'Pelosi is worse than Trump in some parts of the country'

[Glorious Leader]

They're considerably worse at lying, though. The Dems are good thieves and good liars, comparatively speaking.

Theyre actually not worse at lying, they merely dont bother for the most part. They can trust their efforts to disenfranchise millions will result in electoral victories and their media sphere to spin the narrative.

The apathy towards Pelosi is very similar in nature towards the apathy displayed for Hilllary. Female politicians with tonnes of baggage whove been beaten up by right wing media for decades both seriously and casually as a joke. Before Oreilly got booted off faux news he had one last really unfunny dennis miller segment where miller jist casually out of nowhere threw out the idea of unanimous agreement between left and right that we all hate pelosi! This sort of thing is low level but it happens enough that these people become convenient scapegoats for whatever the zeitgeist is. Both pelosi and clinton have been around long enough and have made names for themselves to get hit by it. This is almost all apart from an actual discussion of their roles in american political life. You can criticize their records sure no dispute but that sort of thing would not explain the vitriol. Its far more subtle than that.

[Nadiru]

Theyre actually not worse at lying, they merely dont bother for the most part. They can trust their efforts to disenfranchise millions will result in electoral victories and their media sphere to spin the narrative.

The apathy towards Pelosi is very similar in nature towards the apathy displayed for Hilllary. Female politicians with tonnes of baggage whove been beaten up by right wing media for decades both seriously and casually as a joke. Before Oreilly got booted off faux news he had one last really unfunny dennis miller segment where miller jist casually out of nowhere threw out the idea of unanimous agreement between left and right that we all hate pelosi! This sort of thing is low level but it happens enough that these people become convenient scapegoats for whatever the zeitgeist is. Both pelosi and clinton have been around long enough and have made names for themselves to get hit by it. This is almost all apart from an actual discussion of their roles in american political life. You can criticize their records sure no dispute but that sort of thing would not explain the vitriol. Its far more subtle than that.

Clinton's intellectually bankrupt "triangulation" strategy has led the Democrats closer to Republicans, and Pelosi has served to cement that strategy through her fundraising efforts. They have baggage because they're part of a system which has become the problem and not the solution.

[Glorious Leader]

Clinton's intellectually bankrupt "triangulation" strategy has led the Democrats closer to Republicans, and Pelosi has served to cement that strategy through her fundraising efforts. They have baggage because they're part of a system which has become the problem and not the solution.

Again i wasnt suggesting any defence of either them from a policy stand point. I agree in principle, the sort of clinton style new democrats that emerged post reagan did move the party in the wrong direction. Apart from that the vitriol they both receive is far in excess though. Theirs a line up of people who bear far more responsibility (including bill) for that shift than hillary or pelosi.

The fact is both are woman in politics who happen to be particularly easy targets because they are connected and because theyve been doing this for a long time and because right wing media likes a punching bag. Hell they ran a campaign against ossif where san fracisco was thanking people for voting for him because its librul america and pelosi. It cant all be because theyre corporatist pigs. They are that no doubt but why should the right wingers who havr bren convinced that librul america is out to get them have a hard on against pelosi and clinton who moved the party right? It makes no sense unless you understand theyve been getting beat up by right wingers for decades.

[Allybeboba]

I've said before: I think Nancy Pelosi 2001 would be completely disgusted by what Nancy Pelosi 2017 has become.

Nancy Pelosi 2001 wanted to help people. Liberal, well meaning, perhaps naive, but well intentioned.
Nancy Pelosi 2017 uses helping people as an excuse to hold onto the power and privilege she has accumulated. And she has come to love the fight for the sake of the fight.

She is a model case in what power does to people. Of it's corrupting influence. No matter he intentions.

She should have stood aside after losing the speakers hip in January 2011. It is expected and customary that losing leaders stand aside and take responsibility for the loss.

That didn't happen. What happened instead? She went down to minority leader and everyone below her took a demotion so she could get her old job back. And where did that land the Democrats in the year 2017? Are their leaders are septuagenarians while all the Republican leaders are in their 40s and 50s.


Many corporations used to have mandatory retirement ages. In the US military, it's "up or out"... you get a promotion or you're cycled out. And generals above two stars only get promotions based on jobs (like being head of Central Command is a job that is a 4 star job, so if you get that job, you become a 4 star). And there are mandatory retirements. The point of this, in business and in the military is is to inject new blood, make sure leadership isn't top heavy and that it represents the interests of the rising majority, rather than the slowly declining "elders".


Two years ago I named the four problem people in American politics as:
-Barack Obama
-Nancy Pelosi
-Harry Reid
-Mitch McConnell.


Barack Obama's action and worse inaction, the political divide in this country was worsened greatly.

Pelosi we all know.

The personal rivalry between Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell was the driving motivator behind Senate dysfunction. It got so bad they had other Senators carrying messages between them because they would not talk to each other.

Two of the four are gone. Governance in America will automatically get better when the last two go as well. Obama had an opportunity to do this. He could have named Pelosi Ambassador to Itlay in 2014. He chose not to. And look what it got the Democrats.

The problem though is that Pelosi is the single most lucrative fundraiser in American history, and for House races, where a few million dollars is a huge, this is a big deal. With that fundraising, she's bought loyalty. It's as simple was that. Dislodging her will be very difficult, if it is possible at all.

This is why we need term limits.
Unfortunately, we have to get them to vote themselves out of office. That is not going happen without drastic measures.

[Blade Wolf]

I've said before: I think Nancy Pelosi 2001 would be completely disgusted by what Nancy Pelosi 2017 has become.

Nancy Pelosi 2001 wanted to help people. Liberal, well meaning, perhaps naive, but well intentioned.
Nancy Pelosi 2017 uses helping people as an excuse to hold onto the power and privilege she has accumulated. And she has come to love the fight for the sake of the fight.

She is a model case in what power does to people. Of it's corrupting influence. No matter he intentions.

She should have stood aside after losing the speakers hip in January 2011. It is expected and customary that losing leaders stand aside and take responsibility for the loss.

That didn't happen. What happened instead? She went down to minority leader and everyone below her took a demotion so she could get her old job back. And where did that land the Democrats in the year 2017? Are their leaders are septuagenarians while all the Republican leaders are in their 40s and 50s.


Many corporations used to have mandatory retirement ages. In the US military, it's "up or out"... you get a promotion or you're cycled out. And generals above two stars only get promotions based on jobs (like being head of Central Command is a job that is a 4 star job, so if you get that job, you become a 4 star). And there are mandatory retirements. The point of this, in business and in the military is is to inject new blood, make sure leadership isn't top heavy and that it represents the interests of the rising majority, rather than the slowly declining "elders".


Two years ago I named the four problem people in American politics as:
-Barack Obama
-Nancy Pelosi
-Harry Reid
-Mitch McConnell.


Barack Obama's action and worse inaction, the political divide in this country was worsened greatly.

Pelosi we all know.

The personal rivalry between Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell was the driving motivator behind Senate dysfunction. It got so bad they had other Senators carrying messages between them because they would not talk to each other.

Two of the four are gone. Governance in America will automatically get better when the last two go as well. Obama had an opportunity to do this. He could have named Pelosi Ambassador to Itlay in 2014. He chose not to. And look what it got the Democrats.

The problem though is that Pelosi is the single most lucrative fundraiser in American history, and for House races, where a few million dollars is a huge, this is a big deal. With that fundraising, she's bought loyalty. It's as simple was that. Dislodging her will be very difficult, if it is possible at all.

Good luck getting the turtle man out, he'll probably die in the senate.