Why NOT run a Democrat against Pelosi?

[jgraz]

If people are unhappy that Cindy Sheehan is running against Pelosi as an independent, why not run a progressive Democrat against her? I'm sure are plenty of high-profile Democrats in Pelosi's district who could challenge her.

Are there any efforts afoot to find Pelosi a Democratic opponent?

[saracat]

1. Because her district likes her? Thats why!

[jgraz]

7. Still? How do you know that?

I haven't seen any approval polls from her district.

[Selatius]

11. It wouldn't hurt to run on an anti-war plank against Pelosi through the primary system.

The primary system was set up to allow people to challenge their own party's incumbent. I'm sure if Sheehan did run, she'd shave quite a few Pelosi votes away, maybe enough to win. However, I think she thinks the Democratic brand name has been too damaged for her taste to run with a "D" behind her name.

With that avenue ruled out, she only has an Independent route to follow, but objections to this maneuver are usually predicated upon the idea that splitting the left's vote would make the Republican win, but with Pelosi's district, I frankly don't see the Republican winning at all.

[jgraz]

16. Exactly. Worst case, you just get ignored

Best case, you draw more attention to Pelosi's failure to stop this corrupt regime.

[Gman]

Duh...! She won her election last year

The only poll that matters, that is. I think her district is just fine with her.

[jgraz]

50. Duh, that was like, last year, dude

Before she re-funded the war and expanded FISA. Let's see where she is now.

[EFerrari]

55. The progressives in this district as mad as hell as far as I can tell.

But, I don't know enough of the centerish types to have a sense how they feel as a group.

[clixtox]

33. They used to, anyway...

Pelosi is not doing much, if any, hobnobbing (or slumming) in her district these days....

The old girl is definitely keeping her head down and out of sight, at least in SF and Marin counties!

[stimbox]

54. We used to like her.

before she started to ignore our calls for impeachment and ending the iraqi occupation.

[lonestarnot]

62. I wouldn't be so sure about that if I were you Saracat, but then I'm not Saracat.

I'm lonestarnot, and I'm not so sure I would give a popcorn fart for her lately if I lived in her district.

[Hosnon]

84. Every congressperson has a strong incentive to bend to the will of

his or her constituents. Unfortunately, they have little incentive to bend to the will of the nation. At best, a nebulous "duty" exists. But the Speaker of the House has a heightened duty.

A great way to increase the incentive such individuals have to listen to the rest of nation is to aggressively support alternate candidates in their districts. None of the federal representatives are beholden only to their constituents. Their decisions affect us all. Yes, the particular constituents have the ultimate say but there is nothing wrong with trying to influence their decision.

Edit: Content.

[ProSense]

2. Because there are dozens of Blue Dog Democrats to be more concerned with.

Why the hell are people always advocating getting rid of the Dems in Congress who are far left of almost three-quarters of the Congress?

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. Pelosi? Far left???

:rofl:

[ProSense]

65. Can you read? n/t

[cui bono]

70. Um, she's not acting far left.

She continues to fund the war, refuses to put impeachment on the table and expanded FISA with a bill that gave Bush more than what he asked for. She does not need to bring those bills to a vote.

Hardly far left.

[ProSense]

73. Um, can you read?

This is the silliest argument for replacing a progressive member of Congress. Speaker of the House is chosen by the other members. Why is Kucinich, Conyers or any of the other members who support impeachment not Speaker? I think any of them are qualified.

So you replace Pelosi, one progressive vote, do you think the next person is going to be automatically made Speaker of the House?

Do you think that the members who are currently voting against the party are going to change because you replaced Pelosi?

Silly argument!

[cui bono]

74. So you think anyone who might disagree with you can't read?

I really feel no need to go beyond your subject line since its intent is to insult and not further discussion.

[ProSense]

76. Yes, when

you mis-characterize my comment. She is far left of most members of Congress, which is determined by how she votes.

You will not go beyond the subject line because the point is accurate. It's a silly argument to call for challenging Pelosi under the assumption that if the next person miraculously wins, that person automatically changes the dynamics in Congress.

[KingFlorez]

3. She's popular in her district

Nobody could beat her in the primary, because very few people dislike her enough to try and throw her out of office.

[rjones2818]

4. I agree whole heartedly!

There should be some progressive in the district who will be willing to run against here. I'll donate to the cause if there is!

[opihimoimoi]

5. Nancy is doing what her district sent her in for...to do her best.,...that she is doing...

[FiveGoodMen]

38. Taking impeachment off the table before even getting '07 started was doing her best?

If the folks that voted for her are still happy with her then she must be bringing home some major league pork.

This is the Democratic Speaker of the House and she went on Charlie Rose and called the BFEE a lovely, patriotic family.

Her constituents damn well better be disappointed by now!

[opihimoimoi]

48. Sez you..."major league pork"? Is that how you gauge? How revealing

[onenote]

58. she said it was off the table. And then got 80 percent of the vote

So I guess her constituents aren't quite as hot and bothered as some would like to think.

[RaleighNCDUer]

39. She was not sent to congress to do her best.

She was sent to congress to get shit done.

To do their best is what we send kids to Special Olympics to do - results are less important than doing their best, and everybody gets a medal.

I don't think she deserves a medal. She is NOT representing the will of her constituents - one of the most progressive districts in the country which is something like 80% against the war. As Speaker, she is not showing leadership commensurate with her position.

Sometimes "doing your best" is just not good enough.

[opihimoimoi]

53. Semantics time...yadda yadda She showing a lot more Leadership than any RePub in the Bush AD

[lonestarnot]

63. And that is what? Smile and do what?

[cui bono]

71. If she's doing her best then she NEEDS to be challenged.

You just gave the best argument for it.

[AlCzervik]

6. can we keep her and help my district unload our asshat dan Lungren district 3?

please, huh?

http://durstonforcongress.org/

Durston ran against him last time and with almost no name id he got like 35% of the vote.

please help Will, please?

[trashcanistanista]

66. I'm in the 4th and I feel your pain! I donated to

Dr. Durston last time and I will again. Help us get Charlie Brown in! I think this time around it will be a little easier for both of our districts. I am seeing a lot of unhappy rethugs. I agree, get a progressive to run against Pelosi, it's worth a shot and there is nothing to lose.

[mondo joe]

8. No one is going to successfully run against Nancy.

Not in the foreseeable future.

[jgraz]

10. Hey, I wasn't expecting anyone to *win* against her

But Nancy's got some 'splainin to do. This would be one way to get her attention.

[mondo joe]

17. Maybe so. I don't think anyone would be challenge enough to do... anything.

Seriously.

[jgraz]

24. You might be right

I don't see a huge downside, though -- outside of a bit of wasted time and effort. Of course, many of us feel our campaign to take back Congress in '06 was just that. :shrug:

[mondo joe]

26. Everyone has to live with themselves, and everyone has different standards.

For those who feel running against Nancy is a good use of their resources, that's an option.

[bigtree]

9. you're sure?

:rofl:

[cali]

12. LOL!

A post like this really makes be question whether you know anything at all about politics.

[jgraz]

14. Question away. It's not all about winning.

which is something you might do well to learn.

[mondo joe]

15. What is the point of politics?

This is politics, isn't it?

[Selatius]

19. Politics is the art of divining what you can do vs. what you can't do relative to opponents

In this case, if Sheehan ran against Pelosi in the primary system, I think there is enough wiggle room for progressives in general to allow such a challenge without increasing the chances of a Republican winning Pelosi's district.

[jgraz]

22. There's no chance a Rethug will ever win that seat

The district is around 18% Repug. Even if Sheehan and Pelosi split the Dem vote down the middle, one of them is going to win the seat.

[jgraz]

20. I should have said it's not all about winning *elections*

For example, look at Gore's political impact over the last few years. Look at the impact of the anti-war movement.

Yeah, winning elections is fine and dandy, but it's just as important to make sure that the folks who win govern the way you want to. If timid Dems knew they would have to face progressive challenges in the primaries, that might just tug them to the left a bit.

[cali]

31. I never said it was all about winning. that was not my point

In your OP you posited that there must be plenty of high profile dems in Pelosi's district who would run against her. I'll tell you right now that no high profile dem is going to run against her. It's politics 101.

Oh, and right now? To paraphrase Grover Norquist, we need to shrink the repuke party until it's small enough to flush down the drain. In other words, at this juncture, it damn well is about winning.

[jgraz]

49. You may be thinking of different Democrats than I am

Pelosi's district includes the homes of many left-wing celebrities, both local and national. I don't have anyone in particular in mind, but I was thinking that a progressive non-establishment Democrat who is already well-known could certainly make life uncomfortable for Madam Speaker.

As far as the Repukes are concerned, they're being very successful at flushing themselves. We need to make sure to offer voters a real alternative, just not more of the same.

[Oilwellian]

60. Do you hear what you're saying?

"As far as the Repukes are concerned, they're being very successful at flushing themselves."

And now you want Democrats to do the same? How odd.

[jgraz]

61. Yes, that's exactly what I said

:eyes:

[qdemn7]

37. Really????

You can't govern, if you don't win. That is something YOU ought to learn. Ideological purity is what has caused Democrats to shoot themselves in the foot too many times over the last 40 years.

[jgraz]

44. OMG, to assert that "ideological purity" has hamstrung the Dems is beyond laughable

But I will laugh at it anyway :rofl:

[Zhade]

46. Yeah, I didn't realize asking her to do her job and fulfill her oath was asking for "purity".

I thought it was, you know, asking her to do her fucking job.

[qdemn7]

52. I imagine HER version

Of doing "her fucking job" and yours are quite different. It's easy to talk trash about those who have done, as opposed to those who only talk. That's probably why she's where she is, and you an anonymous name on the 'net. :nuke:

[cui bono]

72. You mean Republican ideological purity?

She is handing Bush whatever he wants. Praising him and his family. She is not cut out to be Speaker. We need better leadership to even just get middle of the road issues handled. She let that FISA bill go to a vote! There was no reason to do that. Keeping Bush from dismantling the constitution and rewriting the laws to make it so he's not breaking them is hardly ideological purity.

[RaleighNCDUer]

79. She seems tp be proving she can't govern if she DOES win. nt

[billyoc]

13. No reason not too, that's what primary season is all about. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

18. Personally, I Like Nancy. So I Hope She Whoops Whoever Would Run Against Her.

[Roxy66]

57. I like her too... there seems to be a lot of naivete here

That's not how Government works....going all gang busters and breaking down doors sounds good, but thats why some people are diplomatic and some aren't.

[MonkeyFunk]

21. Pelosi IS a progressive Democrat

and is anti-war.

[jgraz]

23. So you're saying she's just a hopelessly ineffective leader?

Cuz I don't see a lot of other ways to explain her dismal performance.

[mondo joe]

25. She's not the queen. She's the speaker for a diverse bunch that includes not

only opponents of the war as well as Blue Dogs, but everyone in between.

All that said, Cindy Sheehan or anyone else can challenge her in the primary. The electorate of the district will decide if she's doing a good job.

[jgraz]

27. Sorry, but when it comes to setting the legislative agenda, she is the fucking queen

At least, she should be. When's the last time you saw a republican congress passing bills over the objections of a majority of their party?? :grr:

[mondo joe]

28. Hm, I never thought the speaker should act like a monarch.

Not on either side of the aisle.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. Why put words in my mouth?

Why not just ask me if you have a question about what I believe?

No, I do not believe Pelosi is hopelessly ineffective.

But I DO believe you have a child's understanding of how government and politics actually work.

[jgraz]

30. Speaking of childish, you once again offer no information, just insults

I could explain to you exactly how this works, but only after you've had a time out and thought about how to play nice with others.

[MonkeyFunk]

35. the unintended irony in that response

is priceless.

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. You forgot the sarcasm smilie

[Zhade]

43. I call bullshit. If she's anti-war, why did she allow the funding bill to come to the floor?

She didn't have to do that.

[MonkeyFunk]

51. Technically, no

but she's the Speaker, not the Queen.

She voted against the war, and has voted against funding it. Very few Americans support simply cutting the funding. Very few congressmembers support simply cutting the funding.

I wish DUers would spend one tenth the energy they expend fighting Democrats fighting the Republicans who started this war and are responsible for continuing it.

[clixtox]

68. I don't believe so...

The Congressional District which she is supposed to be representing is much more progressive than she is politically, socially and economically.

Pelosi is a transplant from Baltimore, Maryland, moving to SF after college and marrying a local.

I would have to judge that her priorities include looking out for "business interests", our corporate masters, as much as she can and continue getting re-elected every two years.

Don't forget that she is among the richest politicians in government.

One of the main reasons she is in the Speaker position is that she is a big-time money magnet for the Democratic Party.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

91. Progressive Democrats Do Not bring amendments to the floor that help kill our Fourth Amendment.

As to being anti-war? Let her prove it and not send a bill to the floor that will fund the war.

[Vidar]

96. Lieberman used to be called " progressive" too.

[TreasonousBastard]

32. Because it's an incredibly stupid idea that would...

simply be a waste of time and energy. It would make us look like fools and just get us another Speaker not guaranteed to be any better. And in a Presidential year, no less. Great timing!

Once again, when you criticize Pelosi for failing to meet some standard, it must be a standard not in your head alone-- you have to compare her record to other Speakers, preferably Democratic ones who have had to stand up to Republican Presidents.

Or even Republican ones who have had to stand up to Democraic Presidents.

Now, please explain in detail how Pelosi has failed to meet the achievments of those past Speakers and how she is so much worse than they were. Detail her record in comparison with theirs. Explain precisely why she is so bad, and not just because she doesn't meet some undefined personal standard of yours.

Huh?

I didn't think so.

[madrchsod]

34. i have my own problems in the illinois 14th

there`s a good chance that we`ll get a democrat instead of another fat denny wannabe..what ever the people in her district do is there business

[trashcanistanista]

67. We are in this together.

I supported John Laesch last time for you and will do so again. Pelosi's actions affect us on a national scale and if there is pressure on her to do better that she is ignoring, yes ignoring, then the ultimate pressure of finding a good challenger will either kick her into action or get her replaced. And I have always loved Nancy, but to say she is a disappointment to me right now is an understatement. There is way too much at stake right now to let this go on. There are a lot of great progressives in her district and there is a hell of a lot of money to back one if someone should step up to the plate. I agree with the OP. It's worth a shot.

[BlooInBloo]

36. I don't have any problem with that. I think it's a non-starter, but if it succeded, fine.

[John Q. Citizen]

40. If Pelosi schedules a vote for the 50 billion supplemental supplemental, and

it passes, I bet she will have some Dem challengers in the primary.

She hasn't done any constituent meetings in a very long time, and her voters are starting to wonder "Where's Nancy."

So I think if she gives bush what he wants yet again, she will get a challenger or two.

[mitchtv]

45. I'd rather those resources went to my dist.

and try to unseat Mary Bono R-Bonehead. what we need is a young, smart, rich , goodlooking , charimatic Dem; Hispanic wouldn't hurt either.

[jgraz]

47. Why is it a zero-sum game?

A Dem challenger to Pelosi could bring in a lot of progressive voters who have given up on the Democrats (and yes, there are a lot of them).

[bvar22]

56. Wonderful idea.

I doubt they would have any chance of winning, but it would inject more ideas into the discussion and force Pelosi to defend her non-record.
I would love for someone to ask her about the "Secret Free Trade Deal" she and Rangel negotiated directly with Bush*.


”Unlike other candidates, I am not funded by those corporate interests.
I owe them no loyalty, and they have no influence over me or my policies.” ---Dennis Kucinich

[KharmaTrain]

59. Sure, Lets Waste Lots of Money...

Then let's run primary challenges against Jan Schakowski and John Conyers and Sheila Jackson-Lee...why not run against every Democrat that didn't jump on immediate impeachment or danced the way you wanted to. Hell, it's only money...and maybe we can even dig enough dirt or make up shit that the GOOP would love to use. Yep, sure makes sense to me.

There are many out here who would love to have a fraction of the representation Pelosi gives her district...people in purple and red districts who would even love having a blue dog compared to the right wing twits that are obstructing Congress and the Senate. Yep, let's all waste money on tearing down our own party.

[Truth2Tell]

69. Great idea actually

Primary challenges in every Congressional district might actually be a sign of a functioning democracy. God forbid we ever have that.

Even a primary challenge destined to pull only 5% would force Nancy to appear on stage - at least a few times - with a genuine anti-war progressive. It would force her to address questions she would rather not address. It could even cause her to adjust her positions in response - even if ever so slightly.

As it stands, she will be able to fully ignore Sheehan - at least in public. She couldn't get away with that against another semi-credible Dem. She would certainly limit her exposure, but there are a few interest group forums and events she couldn't ignore, and whose members would force full participation.

[KharmaTrain]

77. Yes It Is For Those That Truly Deserve It

After working for three campaigns for a Democrat who has turned into one of the worst of the Blue Dogs, I'm spending both time and money in supporting a Progressive challenger in the upcoming primary. While this congresscritter is far better than the Repugnican drunkard we had representing this area for 30 plus years, many of us have been let down on our congresscritter's "moderate" record and see a strong possibility of either forcing her to pay more attention to those of us who helped get her elected or, even better, get a more Progressive candidate on the ballot next year. Here's a case where the chances of us being successful are small, but it's worth the investment of time and money to make a statement now and work toward winning that seat in a future election.

That's a race that deserves a challenge...and I can think of other districts that could use a similar challenge...and where money from other Progressives may make a difference...instead of throwing money away to embarass one of the more Progressive leaders this party has. Dare I say does anyone think that Dick Gephardt would have stood up any better than Pelosi? Or any other Democratic Congresscritter? Is you think so, then those are the people you should be pushing for...get them in a position to challenge for the leadership in 2009.

[jgraz]

80. And who determines which candidates "deserve" a challenge?

Who gets to be the gatekeeper on our primary process? You see the problem here, right? The process we have for determining who can run is the primary. Do you have another method in mind for selecting candidates?

[KharmaTrain]

81. That's Called Freedom Of Choice

I'm my own gatekeeper...you are your own...or I would hope so. I put my time and money in people who I have investigated...and in many times seen or met personally...I would hope that's how others operate as well.

Sorry, it's not my "job" to determine who should or shouldn't run...nor to reform the primary system. We have what we have and either one works within the system to make a change or walks away and good luck in finding an alternative. The ultimate gatekeepers are what kind of government we want to see in Washington after 1-20-09...and afterwards. Do we "eat our own" while Repugnicans rebuild and restore their money and slime machine? Do we fight among ourselves for short term disagreements in spite of common long term objectives? These questions also are ones only you can answer and then act accordingly.

If Sheehan wants to run against Pelosi...more power to her. I don't even have a problem with people supporting Sheehan here on DU...as long as it's in a respectful and not condescending manner. However, I also reserve the right to express an opinion as to how counterproductive this rear guard actions are in pushing Democrats in Congress to end this ugly war...creating divides that let the Repugnicans continue to obstruct and avoid their own responsibility and culpability in aiding and abeting this criminal regime.

Cheers...

[Justitia]

64. That's what primaries are for. I'll take Nancy over here. Even my dogcatcher is a repub.

I don't have a single Dem representative, from street cleaner to president.

You spoiled CAers are just lousy with extra Dems! :P

[SoCalDem]

75. Money and her incumbency n/t

[AuntPatsy]

78. It is hard to keep up with her popularity ratings by reading Du at times,

some days she can do no wrong and the very next day she is seen as completely worthless, it can be a bit confusing to those of us that do not watch her every move.

[ElkHunter]

82. I think we have better things to do...

...than trying to find someone to run against Pelosi. I don't always agree with her decisions as House Speaker, but I also understand that she is the leader of ALL the House Democrats and not just its' progressive wing. As such, Speaker Pelosi allows votes even for those things she opposes. We need to work to bring the conservative members of the Democratic caucus in line rather than waste efforts on punishing Pelosi.

I didn't see Republicans acting this way when they captured the House in '94. But I guess they new better than to shoot themselves in the foot by going after Newt, which is a lesson we Democrats apparently need to learn.

You want to pressure Pelosi and the Democrats to have a spine when it comes to this war? Then work to build the anti-war movement and lets put hundreds of thousands of people in the streets like we did during the Vietnam war. History tells us that mass action tends to get the attention of politicians.

[jgraz]

85. "mass action tends to get the attention of politicians"

Really? Like those WTO protests in Seattle? Like the near riots in Sidney? Or how about those protests at the 2004 conventions? How much impact did those have?

The status-quo pols have learned a lot since the 60s. They've become incredibly good at isolating mass protests and the media has become quite adept at ignoring them. Also, the public is far less likely to turn out for street protests when so many people are sturggling financially and fear for their jobs.

We need a new way. Organizing direct campaigns against politicians who fail to lead is just one approach, but I bet it's an effective one.

[The Stranger]

83. Yes, run someone against her who represents the BASE of the party.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

86. Because if she lost the nomination, she'd win as an independent?

It'd be another Lieberman?

[paulk]

87. the money spent running against Pelosi

would be far better spent in a district currently held by a Republican.

if you want better results in the House, give her a larger majority to work with.

[jgraz]

90. How will a larger majority help her if she can't do her job now?

If she still refuses to control the legislative agenda, if she changes the rules of the House to defeat Democratic bills (as she did during the FISA debacle), how will a larger majority help?

[paulk]

92. ok, it won't help

what we should do is work toward giving the House back to the Republicans.

there's a plan....

[jgraz]

93. Well then we're right on track

:banghead:

[defendandprotect]

88. Let's just try to make sure that Pelosi doesn't let the new Bush funding bill onto the floor --

If she does, it will pass --

Let's work on that -- !!!

[jgraz]

89. How do we do that?

I used to email and snail-mail her at least once a week. I see no sign that she's paying attention.

[defendandprotect]

94. You make sure that Pelosi doesn't bring it to the floor ---

didn't you read the thread on the Woolsey conference phone call?

[ToeBot]

95. I haven't spent a great deal of time there, but...

it seems that if any place could elect a true liberal, even a radical, San Francisco would be that place. Pelosi is almost demure. It's as if the conservatives connived to get her nominated, thinking she was the best for which they could ever hope. If so, their machinations would appear to have paid off.