this argument does not fly. Being a woman does not make one a feminist and many women are misogynists. They just think they are special.

So who is the misogynist?

and downright thieves are taking over and we are arguing about purity.

We DESERVE to be destroyed if every single one of us doesnt vote for ANY democrat in 2018.

And I mean it, we deserve to lose our SS and Medicare, because we will.

We will.

Just returned from Tralfamadore. All is well.

Kilgore.

“Hello, babies. Welcome to Earth. It’s hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It’s round and wet and crowded. At the outside, babies, you’ve got about a hundred years here. There’s only one rule that I know of, babies — ‘God damn it, you’ve got to be kind.”

Thanks, Eliot

Damn this shit is PISSING ME OFF.

VOTE DEMOCRATIC! Period. No excuses. Especially no waiting for the (non-existent) "perfect" candidate.

are suggesting Pelosi needs to step down as minority leader. She is the reason Dems have lost these special elections. She is too divisive, too partisan, too, you name it. it is becoming if a candidate loses blame a woman.

When Clinton lost dems also said she and she alone was to blame for the loss.

Kind of hard to hang that around Pelosi's neck if one is being intellectually honest enough to look objectively at the odds of taking that seat.

by the the Right or anyone else.

All those who complain about "shrill" or "aggressive" women could hardly paint her in those colors...Her manner is exceptionally restrained and "ladylike". All I can conclude is that the hatred is due to her being extremely good at her job....It so pisses me off.

They've tied everything that the public doesn't like about liberalism to her. She is the face of what republikkans and independents fear. Her being from a county near San Francisco helps them.
They used brand marketing
Not fair, yes. But the political reality is, much of the public doesn't like her, doesn't trust her and the Republicans use it.

Don't agree? Look at the advertisements they run. Pelosi figures prominently in some form. We can't seem to do that well.

They did it with Tom Foley. He became the face of the 'check writing scandal in the late 80's and early 90's'. It didn't matter that Republicans as well as Democrats had done it, though it was more Democrats than Republicans. Gingrich was involved and still came away without a scratch.

Bill Clinton in '96. They did it there as well. They accepted he was going to win, so they scared people into voting for Republicans for the House and Senate.

I don't know what the answer is. But, we've lost ground for three decades at almost every level.

Just like they did to HRC. We need to fight back against the bullying and propaganda.

At the same time, watching him squirm when they brought up her name seems to indicate she's not much of an asset when it comes to the party's brand.

At some point, reality and what's fair become divergent discussions.

And this was one of a kind

And the first step to changing a brand is signaling to the public that you're going to change.

Rather than get rid of the leaders.

If Ossoff doesn't have the backbone to stand up to attacks on Nancy Pelosi, he doesn't have what it takes to be in Congress.

If Handel can withstand the attacks on Trump without squirming our candidates should certainly figure out how not to run away from members of our team. Otherwise, they're punks who deserve to lose.

But then, that would mean blaming HIM for his own loss . . .

1-1 in that district.

Democratic challengers are swimming upstream in 2018 and will need every advantage possible.

Own it and throw it back in their faces

because of his loss.

Even though there was no reason to think that any Dem would have won in Newt Gingrich's old district. The only reason people got their hopes up in this race was because he did surprisingly well in the open primary, winning a plurality of votersl. But the only reason he did that was because Handel had 10 primary opponents. They all banded together to support her in the run-off, however, so his primary plurality wasn't enough to overcome a united GOP.

of the solution.

Democrats are going to need some kind of standard-bearer, some kind of agenda, some kind of leadership in 2018. Where's it going to come from?

Bernie? Hillary? Nancy? Steny? Anyone under the age of 70?

the party has utterly failed to adequately develop its next generation of leaders. We're seeing some of that starting to happen in the Senate with Booker, Harris, etc. But the House remains the same old, same old.

critters already. There's a university or two out there,?I forget the names. They are taught how to speak fast, etc

You're right. The Party Brand as represented by Pelosi does not sell well with GOPee voters and GOPee voters are exactly what Ossoff needed to win. I can live with losing races like this one because to win means changing our Brand to be more palatable to GOPee voters. As soon as I see Sen Turtle resign due to Democrats not voting GOPee, I'll back Pelosi resigning.

Oh. My God. Thank you so much for finding a great way to phrase what I've been trying to say.

We are losing. We are getting our asses handed to us left and right and at every level and the discussion and debate I hear most is not who is the most "pure" or the most liberal or whatever. It's about whether things are fair or not.

News flash: Things are not fair.
They are not going to suddenly get fair.

And if we keep our focus on whining about the fact that politics, in America in 2017 is not fair....if we keep continually banking our wins and our electoral strategy on things being fair and just we will continue to get our asses handed to us.

Ossoff loses his race, it's Nancy's fault.

Bernie loses his race, it's Hillary's and Debbie's fault.

Hillary loses her race, it's HER fault.

Hmmm. Notice some kind of pattern here?

It's even Hillary's fault when she actually wins her race only to get rat-fucked out of it through no fault of her own.

I'm still waiting for the media and some on the left to insist that Bernie blame himself for his loss - to their satisfaction.

Tim Kaine was as her running mate. How utterly uninspiring he was. No, it's all "Hillary was so unpopular and it's her fault that she lost."

And when you note that Trump was twice more unpopular than Clinton except with imbeciles who want to take America back to the 1950s (and apparently there are alot more of them than the average white person -- including the average white liberal -- chooses to admit) then everything just goes super quiet.

I'm sure that someone will come along to mansplain' what a good thing that is.

Unless one does not want to

Or are you claiming it wouldn't happen if Pelosi were a man? Neither sounds plausible.

Pelosi is in a leadership position and has been there for a long time. The reason she is there to begin with and has remained so is because a majority of mostly male legislators put her there. Regardless of gender anyone in that position is going to get their leadership questioned from time to time. It's simply politics and I'm sure Pelosi understands that quite well.

It really is a stretch to try and blame Democratic leadership on the loss and I have more than a suspicion this kind of blame wouldn't be happening if a white man was in charge. There would be a greater assumption that a man did his job than a woman.

Just ask Newt Gingrich.

Not sure that's a rational comparison. Ossoff lost in a race he was destined to lose that largely has no practical consequence on current governance. He lost by only a few points in a seat historically solidly red and the Democratic party. I''m pretty sure we can mark that down as an accomplishment, not an excuse to revolt against Pelosi. But, then again, she is a woman and that usually means she should have tried harder.

Or do you think they cared more about losing seats in the mid-term?

I'm pretty sure had the GOP won seats or at least held on to the ones they had, old Newt would have got to keep his job no matter how many rules he broke. YMMV.

It's not a comparison. Newt got fired. Pelosi is and will remain in her position for the foreseeable future and rightly so. It's just a point that when elections go the other way, those waiting in the wings will blame it on the leadership. That's how politics works.

It takes less disaster for a woman to take the fall. Losing a race we were destined to lose is not a disaster at all.

and then campaigned on it on behalf of the entire caucus.

So, naturally he was blamed when it blew up in their faces.

Completely different situation from Pelosi.

Party leaders in congress always have more power and influence over the party compared to party chairmen. He was given at least partial credit for the so-called "Republican revolution" and he was given the blame when it failed. That's the way leadership positions in congress work. When the majority swapped in the 2010 midterms, Pelosi was criticized then as well and faced a serious challenge to her leadership position. There's always going to be someone who wants her job and she will always face criticism when elections are lost simply because that's when the blood is in the water. Comes with the territory, and has nothing to do with what plumbing she was born with. The current criticism is a joke and will be forgotten as soon as the next shiny object comes along.

There's too many other instances that betray that idea and everyone is always looking for a scapegoat.

Harry Reid, Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi. Same complaint from me against all three, has nothing to do with gender.

residency or lack thereof. NOBODY bought wholeheartedly the "girlfriend" excuse, IMO, not even his supporters. At best, Ossoff looked weak; at worst, a carpetbagger.

He was asking GOPee voters to cross party line for the first time in 40 years and elect him to represent their district that he cared so little about he chose to not live in it.

No wonder folks are mad at Nancy!

Only Hillary Clinton is the only candidate expected to be perfect, or else.

After all, he had the good sense to not move into that district! lol

then bashing Pelosi is a tried and true tactic for southern republicans. I lived in Alabama in 2010 and they did the same thing to the incumbent Democrat.

I'm not calling for Pelosi to go but we do need better messaging if we're to make gains in the south

Every time a woman is criticized, it's not automatically "misogyny".

And asking for her head even though she super good at her job

That's misogyny

Gingrich and Hastert are two fairly recent examples.

is not helpful.

One can make legitimate complaints against leadership - Reid, Daschle, or Pelosi - without it having a thing to do with gender. To call any criticism of a woman a result of gender bias dilutes the charge and inappropriately reduces actual instances of misogyny to a cry of wolf.

Misogyny is alive and well at DU. Sigh.

This crap is getting way old.

People are allowed to be frustrated with the top leadership in the party even if its misguided. Throwing the word "misogyny" around every time a woman is being criticized demeans important feminist issues and the word starts to lose seriousness and meaning when its abused in that way.

Whatever the reason, the republikkans get a lot of mileage out of using Nancy Pelosi in close races.
They have determined through focus testing and, oddly enough, through House races across the country, that painting the Democrat running in the congressional district with her wins elections for them.
You can say misogyny drives the dislike of Pelosi, but it doesn't change that much of the voting public doesn't like her and won't support people tied to her. The number of Democrats sitting in the House is at it's lowest point in decades and she has been the leader of the House Democrats during the descent.
Somewhere there needs to be accountability, and yes, that includes people at the top. It's irrelevant that most of the House members think she's doing a bang up job because most of the public doesn't seem to think so - and there are more of them.
Hence the Republicans use her likeness everywhere.
They did that with O' Neill and Foley in the late 80's and early 90's. They did it with Bill Clinton in the '96 election. Their message, "Yeah, you like Clinton better than Dole. But, do you trust Clinton with a Democratic senate and house?" Most of the public did not and he won and so did most of the Republicans running for the House.

Nancy Pelosi isn't the only reason he lost. She probably isn't even a major reason. He didn't live in the district, which could have (and likely was) a big turn off for 'independents'. He came off as wooden (his speeches and such) appeared focus tested. The district is predominately Republican is the biggest factor.
But, to claim it's all about Misogyny that some people want her replaced as speaker is whistling past the graveyard. We've fallen further back every election cycle in the House over the past decade and she is the cudgel the Republicans use to hammer Democratic candidates.
Where is the accountability at the top? She is the party leader in the House. Hoyer is second in command. Both should be held accountable when things are not working. As should the head(s) of the DCCC.

Politics is about winning. Democrats are not winning and have not been winning for most of the last 30 years.
Disagree? Check our Senate and House seats. our governorships and our legislative control after Dukakis' disastrous presidential election. Then look at the trends since then. It has been a slow drip away from the Democratic Party, with only a few blips in our direction.

If you're saying that you want to throw out arguably the best Democratic leader the House has had in its entire history just because Republicans are attacking her, then you're saying that you would rather have a mediocre and ineffective white male leader that the Republicans would *not* be attacking precisely because he *wasn't* effective. The reason Republicans are attacking Nancy Pelosi is that she is effective. But to sexist minds, there is no way a woman can be an effective leader, so they can't help but see an ineffective and weak woman through their hateful sexist glasses.

You can try as hard as you want to hide it; you can even convince yourself that you're not being sexist; but you can't convince those out there who can see right through your misogyny. It's disgusting.

You should work through this reading list I posted in response to another person who didn't understand that Nancy Pelosi, despite having a vagina, is an extremely effective leader:

Washington Monthly: Nancy Pelosi Is the Most Effective Member of the Resistance
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/05/04/nancy-pelosi-is-the-most-effective-member-of-the-resistence/

Washington Post: Nancy Pelosi turns 75 today. She’s still the most effective leader in Congress.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/26/nancy-pelosi-turns-75-today-shes-still-the-most-effective-leader-in-congress

The Atlantic: The Staying Power of Nancy Pelosi
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/the-staying-power-of-nancy-pelosi/440022/

Alternet: Nancy Pelosi: The Most Effective Speaker of the House in History
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/425315/nancy_pelosi%3A_the_most_effective_speaker_of_the_house_in_history

The Guardian: Nancy Pelosi: is this the most powerful woman in US history?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/mar/26/nancy-pelosi-politician-speaker

So many talk the talk, but their true nature shows through....they can't be something they are not all the time.

to get back at the feminists and others they see as in their way.

Attaching the candidate to Pelosi has been GOP plug and play for years. Others in the thread have emphasized it. I've seen it for years while living in both Nevada and Florida. When I've gotten into heated arguments with simplistic angry white conservative males from Las Vegas they may not know a damn thing about politics but the name Nancy Pelosi always surfaces. I can basically predict the point they'll summon it.

We need a strong outspoken white male as minority leader. That's my version. It may be a patch but it's a logical patch. At this point we need to try to swipe a percent here and there, instead of automatically forfeiting a percent or two.

It's like a football team that changes coaches even if they know the current guy in charge is perfectly fine and other teams will quickly prioritize him. Change of scenery. Fresh not stale.

The speaker has been demonized by the GOP for years. She happens to be a woman. I don't think gender has a thing to do with it. They would demonize Bob Pelosi, too.

Who talk about an ineffective white male career politician as if he is a deity.

It's extremely transparent.

causing much of this.

and they don't even realise it. Attacking Pelosi is literally doing the GOP's job for them.