for someone to blame for yesterday's narrow losses.

I'll poke around the other threads.

As a native Californian and a former San Francisco/Bay Area resident, Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, and Barbara Boxer are/were role models for women. I will always have utmost respect for each of them.

"Since neither Hillary or Chelsea are running for office, Ossoff's thin loss in a 40-year GOP district means we have to scapegoat Pelosi."

Link to tweet

elected. That candidate also lost to a woman in a solid red district. So damn her, it's all Nancy's fault.

They want someone not a skilled, intelligent, and effective as Pelosi so they've launched an attack campaign. The 3 Democrats going after her are baffling to me, and suspicious.

My House Rep is Ron Johnson (Fucking Idiot-WI)

Isn't exactly a compromising position and could be understood as one of the reasons Democrats have been losing.

We had a teabaggers for 2 years, then Gwen Graham and now Lawson. I'm in a blue spot in a red area.

But, my point is, the DNC and the rest aren't listening to all of the people, in my opinion.

And for daring to suggest we deprive them of this target, you can get called all sorts of names here. Part of our brilliant plan to insult our way out of our problems.

Because if you did, you'd consider listening to people not currently represented by Democrats.

That isn't going to happen with people older than their grandparents who have held their seats in noncompetitive districts for decades, I don't blame Pelosi for what happened in Georgia last night, indeed I think she was powerless to influence it in any way.

I encountered a lot of young people in the last election who were passionately supporting Hillary Clinton yet couldn't tell me who their Congressman was or whether it was a Democrat or a Republican, it's just the Pepperidge Farm guy to them.

And for the record, by the standards of "millennials" I'm older than fuck.

I'm a millennial myself. I can understand giving room for younger people to blossom in leadership. My beef are the silly phantom reasons ( Pelosi being one) being proffered for Ossoff's loss.

we need a win. If that means changing leadership, then so be it.

the definition of insanity again?

The last Republican who ran in the 12th got less than 20%, in 2016 she only ran against an independent far to her left.

to anyone talking about leadership change is misguided. Nobody is saying Pelosi is bad for the party. She's done phenomenal things. But a change at leadership may be just what we need.

You hear that Bernie supporters? You can stop alert trolling me now.

The transformation that has to happen is getting out the vote in the mid-terms, we need leadership who can get our base as invested in the midterms as they were in Obama. None of the geriatrics in congress are going to do that, whether or not they also posses a geriatric penis or not.

SWS

.....people new to DU or the party itself just because we disagree with them? Really unpleasant and unhelpful.

We lost the House. You'd have to be an ostrich to not examine the leadership and what we're doing wrong. Even if gerrymandering is issue---is Pelosi doing everything possible to expose and fight that? We need new energy and new strategies. She may be safe in her district but it may also be time for her to pass the baton.

I am really getting tired of this shit.

I was just putting forth a viewpoint. I could be wrong, just feeling a little down about the 0-4 in congressional races this year.

...comment. Have no idea what all the hullabaloo was about.

I was feeling terrible already. Now I want a drink, but I have to get up before dawn to go to work.

You're point seems valid and should be looked at. The country and the party is in crisis and we need hugely new and bold ideas and actions to counter the coup of Trumpism that's underway.

Pelosi's district is blue. We have nothing to fear. She should probably step aside.

I agree...We are at the drawing board. 18 months to figure this out. We can talk about leadership in a respectful way. Maybe we need a change, maybe we dont... but it all starts with a conversation.

to maneuver, doesn't mean I take everything he says seriously.

I live in NM 3, my Democratic Rep is Ben Ray Lujan.

Blaming Nancy Pelosi - or anyone else - is completely meaningless and counter-productive.

Pelosi is a superstar, and there's no way this "loss" should be pinned on her. The point you make is that the only ones who can fire her would be her own district. And they love her, because she's doing a great job. She has the respect of everyone in the House of Representatives and she deserves our respect too.

We can't be fighting the same stupid battles over and over. There is no Democrat who's our enemy, so let's just stop this infighting. All the enemies come from the other party, Trump, Pence, McConnell, Ryan, and a whole bunch more losers.

Let's get to work!

We even share the same first name! She was an absolute master at counting votes when she was Speaker. But I hear the dissatisfaction of young people about the Old Guard. My evil Congress critter is Greg Walden and we are working hard to unseat him! Our Indivisible group has been very busy. So far we have three potential challengers.

I'm totally supportive of pelosi. Frankly I think the objections to her are nonsensical at best.


But I don't understand why du'ers stuck with a repug rep shouldn't have a voice.

I got an email from her today about her suit against Trump on Emoluments.



Are y'alls Reps on board?

called for Nancy Pelosi's ouster today. I'm beyond disgusted.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/21/politics/nancy-pelosi-democrats-kathleen-rice/index.html

leader. I have no doubt that those complaining about Pelosi didn't want her for minority leader either.

Well too F**ing bad. She one the votes in the House, and no, that vote wasn't rigged.

Of course this bullshit is feeding right into the media, and right wing propaganda machine.

It's just garbage. If someone else was the minority leader, and we continued to lose elections in RED DISTRICTS, who are they going to blame then.

This is just scape goating bullshit because they are unhappy that candidate for minority leader didn't win the votes in the house. All this does is divide the party. When the next Congress occurs they will have another chance to vote, that is how it works Kathleen

goes out of its way to insure its double standard bullshit that they pushed all last year, and into this year

Even their coverage of this 6th district election conveniently leaves out that fact that reputable analysts said that if ossoff didn't win the first round outright, it was very unlikely he would win the runoff, since all the republicans running in the first round took votes away from each other, and united behind the ONE republican in the runoff

I cancelled my subscription several a few weeks ago when the Times had a story blaming the republican position of "global warming" on the "hubris of Obama and the Democrats"

F**k THEM

I don't understand why they fired Judy Miller. She fits right into that garbage.

Here are some of their stories which motivated me to cancel the NYTimes this year.

"the Times just couldn't resist invoking a false equivalency of the republican extremism by saying that it was "Democratic hubris in the Obama years", that helped push the republicans over the edge:

"The Republican Party’s fast journey from debating how to combat human-caused climate change to arguing that it does not exist is a story of big political money, Democratic hubris in the Obama years and a partisan chasm that grew over nine years like a crack in the Antarctic shelf, favoring extreme positions and uncompromising rhetoric over cooperation and conciliation."

Then they proceed to make excuses for the republicans by saying "most republicans do not believe climate change is a hoax"

“Most Republicans still do not regard climate change as a hoax,” said Whit Ayres, a Republican strategist who worked for Senator Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign. “But the entire climate change debate has now been caught up in the broader polarization of American politics.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

This is not the first time the Times does this. Frequently in their articles, believing I suspect, that it makes them appear "balanced". What it actually does, is distort the true picture of things.

The hiring of Bret Stephens is a perfect example of that philosophy:, "see how objective we are, we give equal voice to those who have different views, regardless that the Science on the subject has already spoken


In February they reported on a Democratic Member Quiting the Election Commission, and by invoking this so-called "balanced approach, left readers with the impression that both sides do it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/fec-elections-ann-ravel-campaign-finance.html

It was a completely distorted picture of what was happening in that committee. The Democrats on that committee were willing to compromise, and work with their republican counterparts, but guess which side would not meet half-way?

The article gave such a distorted picture of what was really occurring, that the Democrat who resigned from that committee followed through with an editorial to present an actual picture of things:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/dysfunction-and-deadlock-at-the-federal-election-commission.html

In the Times infinite wisdom to setup false equivalencies between the republicans and Democrats, they have a video by Mark Scheffle and Shane O'Neill telling us how both republicans and Democrats have flip-flopped on Comey. It is so out of context it is pathetic. Shame on the NY Times for this and the other garbage they have been peddling.

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000005090191/comey-fired-democrats-republicans.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Their paper isn't even worth the lining in my birdcage

There are always going tp be calls to fire the manager. Sometimes that's what needs to happen- even when the manager has done a good job over their tenure. A new face and style can help.

Most of the time, however, it's fans bitching and looking for somebody to blame for the team losing.

changes around placing greater emphasis on supporting labor and championing working class issues. But can't get behind an anti-Pelosi effort. She's been a heavyweight champion throughout her career. I haven't always agreed with her stances, but she's one tough, classy and respectable lady.

Oh, and I'm spoiled. Peter DeFazio.

1st District Colorado. Nancy Pelosi should NOT go ... the problem is Republican hate ads that vilify Democratic leaders. I hate negative ads with a passion and the Democratic party needs come up with a way to nullify them. It just disgusts me that people get their information from ads. I don;t know what the answer is but it is time to make Republicans own their own words and point out their lies with facts!

It's time for somebody else, younger and more open to new ideas, to step up. That being said, a lot of the challengers (from people like Tim Ryan) aren't really any better.

nt

They said that attack ads were used with her in it.

I think the House member was from MA.

...says some Dems in office want her to go.

From the article by Igor Bobic:

“This is something that we certainly have to discuss,” Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) said during a Wednesday interview on CNN, when asked whether Pelosi should step down as minority leader and make room for fresh voices.

Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) also told CNN it was “time for Nancy Pelosi to go.”

But it isn’t only previous Democratic critics of Pelosi who are calling for a change. Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas), who supported Pelosi in the leadership election, argued the minority leader had contributed to Democrats’ loss in Georgia.

“I think you’d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top,” he told Politico on Wednesday. “Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost. But she certainly is one of the reasons.”

We need a less polarizing figure. Maybe Seth Moulton. A military guy who has experience in battle.

My rep is Rohrabacher. Hillary won our district. I have good cause to question.

They went for Bernie Sanders in huge numbers, and Sanders isn't exactly young.

She was so gracious to me a few years ago. I was in D.C. for a week and her office secured my daughter and I tours of the National Archive, the Supreme Court, Congress and the White House. She even personally greeted us when her intern was escorting us around Congress. And we're just simple nobodies.

Now I'm represented by Kevin Yoder-R here in Kansas. Sigh. Betty McCollum is a treasure. You're very fortunate to have her representing you, Mineral Man.

several elections and always welcome a chance to talk with her at DFL party conventions and other opportunities. She's doing a great job for her district and for the nation.

With those knuckledraggers

if you think that.

Ossoff ran in his old district.

Gingrich kept painting her over and over as a "San Francisco liberal" during his presidential campaign. (Almost like Nancy was running against him for president)

Then, Ossoff gets attached to a "San Francisco liberal". I'm sure that Newt Gingrich was behind this stunt.

We don't need to cave to that slimy pig.

I know he didn't win but now we are going to rearrange the party based on GA?

"Impeachment is Off the Table" Pelosi out of the water.

WTF? "Impeachment is off the table"??? In what universe is a Speaker allowed to sabotage the Constituton before Conyers' Judiciary Committee even has hearings??????????

Fucking incredible.