Babe strikes again in pure California speak . It’s like duuuuhhhh huuh? Good news for the continued success for a move to centrist moderate stance in and return to the Constitutional Republic with a good strong democratically chosen foundation.

    Her first three words explain all you need to know about left wing fascist progressivism. She really does NOT think. Especially before speaking.

    1. Pelosi is not a “left wing fascist progressive” – she is a neo con / neo lib globalist.

  4. Great article! The leadership of the party is completely tone deaf. Even if they have no plan to change policies getting rid of the least popular Democrat in Washington seems like a no brainer.

  5. Pelosi makes my a** pucker when she speaks. There is just something about her that is very grating. Could it be lack of real imagination?

    1. Pretty much. She’s an institutional politicker. She went from fundrasing and party work to a safe seat in the Bay Area. She had a leg up running for that safe seat de novo when the previous incumbent resigned t and endorsed Pelosi on her deathbead in a special election. Her most challenging campaign may have been a failed run for Democratic National Chairman in 1985. The Democratic caucus in the House has none of the sort of rotation rules for committee chairmen which the Republican caucus has, so it has these party barons the other side does not. The Republican caucus replaced its leader in 1959, 1965, 1998, and 2015. The Democratic caucus replaced it’s leader once, in 1989, when he’d been hit with credible charges of taking laundered bribes and other abuses (he’d never be ejected today).

    2. I have the same grating, repelling reaction to her! She is like nails on a chalkboard plus stupid hubris piled on! Botox on the brain.

  6. ‏@BillMoyersHQ 8m8 minutes ago

    Noting more Americans voted Dem, @SenWarren says her party has a mandate to resist Trumpism, writes @NicholsUprising

    1. You lost the popular vote for House seats as well. That’s 9 of the last 12 congressional elections.

  7. It’s right up there with the Dems considering Congressman Keith Ellison, a Black Muslim and former Louis Farrakhan and Muslim Brotherhood supporter, to head the DNC. And the black female CNN commentator stating on CNN last week that “We don’t need white people in the Democratic Party right now.” These folks have aligned themselves with the radical left and are making themselves increasingly irrelevant to mainstream America. Good riddance!

    1. I hope they go with Ellison. It would be a perfect storm to sink a leaking ship.

  8. I guess this is her “well, let them eat cake moment.” Just compare the support and turnout for Sanders compared to Clinton. Or, better yet, just pretend that all didn’t happen… yeah, yeah… that’s the plan. Bernie… who???

    Just a hiccup.

    1. The thing is, the vast majority of Democratic voters are likely satisfied with the swill they’re fed. The Democratic Party has generally had a more committed core and a smaller periphery than the Republicans, in large measure because the Republicans collect everyone dissatisfied for whatever reason with the Democrat’s stock in trade. That everyone has several segments with disparate interests, so Republican voters will always be less satisfied. From Pelosi’s perspective, more satisfaction for swing voters means more dissatisfaction for base voters.

      1. Trump is more like an independent third party candidate than a Republican. He’s like a combination of “it’s the Economy, stupid” and “I’m fine with gay marriage” and other social issues. He has the possibility to make it cool to vote Republican. If he can help the inner cities in meaningful and tangible ways (ie not have them stay poor and government dependant as the Dems keep them), he will gain momentum towards a realignment of D voters becoming R voters. Go Trump!

    1. You’re not in a position to call the average nursing home resident an idiot, much less a man who has built a business with 22,000 employees and $9.5 bn in annual revenue.

      1. Leave an inheritance of $40 million of New York real estate to any bum on the street and most will be able to do the same thing.

        1. No, he will not, and that’s perfectly obvious to anyone who isn’t a supercilious jackass. The contentions that he could have done as well had he thrown the money in passive vehicles have been debunked again and again, but Democrats never listen to anything said to them, so it all goes over their heads.

          1. How many people do you know who lost money in real estate between 1970 and 2006 when it often appreciated at 10% /year?

            1. I don’t ask people about their real estate portfolio, and neither do you.

              Real estate commonly does not appreciate more than nominal income per capita. The one extended period when it did (1997-2006) left some trouble in its wake, because people purchase that asset with borrowed money.

              Trump is not a passive real estate ‘investor’. He’s an active developer and manager of commercial properties, resorts, and entertainment programs.

              His net worth exceeded his father’s by 1982 and was many multiples of his fathers by 1999. He wasn’t working in the same end of the business. Trump was a developer of commercial real estate and had properties in Manhattan. His father emphasized residential real estate an the Outer Boroughs.

              If you’d care to, you can examine the estimates of the net worth of the other real-estate developers who have been on the Forbes 400 for 30-odd years. Trump’s assets appreciated at the median rate among this set.

              Again, the contention that he’d have been better off had he thrown the money in passive vehicles is false, as it presumes dividend yields well in excess of what they were during that run of years, it presumes he pays no taxes, and it presumes he has no personal consumption. It also neglects a social reality: you’d be hard put to find any peers of Trump who made their money this way. You find extremely wealthy people (about 10% of the Forbes 400) who are investors, but they make discretionary investments in specific companies, and sometimes take an active hand in management. They’re not using passive vehicles.

              Again, the only reason this BS is plausible to liberals is that liberals are commonly snotty jerks who have no regard for the accomplishments and talents of people who are not like them.

    2. Seventy percent of Americans did not vote for Trump so he has no mandate. Just remember that.

      1. 70% did not vote for his opponent, either. You’re saying what, no one has a franchise to enact any policies at all?

        1. Toads – is that 70% of Americans or 70% of registered voters? Because, frankly, except for a couple of states, the Democrats lost the Rust Belt, the Midwest, the West, the South and the Southwest.

        2. Trump took out Jeb only to bring in an administration that resembles that an even more corrupt version of W’s first term.. If that is winning to you then congratulations. He is probably the best con man to ever win the presidency.

          1. Neither Trump nor anyone else is responsible for pleasing someone who fancies Media Matters is worth anyone’s attention.

            1. Not exactly the attitude that is going to be the winning strategy in achieving the promise to unite the country that Trump made repeatedly.

              “I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be president for all Americans, and this is so important to me.” — Donald Trump victory speech. If he really means this then it applies to even those folks who think that Media Matters is worthy of attention.

              “I will be a great unifier for our country.” — Trump response to a question by CNN’s Jake Tapper in October 2015

              Not going to unify the country if he follows your reasoning and dismisses the views of people because he does not approve of their sources of information.

              1. dogfightwithdogma – Media Matter (a Soros funded org) is going to be his opponent during his Presidency. Media Matters is known for fake news and dirty tricks. I wouldn’t rely on Politifact either after it gave a true fact 4 Pinocchios. There are some people like Nancy Pelosi and Madonna that he is never going to get along with. So they won’t get invited to the WH like they used to.

      2. Some 62 million voters voted for Trump. About that same voted for Hillary but she had a lead in popular votes mostly from liberal California, New York and Mass – and she failed to achieve 270 electoral votes – which is the point of our system, not a popular vote. Trump won because he ran a smarter campaign. Period.

    3. Trump nearly single handedly took out the Bushes (Jeb in primary), the Clintons (whooped HRC in the general), and Obama (campaigned his heart out for his legacy and HRC unlike any sitting president we have ever seen and still lost) and he had to fight the Republican establishment -and Trump won! That is not something an ‘idiot’ or a ‘moron’ or a ‘buffoon’ could accomplish. You underestimate Trump, my friend.

      Oh and spare us the spin that HRC won the popular vote. This was a contest to get to 270 electoral votes, not the popular vote. That’s essentially meaningless data in our electoral college system. The fact that HRC’s campaign took for granted the votes in Wisconsin and the rest of the Rust Belt while Trump went there and earned their votes absolutely proves Trump’s argument that Hillary does not have good instincts or good judgment. She doesn’t. And she lost a winnable race didn’t she? Deal with it people.

      1. And calling half the electorate “deplorable” and “irredeemable” isn’t exactly a smart move. And make no mistake – that was a rehearsed and planned comment – not off the cuff. Hillary believing THAT was a smart thing to say? Now THAT is stupidity on top of hubris. Sickening combination. And people still wonder why she lost? Please.

    4. Only the densely populated coastal elite voted for Hillary. Trump won a majority in 32 states. CA and NY do not get to decide the fate of the entire country, against the will of the rest, merely because they’re packed with people.

      And I have grave concerns about the CA vote. Since every single effort to purge the voter rolls of illegal aliens, dead people, and other fraudulent entries are deemed racist and anti-poor, we have absolutely no idea how many illegal aliens voted. The Moter Voter law ( swelled the rolls, but did not improve voter turnout. It did, however, make it more difficult to remove erroneous or fraudulent entries. I never realized this was that common until years ago I watched an expose where the journalist went from house to house where he got people to admit they were illegal aliens, had voted, and had absolutely no idea they were not supposed to vote.

      I have a somewhat cynical view of human nature. If the temptation of voter fraud is dangled, how many politicians can resist the lure?

      I would not go so far as Trump, who declares that millions of illegal aliens voted. Since the Democratic Party prevents us from combing through the rolls, and their voters dutifully call all efforts racist, we are not allowed to know.

      1. Guess MN, CO, IL, NV and NM don’t count in your narrative. She lost WI and MI by very small amounts. Do you consider the residents of VA, NH ,VT and ME to be coastal elites?

        1. Dave – of course you are right that some interior states voted a majority for Clinton, such as CO. I should have worded my coastal elite comment better and not used “only.” That was wrong. I was thinking about the majority of votes came from densely populated CA and NY. The East and the West coasts also tend to vote Democrat. I was very surprised he flipped WI. I thought that was hard blue.

          My issue with the popular vote comes from my experiences living in a rural area. The city uses rural neighborhoods for dumping grounds, the “not in my backyards” like pedophile placement, high speed rail, and nuclear waste dumps, or pipelines through Native American lands. We lack the votes to self determinate. The electoral college gives every state a voice. Without it, basically CA and NY would determine all our Presidents, and the rest of the nation would become flyover. I assume it would be treated like rural areas are treated now. In a popular only vote, no sparsely populated state would ever matter, ever get the President’s notice, and who knows what he or she would do with such a large portion of the country whose ire would never matter.

        1. Abraham Lincoln wasn’t running this year. Nor was Mother Theresa. We may have had record unfavorables of both major candidates this election. Many people assume Trump will continue to have self defeating problems in his Presidency. I’ve hammered on Trump’s flaws and only defended him when the criticism appeared unfair.

          Again, it is just a Democratic meme that Trump votes ignore his mistakes or believe he’s without issues.

      2. The cool thing Trump does on Twitter is get the conversation going. He knew he could not confirm ‘millions of illegals voted’ in California, but he got a tweet storm going with people and pundits talking about the subject of ‘illegals voting’ – which they are doing. This is his intent. He is driving the narrative. And at the same time he is driving the mainstream press nutso. So fun to watch….

  9. When President Bush was president, we came in big in the next election.

    They didn’t. It took 3 subsequent elections and a relentless media propaganda campaign re Hurricane Katrina to do that.

    What the Democratic Party has to offer still has a large constituency in the country, just not a majority constituency. The thing is, even in 1992, their stock-in-trade was pretty much non-negotiable. Clinton won through clever marketing and trivia like Sister Souljah and V-Chips. After the Republicans won Congress, he was willing to compromise (especially when Dick Morris told him too). BO was far too socially inept and spiteful to cut any serious deals with the opposition and the Democratic base is vicious to a degree it wasn’t in 1992, so you just had gridlock. Very few people in influential positions can imagine any policy innovations. Harold Pollack might, but he’s an academic in Chicago, not someone well-connected.

  10. Clinton leads by 2.5 million votes. Pelosi gained 6 house seats and the Dems in the Senate gained 4 women. Trump has brought in old billionaires, old generals and more former Goldman officials than any prior administration has. He is moving the country in a new direction – backwards.

    1. They had an optimal calendar and they managed to gain 2 Senate seats. The seats they gained were Mark Kirk’s and Kelly Ayotte’s. Kirk was one of the two most unreliable votes in that body from the perpective of party whips and Ayotte is a blatant opportunist whose word isn’t worth manure. They won’t be missed by any thinking Republican.

    2. All of that “lead” is from California, where Trump did not campaign. His winning strategy was to campaign in those states that he needed to win.

        1. Dave – if no one campaigned in California they should have voted for Vicente Fox.

    3. “Trump has brought in old billionaires, old generals and more former Goldman officials than any prior administration has.” Pretty much sums up Trump’s populism.

  11. The fact of the matter is that over two million more Americans opted to continue the successful transition out of the chaos and disgrace created by the Bush administration and the Republican party. Many millions more were seduced by the ‘Chicken Little’ routine of Trump, the lies, exaggerations, repetition, etc. The message put forth by Clinton was not designed for the feeble minded but for those who have a memory and common sense. The message put forth by Trump was designed for those with pent up anger and anxiety who personally attached themselves, the worker class, to this billionaire buffoon as he described through lies and exaggerations ‘All’ the problems of the US and their causes. Month after month of relentless finger pointing and lies convinced a few million more to vote for the very cause of America’s woes. This is human nature. If you tell a lie often enough, some believe it.

    So, take the entrenched Republicans and Democrats out of the equation and you have ten to fifteen million who were duped. On the extreme left and right there are those who would never vote for the other party. On the left there were the followers of Sanders and the Green party, those who, regardless of whether or not they are accurate in their estimates of the problems, truly want to move America forward to a better world. On the right you have the White supremacists, racists, bigots, and the Klan. Take those who voted apart and you have most people level headed and a difference of extremes worth a second look. Trump may do well or be the disaster he promises to be. However, the real losers in this election are those who voted for Trump because they couldn’t see past his lies and machinations, suckers born every minute.

    1. Beginning a post with “The fact of the matter” doesn’t necessarily mean that all words after that phrase have any connection with reality. And when you do it they most certainly will be void of reason and logic as well.

    2. Issac-

      Many of those who voted for Trump default their thinking to the most simplistic of all ideologies….god controls everything, so we may as well sit back and enjoy whatever seems most entertaining at the moment.

    3. There are those that do not care much for the female democrats. They prefer “strong men” like Trump.

      1. Elena,

        This is true but by itself, is analysis that ignores the problem.

        Working people have been losing income. More people are in poverty under Obama than Bush. Too many people are hungry, homeless, cannot afford health care (still a leading cause of bankruptcy), cannot afford schooling and are often debt slaves.

        Democrats jettisoned their concern for the working class in favor of their donor class, people who are literally their “class mates” at universities and the dinner table. I’m going to try to link to a very good analysis of this situation as soon as I can find it.

        I don’t prefer Trump but Clinton, Pelosi, and the Democrats do not represent me and my values in any way. I am anti war, against illegal surveillance, pro environment, pro social justice and would like to see single payer universal health care (to name just a few examples of my own values). Neither woman nor your party as a whole, stands for any of these values. Your party enacts “laws” that are antithetical to what I hope for in my nation.

        I want justice. Your party will not bring that to this nation as it is not designed for that purpose. Rather, its purpose is to serve and be part of the oligarchy. This is also true of the Republican party. It will take a people’s movement such as nodapl to bring justice back into the world. We are the people who want it and there is no sense in trying to reform the corrupt legacy parties whose only dedication is to further enriching those already bloated from the money, land and water stolen from the people. Yes, we do want a new direction.

        1. No more democrats in charge of anything to kick around after Jan 20. Trump, McConnell, Ryan and all their billionaires and generals will be in charge. Lots of “strong men” will be in charge. Don’t be surprised if Trump reverses Obama on Standing Rock. Good luck with the Trump administration and fairness.

          1. Elena,

            Again, you are evading the real argument here. This isn’t about what Trump will do, it’s about what Pelosi said and Democrats have been doing. You seem unable to address the real issue, I believe, because there is no leg for you to stand on. You can only try to divert attention away from the actual issue and hope no one notices that you switched to Democratic talking points.

            We notice!

            P.S. Obama may reverse himself. And it isn’t Obama who made justice at Standing Rock, it was the brave men and women whom he let be abused by a militarized police/contractor force who brought justice there.

            1. Jill,The democrats are pretty much over haven’t you heard so why waste time on Pelosi. There are some that want the witches, Pelosi and Hillary, burned at the stake but I hope you are not one of them. Trump and his frightening appointments are the future and they need to be discussed NOW.

              1. Elena – I have been called racist for disagreeing with Obama’s policies, not caring about the poor for bitterly complaining about my experiences with Obamacare, sexist against…myself for believing Hillary was corrupt and a lier, anti-Semitic for believing that Trump, the first sitting President with a Jewish First Family, did not send that meme out with a deliberate anti-Semitic intent, racist for being upset that BLM was openly anti-semitic and for believing that all lives matter equally…I can’t keep track of them all. That just skims the surface.

                A lot of us are like me. We’re awfully tired of being called sexist/raicst/bigots/etc every time we disagree with a Democrat.

                Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi have made decisions and policy that some people oppose. They have character flaws (“we have to pass it to know what’s in it”) that have offended people.

                That’s not sexist, and it’s ignorant to claim that it is. And it’s such a turn off when Dems go straight for their ad hominem quiver without really thinking about it. It drives people away from the party, which is part of the problem behind all these losses.

                I am so very tired of Democrats ascribing evil tendencies to those who oppose their politicians or policies. They put so very little thought into it – do they even notice, for example, that they can freely criticize female conservatives without fearing the sexist label?

                Jill is right – no matter if Trump succeeds or fails, no matter if he never puts down that darned Twitter account, this was a testament that the majority of people vehemently rejected the status quo, Obamacare, and other economic policies of the past 8 years. We need more jobs, and many Democrat proposals kill jobs. Even if Trump fails, that changes nothing about the referendum on the establishment and tax and spend. (Although I do hope that his inner circle removes his phone.)

            2. Probably would have been better if Pelosi had been replaced but she wasn’t. Like I said she does not have much power as the minority leader. She is the most powerful woman but nonetheless not very powerful compared to Trump, Pence, Ryan, McCarthy, McConnell and all the powerful generals and other billionaire cabinet members.

            3. Jill, the establishment Dems did nothing for the Standing Rock Sioux – including Pocahontus. It took 2000+ brave vets who organized and went up there to serve as human shields for the water protectors. And Tulsi Gabbard joined them. That’s the only reason Obama backed down. Imagine the optics and horrible PR if those corporate goons had fired on our vets.

          2. ‘More people are in poverty under Obama than Bush.’ This is the problem. This statement represents a memory almost non existent and a near complete lack of understanding of time. The level of poverty under Bush was the result of the economy created by the tech revolution under Clinton. Bush did nothing but turn a surplus into a deficit and create the recession inherited by Obama. During the past two to three years the US economy has started to recover in rising wages as well as lower unemployment. Trump will enjoy this upswing and call it his own. The effects of policy takes at least three to four years to surface. Trump will grease the wheels with spending programs and cuts. In three to four years we will have the same results as with Reagan-the worst recession since the great depression, and then again with Bush-a recession that eclipsed Reagan’s and was only contained by Obama. This pretzel logic of blaming the administration that inherits the mess is typical of Trump supporters.

          3. Elena – do you really think the Obama administration has been fair? The dude spent $85 million of my money on vacations and he still has Xmas coming.

      2. Nominate a ‘female Democrat’ who merits the office she seeks. You cannot and will not.

        1. That would be Tulsi Gabbard – but you are right – the Dems cannot and will not nominate her.

  12. Nancy doesn’t want to hear that the working class and the middle class are tired of being ignored by corporatist Dems who love to talk, talk talk but they’ve never seen a war or a corporate lobbyist that done don’t like!

    1. Too many of the working and middle classes like fantasies of success, wealth, security, power. The Democratic party loses when it focuses campaigns on reality rather than on fantasy.

      1. When you find yourself talking that way (presuming you’re not a condescending twit 24/7), you might try putting the name of a random individual in there that you know and seeing if it makes sense. As in, “Tami likes fantasies of success, wealth, security, and power”.

  13. She’s so right…. at least that’s what the last election showed! This poor woman lives in an alterate reality. Sadly some of her partners in crime live there with her. She’s the ipitome of stupdity every time she opens her mouth. A real embarrassment for sure. But glad they chose her again. Makes it easier to defeat a few more Liberals.

  14. “What we want is a better connection of our message to working families in our country, and that clearly in the election showed that that message wasn’t coming through.”

    The message is not getting through alright; however it’s the political class that is tone deaf.

  15. “Never reinforce defeat.” Von Clausewitz

    Keep going Dems – we love your tactics.

Comments are closed.