Here is the compromise on Pelosi:

[LBM20]

As some have said, and as I believe she may have even hinted at:

They agree to this: She comes back for an interim year to re-adjust the House back to Dems with her experience. In a year, they have another vote and get someone new. Those who need to can vote "present".

Situation solved.


Pelosi should be honored for her service and we all honor her, but she has already done many years in leadership. I think she has generally done a good job, and of course none of this has anything to do with age or gender. I feel the same way about the entire old guard. It is time for change and some new blood. A new and DIVERSE cadre of leadership. That is healthy. But some experience is needed to get things off the ground. Get it started, and have another vote in a year.

Situation solved.

[hlthe2b]

1. Maybe when you are at the height of your professional career & abilities

yet approaching whatever age is deemed THEN to be "too old", you will realize the folly.

We desperately need the experience now more than ever that Pelosi brings. No one is telling any of the male leadership they are too old, though they are all as old or nearly as Pelosoi. I find that offensive as hell.

Of course she will bring in newcomers to leadership, as well she should, but she should not be driven out by those who yell ageism (and barely concealed misogyny).

[saidsimplesimon]

4. I agree.

[LBM20]

6. Please, this gender fight MUST stop. I just said in my OP that ALL need to be replaced. Read it.

[hlthe2b]

14. Say what you want, it is BEHIND those 5-white guys who are stirring this crap and are DINOs at best

MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM,MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM,MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM, MISOGYNY, AGEISM

Bury your head if you want. This is what is behind this move to shove out Pelosi and it is the most foolish thing that could happen as well as REVOLTING, considering what our party is supposed to stand for.

5 white guys who have a vendetta toward Pelosi and are as FAR to the RIGHT of the Democratic Caucus as they could be, yet they are somehow trying to bring on the young progessives? Only if they are incredibly foolish.

[hlthe2b]

16. Attack me and others who point out the obvious all you wish... I'm sorry you resort to ad hominem

and, no, I will NOT take a "chill pilll"...

[LBM20]

25. You are accusing me of bias and it is shameful. So yes, take a chill pill. The sooner the better.

[Me.]

46. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[yardwork]

49. This is familiar to all professional women, especially as we grow older.

It's pathetic that so many men and women are so threatened by powerful women.

Fragile snowflakes.

[hlthe2b]

21. GENDER is at the heart of it, just behind an ageist agenda by 5 DINO men & their supporters

[LBM20]

27. Enough that DINO crap. Sounds like right wingers who like to say RINO. Purist crap. Enough.

[hlthe2b]

37. I can recognize shit-stirring when I see it, so have a good night

You are not worth my time as several others downstream have concluded as well. Continue as you are and enjoy debating yourself.

[WhiteTara]

61. especially shuffle along Schumer.

Lost seats, capitulates to the gop all the time and no one questioned his ability to lead.

[Raven123]

2. I thought she hinted at that plan

Right now, the Dems need an experienced fighter. I haven't heard anyone else come forward as qualified.

[Blue_true]

8. Ted Leiu would be a great understudy for Pelosi to take under her wing.

He simply has it all, smart, tough, quick on his feet, hammer republicans with facts.

[Celerity]

33. yes!!!!!!!!! in 2020, after Trump is out or is re-elected

He is my Rep.

Only issue is with POTUS line of succession, as he is ineligible (Taiwan born). Unless we just accept he would be passed over, or argue that since he would NOT be made POTUS via an actual election, then that is null and void.

[Blue_true]

41. I am seriously starting to doubt that Trump has a prayer at being reelected.

I am not sure that his mind will hold up long enough. If we don't damage ourselves in and after our primary, we have several people that will beat him.

I actually have more concern with Trump being forced to resign and us facing Pence (if he is clean, which looks doubtful). Pence could bring back some of the White women that jumped the fence and are voting with us, that would spell trouble for us if we don't have our shit tightly together.

[Celerity]

53. I swear this isn't a flippant comment (and certainly not directed at you, lol) but Pence

is too boring to jack up the extra 20% or so of the racist rubes who also want to be entertained (whilst exercising their nazi-lite, baby jeebus was a white nationalist scumfuckery) to win. Only way is if Trump leaves the POTUS on a slab due to a violent end, and thus assumes the role of god martyr for whiteness. If that batshittery actually happened, we will have far more than an election to worry about.

If Trump is legally taken down to the point that he is just destroyed beyond all doubt and exposed as a traitor, I do not think Pence cannot win, as too many slack-jaws will simply not turn out for him to in, unless we REALLY make a crazy mistake in our nominee.

[Caliman73]

3. I wouldn't take that.

If Pelosi has the votes (which she will likely have or get) then she should stay as long as she needs to stay. This "new blood" is in my opinion, ridiculous. It means nothing. It is like saying "family values".

Would you rather have a mechanic just out of certification training work on your car, or a mechanic that has been out there, working on cars for 10 years, who has seen every problem you can imagine?

Would you rather follow a green First Lieutenant into a combat zone or a First Sergeant that has been in combat?

I mean we are talking about "new blood" in all of those scenarios. So, consistency?

[LBM20]

10. So you are opposed to ever making a change? And there are other experienced people. C'mon.

[Caliman73]

20. No. Not opposed to change at all. Just to change that makes no sense.

If this push is being orchestrated by people with "experience", they are hiding it very well. Put together the "five white guys" have maybe 5 more years of experience than Pelosi combined.

Again, other than "change" and "new blood" what specific reason is there for a different Speaker at this point?

[LBM20]

29. Not just the "5 White Guys." More registered Dems in America support some change than not.

Should Pelosi and Hoyer be there forever? It is time to get some new blood in, at least within a year or two.

[Caliman73]

44. Is "forever" the only other option?

That sounds quite binary to me. As Obi Wan said in Star Wars, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes".

Pelosi doesn't even want to be Speaker forever. She had hinted at a transition. She is 77 years old and is smart enough to know that she cannot continue to do this indefinitely. Hoyer, that I know of, hasn't made any kind of play for the Speakership or weighed in other than to support Pelosi.

This isn't about extremes. I don't understand why it is being framed as "forever". The Democrats are all about change. That is what we as a party have done in different areas since we stopped being the party of states rights, and took over the mantle of representing labor, civil rights, got rid of the Dixiecrats, allowed the DLC in and the blue dogs, and are now trying to accommodate the growing voices of women and people of color. Look at our caucus and look at the Republican caucus and then think about how unnecessary it is to actually state that Democrats want change.

The point is that there is a group of conservative Democrats, not all, but certainly the strongest push is from the conservative faction, that are calling for Pelosi's ouster. We don't have a ton of new young fresh people saying, "we have to move in a new more Democratic direction" it is conservative Democrats leading the charge.

[Small-Axe]

5. No. If she is willing Nancy Pelosi should stick around awhile.

[pnwmom]

7. I don't remember. Is this what we did when RBG turned 78?

Obama was in his first term and could have gotten a replacement appointed.

Or maybe we demanded this at the beginning of Obama's 2nd term, when RBG was 79?

Just wondering . . .

[still_one]

18. Actually some here on DU did want that, but the fact is RBG knew she was up to the job

[pnwmom]

28. And yet RBG's position is even more critical, because of the risk

that a replacement would be appointed by a Republican.

We don't have to worry that a replacement of Nancy would be chosen by R's.

[still_one]

30. Your assessment is right on pnwmom

[Me.]

48. And Old Guys

like Sanders and Biden are being touted for Pres... go figure

[yardwork]

50. Could not be any more obvious.

[Me.]

51. But Maybe...To Throw Her A Bone

she can stay a while and then...GET OUT

[Blaukraut]

9. She should at least stay through '20 with the understanding that if...

The Dems manage to retain the majority in the house, she'll pass the gavel to someone she'll have mentored in this term.

[Bfd]

13. K n R & Thanks!

[LBM20]

17. That may be a fair compromise too. And the opposers can still vote "present."

[Caliman73]

23. I think that she actually hinted at that.

If that is her choice and the choice of the caucus then that would be fine.

If she gets voted out this time, then it is what it is. I just think that it is really dumb and short sighted to get someone in who doesn't know the ins and outs of the position. If the number 2, 3, 5, or other ranking member wanted it, I would not be as opposed. What we have are 5 white guys who put together have like 5 more years on Congress combined than Pelosi agitating for change without having anyone specific in mind, so they go to Fudge and now she's like, "yeah, it should be me".

It isn't the new progressives that are stoking this fire, it is the conservative Democrats.

[Blaukraut]

26. Moulton is my rep and I am beyond pissed. He is acting based on an old grudge, too n/t

[Celerity]

38. If, in 2020, we lose the House majority, fail to take back the Senate and Trump is somehow

nightmarishly re-elected, ALL of our House and Senate leadership must go, no exceptions. Total purge.

I do not see that hellish dystopian scenario having much chance of happening, but if it does, they all gotta go go go.

[Blaukraut]

43. I'm up for that because then it will be deserved n/t

[Caliman73]

47. I would agree with that.

The Senate is expected to be an easy pick up for Democrats in 2020 barring some miracle from the GOP. Trump's economy is due to start kicking in in the next couple of years, just like Reagan's started to crater in 83 when he had to go back and raise taxes, oops I mean fees and stuff...

President Obama's economy was continuing the uptick, though not as fast as people would have liked and there was still an issue with the richest getting the biggest benefit, but it was on sound footing. Trump kicked the legs out from it, and pumped it full of hot air.

But like you said, if the Democrats cannot manage to make gains in the Senate and hold the house after 2 more years of the moron in the White House, then they all need to go... in disgrace.

[LBM20]

19. Never ever question a person's motives on an issue like this. That is SINFUL.

It is OK to think there should be a change after some have spent SO long in leadership. That damn well does NOT mean I or SO many in this party (look at the polls) who think some change should happen at least in the fairly near future is and ageist or sexist. Do not EVER question someone's motives like this.

MORE Dems in polling would like to see a change than not. It has NOTHING to do with age or gender. NOTHING. It is simply a belief that some, NOT JUST PELOSI (Hoyer too) have had tons of time in leadership and there are other good people and there should be a change. Never ever accuse anyone you don't even know of bias just because they have a different opinion than yourself.

[still_one]

24. If you think this was a personal attack then please alert.

[LBM20]

32. I'd rather respond. You can disagree, but don't question a person's motives. It is ok to think we

should have some leadership change. That does not mean anyone is being ageist or sexist. It is horrid to suggest such a thing. A word to the wise. Fine to disagree with a viewpoint or a judgement, but never go after a person's motives. You don't know what the motives are. And you can end up attacking a person's character and be entirely wrong.

[still_one]

34. I am not going to debate with you, I will just remove my post. I got your point

[Baltimike]

12. Ummm....no. nt

[JI7]

22. yup, we need to keep the woman in check and she has to know her place

[LBM20]

35. Enough of that hyperbole. Just enough. It is about wanting a change in leadership. Hoyer too.

At least a change within a year or two. Are they to keep going forever? Are we to ever have some change? So please, don't play those cards. You lose as soon as you do.

[pnwmom]

42. Maybe you didn't notice but most of the people who ran on

anti-Pelosi platforms failed to get elected.

The biggest faction now aren't progressives, but people connected to the #5whiteguys who want the party to move away from the "San Francisco liberal" to the center.

[LiberalFighter]

31. Absolutely NOT

[LBM20]

36. Not ever? Should current leadership keep going on and on and on and on and on...? Never ANY change?

[LiberalFighter]

40. Leadership never stays permanently the same.

So change does happen.

[LiberalFighter]

39. She doesn't need to compromise. The opponents are causing the problem.

How do those opposing her expect to elect someone else as Speaker? She only needs a majority of the votes within the Democratic Caucus. Right now it would 115 or maybe it is 117 out out 231 or 232. There are only at best 20 that are talking about someone else. Once it is decided in the Democratic caucus it will be decided between the nominee from each party. There are no other additional members that can be included according to the rules.

They can vote against her during the caucus but it would be wise for them to vote for her in the full House vote.

[Renew Deal]

45. I don't know why people want to cling to Pelosi

She can’t be the only qualified Democrat for that position.

[Caliman73]

54. She isn't the only qualified Democrat.

None of the other equally qualified Democrats want to the job and most of the most qualified Democrats are already backing Pelosi. So, you are right, she isn't the only qualified but she is the best qualified Democrat for the position, especially in this climate. She is the Democrat that the most qualified Democrats in the House think is most qualified.

No one is "clinging" to Pelosi we are only looking at the options available and understanding that she is the best option.

[pnwmom]

56. Because she's far more qualified than anyone else and we're at a critical time

in our country's history.

This isn't time for a newbie to learn the ropes, so the party can have better "branding" and a "fresh face." We need someone who knows all the arcane rules of the House, and who's experienced in getting legislation through more than 400 diverse House members, and working with the Senate leadership.

[RichardRay]

57. Alternatives? Name one.

Name someone who knows where the buttons to press, the bodies sre buried, and the tricks of the trade. I don’t believe this is the time to put anybody but our most qualified and capable person in the Speaker’s role.

I agree with the suggestion that Pelosi tap a small cadre of possible successors and season them for a couple of years. If/when we hold the House in 2020 (and take the Senate and the White House!) she can take an emerita position.

[Renew Deal]

58. Maxine Waters

[Celerity]

59. At this point she actually is, unless we went full stop centrist Rethug lite. If we did that (I

shall call it the No Labels Lieberman option), we can basically call our country a one-party-rule (Republican) nation state for decades to come.



Pelosi as our Speaker is by far the best option for a progressive party atm, IMHO.

[dflprincess]

52. You do understand that the people who really want Pelosi gone are the Republicans

(why else would they demonize) and conserva-Dems who are to the right of Pelosi.

It's sad to see so many falling for another right-wing trap.

[DonViejo]

55. She, herself, has said she views her coming role as transitional.

Learn how to speak politicalese, Nancy Pelosi has said exactly what's going on and going to happen.

[Wintryjade]

60. Out of all in the House, IF Trump and Pence go down, I want Pelosi in there.

I think we would have a clue within a year.