But but but republicans…
Who Should Replace Nancy Pelosi and Her Cronies?//Should Pelosi step aside to let younger leaders in
I see. You’re happy with California have the highest number of illegal aliens? The highest taxes? Housing so high that it’s not affordable for most? That happy?
I don’t doubt that Pelosi’s constituents are happy with her, but I’m not sure she’s the spokesperson the party needs right now. I’m not sure who’s fit to replace her though.
California is the most diverse state in the US and has been for some time. If people can’t hack diversity there, then they’re just in the wrong state. And it’s not like you can just tell someone’s ‘illegal’ by looking at them.
Actually California’s taxation isn’t really as bad as people (usually on the right) say it is – try living in the Northeast. Property taxes in CA are reasonable, even compared to some conservative states which don’t tax income but do tax property. The property taxes I paid in CA were much lower than where I’m at not.
As for property values, it depends on where you live. You can actually find fairly reasonable property values in the interior part of the state. It’s true that you do have very high rent and mortgage payments along the coast, but then again…that’s because a lot of people want to live there.
Well by all means, enjoy it.
I agree with your OP, but I also think it takes time to build up the negative pavlovian response that Fox News works so hard to foment against these names. I agree with others that Pelosi is unfairly vilified, but at some point fair doesn’t matter, right? If Republicans already have a built in shortcut for campaign rhetoric, BS or not, why keep giving them the opportunity to use it?
I wondered the same thing about Clinton. Yes, the right-wing hate machine had spent decades building a bullshit mountain of hatred against her, but why run a candidate who had to overcome that hurdle? Just quietly move these people from the front lines to a support role and make the opposition spend years building new portfolios of bullshit.
Coming from someone who (apparently) resides or is connected to the state with the SECOND highest number (and higher percentage of residents) of illegal residents, that’s actually kind of ironically funny. 
Noticeably absent from your comments (and those of others) is an acknowledgement that Nancy Pelosi has an abrasive way of doing her job. I think it’s easier for the opposition to paint her as “evil” when she, herself, acts with disdain about those whose viewpoints differ from hers. Harry Reid had that trouble, too. Say what you like about the ever-smarmy Sen. McConnell, but he doesn’t abrade very much. He’s much more Southern: he’ll say bad things about you with a deprecating smile, and finish up the comments with a “Bless his heart.” 
That’s because I’m not the most informed voter myself. I only know of Pelosi from sound bites here and there, mostly from conservative news sources but also from NPR and whatnot. Based on those, I’m generally not impressed but I also didn’t get any sense of the abrasiveness you’re talking about. If it weren’t for CA voters here on the dope singing her praises I’d wonder how she ever got elected, but since they do I assume she’s good at what she does.
For a blatant appeal to authority I noticed Nate Silver commented on this in their GA-6 coverage:
[QUOTE=Nate Silver]
For sure — any Democratic leader would become villainized after a sufficient length of time. But I think there’s something to be said for giving voters symbolically a new look.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not one of “you guys”, but it’d probably benefit Republicans to replace those two with leaders who are more moderate, effective and have spines.
Meantime, as long as Pelosi, Clinton et al are the face of the Democratic Party, it’s going to be an easy target for the opposition.
They’ll *make *a target of whoever’s the face of the opposition. Can’t let that affect who we choose.
Then make them put forth the effort every few years. If it’s going to take them 3 months to drum up some bullshit on someone, and another year of solid repetition of said bullshit to permanently slag someone’s reputation, then let’s replace the folks on the front lines every 2 years and make them come drum up some new bullshit on someone else.
Its too bad the Dems refuse to take down Ms Pelosi’s abrasive and combative style. Think how much better things would be if she were more like Rep. Louis “Goober” Gohmert! All the warm generosity of Mr Rodgers plus ignorant, ugly and stupid!
Yeah, all due apologies for the blatant tribalism and diversion. It is a personal irritation when encountering the “you know what you guys need to do” advice. Pelosi, Clinton, Obama - the RW media will always demonize whoever is at the forefront of the Democratic Party. I suggest we ignore all of this “helpful advice” and advance whoever is effective, and one thing Pelosi could do is whip votes. If her turn is over, whoever is next will be “Pelosied” within six months.
When Dick Gephardt was the minority leader, Tom Foley was the Speaker of the House and Bill Clinton was the President. They were portrayed as the embodiments of evil and Gephardt got ignored as a relatively minor figure.
You think it’s good policy to give the oppositionists veto power over your choice of leaders. I don’t. That only shows them it works, and it lets the voters think it isn’t just manufactured.
It may, but you;re badly missing the point all the same. The OP is not talking about replacing Pelosi as the Representative for her district, but as a major, prominent leader of the Democratic Party.
I think it is fair to say the Democratic Party has not performed well lately. When will its leaders be called to account? At what point does one ask whether Pelosi is actually good at the job of being the Democrat’s legislative leader?
Say what you will about Paul Ryan… but his party won big time in 2016, so why would his party want rid of him?
Who should replace Nancy Pelosi and her cronies? A good question but at this present juncture academic. Pelosi still has far too many Democrats in her corner and this woman will never ever jump without being pushed. She has no interest at all in the welfare of the party other than how it affects her own interests. I do believe at one time Pelosi was a strong and fearless fighter for Democrat policies. That was a long time ago. Pelosi fights for Pelosi these days.
Not that, as a rightist, any of this loses me sleep.
I think it’s obvious that Democrats should replace Pelosi. She has lost four elections in a row, how many more chances does she get? She is also a big liability in the purple districts which the Democrats need to win.
Republicans will undoubtedly attack whoever replaces her but it takes time for attacks to leave a mark, for the first few years, freshness itself will be a defense. Secondly politicians can be more or less skilled at floating above attacks and Pelosi seems especially unskilled in that regard. Finally it will be more difficult to land attacks on a more moderate politician coming from a more moderate district.
On the flip side the main reason for continuing with Pelosi appears to be is that she is good at raising money. However will that money just disappear if Pelosi goes? That seems unlikely. I am guessing the vast majority of those donors support the Democratic party and its policies rather than Pelosi personally. In any case once you reach a threshold, money is not that important and it is more important to have a strong message and credible leaders.
Liberal rule 2: When corned spin smoke and deflect!