• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official House Democrats thread (Pelosi #undefeated)

PhDeac said:
This is the biggest problem. And they've shown no desire or ability to grow a bench, so it's hard to imagine they're going to let the new talent shine.
Click to expand...

They definitely need to get younger...and of the reasoning I've seen floated to keeping her in power are things she can do as a member of the party and the house, mentoring younger leaders showing them how to get things done.
 
birdman said:
They definitely need to get younger...and of the reasoning I've seen floated to keeping her in power are things she can do as a member of the party and the house, mentoring younger leaders showing them how to get things done.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except she hasn't mentored for shit so far.

I think they end up striking a deal in which Moulton or one of the others replaces Nancy as whip and Fudge or somebody else replaces Clyburn as assistant leader. I doubt there will be changes to the committee leaders.
 
birdman said:
They definitely need to get younger...and of the reasoning I've seen floated to keeping her in power are things she can do as a member of the party and the house, mentoring younger leaders showing them how to get things done.
Click to expand...

And there's no reason she has to be speaker to be a mentor.
 
TBDeac said:
And there's no reason she has to be speaker to be a mentor.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I am saying...the whole, “she is so effective and experienced” argument for keeping her as speaker is just silly because what the Dems really need is to train the next generation. And, what better time to do than with a Pub president and a Pub senate who’s number one objective is to own the libs? No one is going to be effective for the next 2 years so effectiveness doesn’t matter.
 
birdman said:
They definitely need to get younger...and of the reasoning I've seen floated to keeping her in power are things she can do as a member of the party and the house, mentoring younger leaders showing them how to get things done.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. One of the reasons Democrats seem to have such a dearth of strong candidates for 2020 is their failure to build up a bench and groom younger stars. Much of that, I think, was due to the feeling that Hillary would run (and win) in 2008 and 2016, and the Clintons wanted no strong competition (in 2008 they failed, in that Obama rose to prominence and beat her, in 2016 there was no younger competition, although Bernie certainly gave her a fight). The end result of all this is a party whose most prominent candidates are all in their seventies and late sixties, while younger players like Booker, Harris, etc. seem to have failed to get any traction, and old-time congressional hands like Pelosi and Schumer continue to take the spotlight in Congress. The Democrats need to start emphasizing the younger stars of the party, and promoting some Gen X and Millennial pols.
 
The bench can change quickly. It may already have. The Florida bench has been notoriously short. Four years ago, FL Dems ran the former Republican Governor as their governor nominee. Yesterday I was listening to a FL GOP strategist lament that the FL Dem bench is strong now.

All of a sudden the national Dem bench has been replenished. There are hundreds maybe thousands of new Dems a few years away from making runs for the House and Senate and Governor.

As far as Pelosi, this is the best take I’ve seen so far.

House Democrats don’t need a leader, they need someone to represent them on TV
Nancy Pelosi is going to be speaker, but she should deputize someone else to go on TV and talk about Trump.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/20/18098906/nancy-pelosi-speaker-democrats-tv
 
Apparently, the originator of the letter, Seth Moulton, is apparently liked by Pelosi almost as much as she likes Steve "KKK" King.
 
Crickets. Oh well, I guess the best we can hope for now is an agreement that she will serve again as speaker this year and will agree to leave that position at the end of next year - so before the 2020 electoral season starts. But I'm guessing the chances of that are somewhere between slim and none. Ugh.
 
Democratic rebel seeks negotiations with Pelosi on races for leadership

A high-profile critic of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi signaled on Monday that he is seeking to hold negotiations with her about changes to her leadership team, a development that makes her ascendancy to the speakership likelier as her opponents continue to struggle to recruit a challenger.

The decision by Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) to shift his attention from Pelosi — by far the front-runner for the speakership and currently running unopposed — to potential discussions over the lower-ranking positions of House majority leader and House majority whip underscored Pelosi’s strength and the desire of her critics to reshuffle the leadership even if she holds the gavel.
...

Pelosi, however, has given no indication that she is open to talks with Moulton about a deal for the support of moderate critics or that she would ever waver in her support for her longtime deputies, Reps. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) and James E. Clyburn (S.C.), who are in line to hold the No. 2 and No. 3 posts in the House next year.
Click to expand...
 
Hoyer is 79 and Clyburn is 78. Pelosi is 78.

John Boehner just turned 69 and was 66 when he passed the gavel to Ryan who was 45 at the time.
 
I'm going to go ahead and turn this into the House Democrats thread.


[h=1]House Democrats unveil their first bill in the majority: a sweeping anti-corruption proposal[/h]
[h=2]Democrats will take up voting rights, campaign finance reform, and a lobbying crackdown — all in their first bill of the year.[/h]
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli..._SHokqEHDsrehtCL5QfTOrh7EIaTwqpBHuwJM2bG_nOX4

[h=3]What this anti-corruption bill aims to do[/h] Sarbanes says the goal is to have a bill, which has many details yet to be hammered out, ready to be voted on by January 3 — the first day of the new session.
There are three main planks the bill covers: campaign finance reform, strengthening the government’s ethics laws, and expanding voting rights.
[h=4]Campaign finance[/h]
  • Public financing of campaigns, powered by small donations. Under Sarbanes’s vision, the federal government would provide a voluntary 6-1 match for candidates for president and Congress, which means for every dollar a candidate raises from small donations, the federal government would match it six times over.“If you give $100 to a candidate that’s meeting those requirements, then that candidate would get another $600 coming in behind them,” Sarbanes told Vox this summer. “The evidence and the modeling is that most candidates can do as well or better in terms of the dollars they raise if they step into this new system.”
  • Passing the DISCLOSE Act, pushed by Rep. David Cicilline (RI) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), both Democrats from Rhode Island. This wouldrequire Super PACs and “dark money” political organizations to make their donors public.
  • Passing the Honest Ads Act, championed by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Mark Warner (VA), which would require Facebook and Twitter to disclose the source of money of political ads on their platforms, and share how much money was spent.
[h=4]Ethics[/h]
  • Requiring the president to disclose his or her tax returns.
  • Stopping members of Congress from using taxpayer money to settle sexual harassment cases or buy first-class plane tickets.
  • Giving the Office of Government Ethics the power to do more oversight and enforcement and put in stricter lobbying registration requirements.
  • Create a new ethical code for the US Supreme Court, ensuring all branches of government are impacted by the new law.
[h=4]Voting rights[/h]
  • Creating new national automatic voter registration that asks voters to opt out, rather than opt in, ensuring more people will be signed up to vote. Early voting and online voting would also be promoted.
  • Restoring the Voting Rights Act, part of which was dismantled by a US Supreme Court decision in 2013. Ending partisan gerrymandering in federal elections and prohibiting voter roll purging.
  • Beefing up elections security, including requiring the Director of National Intelligence to do regular checks on foreign threats.
 
Pelosi isn't that tough of a pill to swallow. It's disheartening that Dems didn't have a deep enough bench to get some fresh blood in, but the house is still shaping up nicely as far as progressives go. It's time to shift the narrative to Republicans only demonizing Pelosi because she's effective, which is mostly true. Kind of like how I hate Mitch Mcconnell, but damn if the man doesn't get the job done.
 
Demonwolverine said:
Pelosi isn't that tough of a pill to swallow. It's disheartening that Dems didn't have a deep enough bench to get some fresh blood in, but the house is still shaping up nicely as far as progressives go. It's time to shift the narrative to Republicans only demonizing Pelosi because she's effective, which is mostly true. Kind of like how I hate Mitch Mcconnell, but damn if the man doesn't get the job done.
Click to expand...

I don't care for Pelosi, but I will say that I've become even less of a fan of Chuck Schumer. He's not much better than Pelosi at public speaking or PR, and he seems far less willing to actually oppose and fight congressional Republicans, rather than just try to accommodate and look for "deals" that don't exist. It's as if he still thinks it's the 1980s, where the main goal of congressional politics was to look for compromises and to cut deals with the other side. That kind of politics doesn't really exist anymore, at least not in Congress, and Schumer has utterly failed to realize it.
 
Completely agree.
 
Highland Deac said:
I don't care for Pelosi, but I will say that I've become even less of a fan of Chuck Schumer. He's not much better than Pelosi at public speaking or PR, and he seems far less willing to actually oppose and fight congressional Republicans, rather than just try to accommodate and look for "deals" that don't exist. It's as if he still thinks it's the 1980s, where the main goal of congressional politics was to look for compromises and to cut deals with the other side. That kind of politics doesn't really exist anymore, at least not in Congress, and Schumer has utterly failed to realize it.
Click to expand...

but summary of this i've heard is that he is not a wartime consigliere.
 
 
Both Seth Moulton and Tim Ryan voted for Pelosi.

Rogue votes for Joe Biden, Joe Kennedy, John Lewis, Tammy Duckworth, and Cheri Bestos. Mainly, it seemed, from new members.

Rogue votes for Republicans: Jim Jordan and Thomas Massie.

Kind of cool seeing new members out there.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top