I know. It’s truly sad. The Democratic Party of today has turned into what the Republicans were pre-Reagan.
Actually, every one of those policies has the majority of Democrats behind it. I don’t have the Venn diagram of the groups behind those surveys, but I’m pretty sure it’s a tight set of circles.
Hugely important and as you surmised she is very, very good at it.She is apparently considered the most successful non-Presidential political fundraiser of all time and as that last article notes she is considered a pretty savvy operator generally by outside researchers.
Whether that means she is still the right person for the job is of course an open question. She has definitely fumbled the ball a time or three (though so do all political leaders) and you can make a solid argument that it is time for new blood. But she is very sharp and her ability to beat back multiple internal rebellions in the DP speaks to how adroit she is politically.
We won the fucking White House and the goddamn Senate. We still control the House. Win, win win. Dont give me those loser shit. It is totally, utterly false.
trump was scared of her.
It’s not the Democratic party- the voters dont want that.
We’ll see if anything happens that the republicans don’t want. I have my doubts that the democratic party can do anything at all.
Have you been in a cave? Did you just see that stream of executive orders, most of which “the republicans don’t want”?
Have you seen those cabinet members OKed by the Senate?
the filibuster cannot be used on reconciliation bills so that likely will happen with some bills if they can’t get 60 votes. Right now the Dems don’t seem to have 50 votes to remove the filibuster but that can change.
And they dont and they shouldnt …yet. But when Moscow Mitch starts stopping every…single… bill… things will change.
In theory, I think new blood would probably be for the best, but of course it depends on who gets the gavel. Not all House Dems would be well-suited in the role.
And see:
i’m gonna bet on pramila japayal should she hold her seat for a good number of years, eventually being speaker one day.
i am way more concerned about mccarthy becoming speaker than pelosi hanging on to the title for a bit longer.
On the one hand, I think Pelosi needs to be seen to appoint an heir-apparent or “apprentice” to her job just in case, in order to quell concerns about her age and show Democrats have a deep bench. On the other, anyone they choose will be used in attack ads almost immediately.
I don’t think that’s how it works. If there is an opening for Speaker, various House members put their names forward and then there’s an election. We don’t need an heir apparent.
We have a Vice-President if the POTUS drops dead. I’ prefer as few avenues as possible for mischief. I know it’s not how it’s done, but I’m just suspicious of the “usual” ways we do things these days.
It’s entirely possible that they have an unofficial candidate in mind, just in case something happens. It could be that there’s no official designation, so us laypeople wouldn’t be aware of it, but they’re already getting an education into the job and its responsibilities.