Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nancy Pelosi's Horibble Sunday Performance

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
millsaps28 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:38 AM
Original message
Nancy Pelosi's Horibble Sunday Performance
Edited on Mon May-08-06 10:41 AM by millsaps28
Snip form P M Carpenter's comentary:
Now take Nancy Pelosi -- please
I guarantee you there are a couple hundred Democratic members of the House of Representatives scratching their heads this morning, wondering why in God’s name they ever cast a vote for Nancy Pelosi as the public face of their party.

She just made an appearance on “Meet the Press,” and it was a disaster. Worse than that, it was a lasting embarrassment for any progressive-minded viewer hoping to see something other than a profile in stuttering, stammering, defensiveness, vacillation and evasion.
end snip

http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2006/05/i_guarantee_you.html

I think that it may be time to think about another leader in the house. The value in the Clinton Impeachment for the Republicans is laid before us now: Republican presidency, congress, courts. They did not need to get him out nessesarily, the only needed to taint the Democrats as morally unworthy of power. Now we need to impeach Bush for the sole reason of illustrating to the nation that this bunch is incompetent and should no longer be trusted with power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
1. Funny how people say Dems don't speak up and when they do
Edited on Mon May-08-06 10:47 AM by linazelle
it's this tripe. Why don't you run for the job? Could you have done better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
millsaps28 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I probably could have
First of all, I would hardly call that skeaking up. Incoherent and vaciliating talking points is not speaking up! Its like Clinton said, people will vote for someone who is strong and wrong over weak and right. Just say what you want to do and have conviction. You know that whatever you say, the Republicans and the media will have a hissy fit so be prepared for that. My God!! say something!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. You might read this ......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
41. So when you give speeches
and address groups you really comeout both barrels blazing, eh?

Let me tell you friend, it's not so easy as it looks.

Julie--who knows first hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. Opinions are like assholes
everybody's got one.

Whatever .......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. Judging from what comes out of the mouths of some ...
... I'm no longer sure that's true. Jus' sayin'. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OregonBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
4. I agree with you on her performance. I like Nancy Pelosi but she
was very shaky, very evasive. Not her best by any means!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
6. I agree. She was uncomfortable to watch. I don't get it with her.
Yes, she spoke up, but her delivery is so halting and apologetic that the message is lost.

Compare the clarity of Clinton or Gore to Pelosi's performance yesterday. We need spokepeople
who have a bit of media savvy about them, who anticipate the questions and have succinct,
fully formed answers ready to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UnityDem Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Could she have a "slight" impediment?
In watching her over the years, both in interviews and on the house floor, I always thought that she had a very slight speech problem. Her hesitancy and pauses could be masking a slight stutter or some other problem. Would love to hear from a speech pathologist on this subject. Like I say, it is very slight but it becomes somewhat more noticeable under stressful situations (as was the case with Russert).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. She did fine ...
Russert came across like a domineering jerk. I'm not a subdued classy woman like Nancy Pelosi, but she serves us well. Her understated, yet steadfast stands only make her attackers look shrill.

Go Nancy! Many of us still love ya! :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
9. Rreplace her with who? Steny Hoyers, DLC corporatist? I think not!
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251151&kaid=106&subid=122

Hoyer has been reported to already be furiously courting K Street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Agreed. Plus remember
Edited on Mon May-08-06 12:08 PM by ShortnFiery
that pissy little run Harold Ford, Jr. attempted against her? Hey, Ford may be A OK, but someone who cared about him, should have advised him otherwise.

Right Wing Republicans deplore women with power. A firebrand would be a mistake. Nancy is firm and makes her points clear ... she's IMO, a intelligent and competent leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. More on Steny Hoyer from David Sirota...
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/5/3/123758/5207

Let's take a look at Hoyer's recent behavior in aiding and abetting the hostile takeover of our government. On economics, here's what I pointed out back in January:

You remember, it was Hoyer - the Democratic Whip - who refused to whip votes together to try to defeat the corporate-written Central American Free Trade Agreement. When Pelosi tried to build opposition to the disgusting bankruptcy bill, it was Hoyer, the second-ranking Democrat in the House, who not only didn't whip against the bankruptcy bill, but actually voted for it, after pocketing massive campaign contributions from the banking industry...And when Pelosi worked to keep her caucus together in opposing the GOP Energy Bill, it was Hoyer who voted for the nauseating legislation after pocketing more than $300,000 from energy/natural resource industry cash. That legislation that literally gave away billions of taxpayer dollars to the energy industry profiteers who proceeded to bilk Americans with higher and higher gas prices.

On Iraq, the same kind of behavior:

In today's Washington Post, for instance, the paper reported that according to congressional sources, Hoyer "told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy withdrawal combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party." You might recall that last week it was Hoyer who, after Pelosi came out in support of Jack Murtha's plan for an exit strategy, was quoted in the Post saying withdrawal "could lead to disaster" - a statement only a Washington politician wholly out of touch with ordinary Americans could make, considering a disaster has long been unfolding in Iraq, and considering most Americans now support an exit strategy.

Then there is the corruption at the root of the hostile takeover of our government:

Then, while Pelosi works to resist the influence of corporate interests as she goes after the GOP's "culture of corruption," it is Hoyer who is deliberately landing stories in newspapers about his efforts to formalize his own system of legalized bribery - putting his own campaign wallet ahead of Democrats' efforts to develop a message of reform. Today in Roll Call, for instance, it was Hoyer who placed the story that details his efforts to "woo K Street" (aka. the corporate lobbying community). The story notes he convened a meeting of "50 business-minded Democratic consultants, lobbyists and corporate officers to get them to commit to writing checks." And in case you didn't think Hoyer was trying to land these stories - just check out his website (since taken down after criticism) where he brazenly displays a similar story, as if his corporate shakedown operation is a trophy to be marveled at - and not an albatross that directly undermines his party's message.

Remember folks - this is the number two Democrat in the House, opposing courageous members of his own party who are trying to take our country back. And now he has taken it to a whole new level by criticizing critics of President Bush. If you don't think there's a hostile takeover going on, just look at these examples, and remember the name Steny Hoyer: he's leading that takeover towards completion.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
12. I don't think she was horrible.
I think she held her own, calmly, in the face of the attack she got from Russert.

She quite clearly stated the Dems would do the oversight the Republican Congress failed to do, on numerous issues, and if the facts lead to impeachment, so be it.

I think the expectation that the Dems should breathe fire is unreasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
13. I have to agree. I thought she sounded unsure of herself
and like she had tried to memorize her lines and kept forgetting them. She was not in control. She looked weak. I was embarrassed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GymGeekAus Donating Member (285 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. Uh, "not in control."
It might should make us all feel a bit comfortable that Pelosi did not have control over the media who was interviewing her.... Unlike when the Republicans typically go on these shows.

I'll take a listen and form an opinion after the Goddess of Talk Radio's show is over. Nobody interrupts my time with Randi!

By the way, have you ever heard her (Randi) discuss the climate of these shows? It's more like a circus than news, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. I meant of herself and her own words
she seemed so... hesitant, uncertain, unsure. Look, these things are a big circus, but if you're going to play, you've got to go in showing no fear.

She just really seemed off her game last night. Made me very concerned.

And no, unfortunately, I haven't heard Randi (much, anyway). The closest AAR is in NY, and I can't really get it this far north.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. She did OK...
I generally don't watch "Meet the Press", because watching Timmy Russert fellate whatever right wing guest he has on at the moment is a spectacle I'd rather not subject myself to.

That said, yesterday Russert outdid himself by putting on one of the most partisan performances I've ever seen this side of Fox news - and Pelosi stood her ground well enough.

If anyone's credibility suffered, it was Russert's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
partylessinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
15. The Repugs will use this photo over and over again.


Surely Pelosi has a mirror. She should have worn waterproof mascara. Powder, she always needs a good dusting of powder. Shiny may be California but it don't work when trying to impress. She also needs to learn about power dressing. She should always wear darker colors.

I'm sorry but Pelosi came off very weak in appearance and appearance counts for a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. It was more than just her appearance
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. So what...everyone has a bad frame to use
I did think she was a little too-dressed down as well, but what she was saying was OK...not an "A", but whenever you go on "Meet The Russert", you get railroaded...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfkrfk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #15
38. it was only the Ambien talking
sleep driving
sleep talking

whatever
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
16. Pelosi could have done better, but she did fine.....IMO
Edited on Mon May-08-06 03:48 PM by FrenchieCat
She's no Barbara Boxer....that's for sure.

She's a bit too proper, and appears a bit frail....and I think that carries over to her television appearances.

What she said in her response was actually quite good, for the most part; the real problem is HOW she said it......mannerism and all.
That's an image problem, and if we had someone like Hartman or Barbara Lee, the image problem would not reinforce itself as you would watch an appearance. Hartman is tougher than Pelosi so makes better TeeVee Appearances....and Barbara Lee has more passion for what she says than does Pelosi.

Problem with Pelosi is she's shaky on strength and passion when she articulates and comes off as frail and hesitant--both which are traits that Democrats have been gifted as their imaged stereotypes by the media. That's what the problem is, in fact....Pelosi virtually represents the stereotypes in her mannerism and her articulation that Democrats desperately want to shed. That's what is ironic...that she's the leader of the House Democrats. And in fact, when you think of it, Reid has the same issues.....imagewise, he also seems a bit too soft spoken (which can connotate weakness/frailness) and seems a bit too polite, although his actual words normally are not polite at all, many times.

Conclusion: Democrats have an image problem, and our two Dem leaders of congress reinforce the imaged stereotypes no matter what the content of their words seem to be.

Clark, Fiengold, H. Clinton, Levin, Dean, Rangel, Boxer, Hartman, Ford, and a few others just don't have this imagery "Issue".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I'm sure that at any point during a 10-minute interview,
Lee or Hartman pr Clinton or Clark or Levin or Rangel or anyone else - including you - could be snapped wearing an expression that's not particularly flattering.

This harping over Nancy Pelosi's physical appearance is amazing to me. I expect this kind pettiness from the other side, but I assumed Dems were beyond this. I guess not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I'm just pointing out to a reality, as I saw it.......
Edited on Mon May-08-06 04:39 PM by FrenchieCat
as I watched the entire interview.

I'm not speaking of a "snap"....but Pelosi's mannerisms throughout the entire interview (I was responding to original poster, not poster directly before me with pic of Pelosi).

Mannerisms have little to do with a "snap" or "photo". Folks can convey one thing in a "snap"...while conveying something quite different via three dimensional comportment.

My observation has little to do with HOW Pelosi looks, as opposed to what her mannerisms convey.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. She needs to get with Howard Dean
and learn how to handle interviews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
21. Is this about the Clinton Impeachment?
Pelosi would be foolish to channel the rage and anger of the politically involved Democrats. All she had to do was look reasonable, and unlike the four headed liberal monster that the Pukes have tried to convince everyone she is. She did fine. Let us not forget the Pukes and the media corporatocracy are throwing everything they have against US right now, as if we were corrupt, incompetent,sleazy, hypocritical, lying, immoral and unethical Republicans. Our goal is NOT to hold endless hearings (because it would take at least a decade before they all were jailed) but to push the pukes out of the way and govern this country. It's not like it's going to take a week to fix this Repuke disaster. I too would love to taste the blood dripping from my mouth, but we are bigger and better than that. Americans are in desperate need of honest and competent leadership, not retribution. Rove has already stuck his finger up the ahole of the "average" Joe and he's saying that the Pukes are going to be subjected to agonizing public spectacles of Democrats revenge at the expense of everyone, while ignoring the real issues of security and economy. If we are blinded by our justified rage, Rove's plan just might work. Pyrrhic catharsis is not a strategy.

Pelosi just needs to stick to simple talking points. The weight of her case is already overwhelming to most people. Now is not the time to make things heavier for people. Just let them know we are going to take care of it. WE are Hope and Real Justice. We will restore the rule of Law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
millsaps28 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #21
36. No and Yes
Edited on Tue May-09-06 12:04 AM by millsaps28
I wish what you are saying was sufficient but it is not. Government has a POLITICAL aspect as well as a policy/governing aspect. And usually you have to win at the political aspect before you are in a position to affect the policy governing aspect. This is not simply about petty revenge for the Clinton Impeachment. HAve you been paying attention for the last 10 years? It is clear that the public responds to this kind of stuff. That is why we have a republican house/senate/presidency/court system/media. Remember the goal really was not to Indite Clinton for any crimes, the goal of impeachment was to politically cripple Clinton/the Democrats so that the Republicans would have the moral failing of the Democrats to point to. Now the incompetence and courruption of Bush and the Republicans has presented us with the same oppurtunity.
Therefore, the goal is not really any legal inditement, our goal should be the political destabalization of the Republican party, and the quickest way to do that is through the Impeachment process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. I agree heartily with your last statement. I think
a million significant cuts and humiliations and incarcerations may be less traumatic to Americans than Impeachment. But by all means there should be many Democratic Party operatives and grassroots activists nailing these people left and right and holding them up for scorn and ridicule. That's just my proposed strategy. You may be entirely right. Either way, I'm in. Repukes do amazingly nasty and corrupt things behind the scenes and their candidates always seem to avoid being pinned with these actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RadiDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
23. I think she was wavering, unsure, and wishy-washy 4/10
She doesn't speak for me.

Dean ought to be out front and center on these talk shows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. "She doesn't speak for me"
Well, I'm proud to claim her. Why? I don't bail on a woman who's done great things for our party just because she was caught off guard and/or had a bad day. It's called loyalty. Her heart and her message came out clear. And Russert - well to many he came out looking like a buffoon. An overbearing JERK. As it should be ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greenbriar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
25. a post and run
grrrrrr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OregonBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
28. I like her a lot but agree, Sunday's performance was TERRIBLE!
She just made me feel really nervous with her fidgeting and stuttering, etc. Very twitchy performance. Sure didn't instill any confidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unkachuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
29. I must admit....
....she looked 'scared-shitless' and defensive to me too....potato-head had her dancing like a puppet on a string....

....she may make a great Speaker of the House but she shouldn't be the 'face' of the Democratic Party....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Placebo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
30. I agree.
She is a great representative and a fine leader, but we could use a much better public face and voice for the democratic party in the house.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
31. After seeing her again, I think she did fine...
She does have a "deer in the headlights" aura about her, but she was saying the right things. If you look a the transcript, you'd agree with her wholeheartedly.

Granted, Timmy was doing his classic Repuglified arrogance, including using the same talking points DeLay used on "This Week".

She's not my favorite, but when she's "on", she is as good as Boxer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
33. Tim the bad guy kept interrupting her
that's the problem. She should have said, "Tim could you let me finish!!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
agincourt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
34. Frankly I don't think any Democrat,
should go on the Russert pig-boy show. It just gives him crediblity he shouldn't have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tony_Illinois Donating Member (590 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-08-06 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
35. She Was Awful, I Have to Agree.
And I like her--but she was not sharp, she babbled, and Tim R just did what he does. He was not especially going after her. Why in the world can't the Dems put a better face forward than that performance yesterday? She was particulaly ineffective in answering the accusations that the Dems are focused on impeachment even before they have won any seats. Just fumbling and bad. We need better than that if we are going to win anybody over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 02:46 AM
Response to Original message
39. -
I could never stand her ever since she ripped on that one Dem congressman who didn't say "under god" at the end of the pledge. The one time she could manage to come out strong on something was when she was attacking us godless folks... F her..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andromeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
40. I didn't see it but it couldn't have been that bad.
Nancy is cautious and measured when she speaks which could be misconstrued as being hesitant and faltering. She doesn't just blurt out the first thing that comes to her mind---she tries to make what she says count without giving away Democratic strategies.

Democrats need to know when to tip their hand and when not to and evasiveness is sometimes the only way to counteract relentless media grilling. Some questions can't be answered in a 30-second sound bite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
42. I love Nancy, but

I think new blood here would work to our advantage. Someone more like Rahm Emanuel who I always find to be hugely impressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strawman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
43. Minority Leader/Speaker and "public face" are two different jobs, IMO
Edited on Tue May-09-06 03:05 PM by Strawman
They require different skill sets and sometimes those are at odds. A person can be strong in one and not as strong at the other. Pelosi's job is to lead the congressional caucus and hold it together through insider bargaining, negotiation, pressure, etc.. The presidential candidates should be the public faces.

Right now, two years away from 2008, she and Reid are sometimes occupy the public face position by default. When I see her on TV looking like a deer in headlights, not blinking for minutes on end, I think this is regrettable, but I don't think she should be replaced by a showhorse or maverick who is good on TV but is ill-suited to the tasks of congressional leadership.

We'd look worse changing leaders abruptly than we do by letting someone who is not particularly good on TV go on TV occasionally. Pelosi and Reid are not bad as congressional leaders. Congressional leaders don't function well as disruptors. They have to seek compromise to get shit done. Disruption is the presidential candidates' role.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC