Inevitable: Democrats elect Pelosi minority leader; Update: Pelosi’s favorables now lower than Cheney’s
posted at 4:18 pm on November 17, 2010 by Allahpundit
And so not only does Captain Queeg return to the helm of the ship, she does so with overwhelming support from her devastated caucus. 150-43 (on a secret ballot vote, natch), with only Heath Shuler willing to mount a token challenge.
Quoth Slublog, “Pelosi. Murkowski. Good day for politicians that can’t let go of power.”
“There was a lot of unrest in the room for several hours,” Shuler said following the vote, arguing the strength of his challenge “sends a message” that the party needs to change direction…
In a sign of Pelosi’s strength, Democrats voted 129-68 to proceed to a vote earlier in the day over objections from those who sought a delay in order to have more time to mount a viable challenge to Pelosi.
In making his case to the Democratic caucus today, Shuler said the Democratic Party needs to be a “big tent” party. He argued that it can’t take back the majority without a change in leadership, according to a Democratic aide who was in the room. Utah’s Jim Matheson, a Blue Dog who argues “it’s time to shake things up” in the wake of the midterm losses, nominated Shuler.
Pelosi has argued that she should remain in the leadership in part because she knows how to lead Democrats out of the political wilderness, having done so four years ago. She also argues that she is the most effective fundraiser for members of the caucus. She blames the party’s losses on the country’s lingering economic troubles and high unemployment rate, not her leadership.
Yes, truly, the Democratic wave of 2006 was the result of Pelosi’s strategic genius as minority leader, not a backlash to Iraq and Katrina and six years of undivided GOP control of government. Politico, meanwhile, gamely offers a few reasons why this might be a good thing for Democrats, but I can’t quite get past the first one, i.e. that she’s the only liberal in the House with enough national prestige to stand up to Obama if he (giggle) tacks to the center. Even if it were true that there was a meaningful difference between The One’s agenda and Madam Speaker’s, having Pelosi as a counterweight to Obama actually makes it easier for him to tack right, not harder. Sure, the lefty base loves her — just feast your eyes on this — but who cares? They’ll turn out for Obama next cycle anyway, and in the meantime, whenever she challenges him on policy, he can point to her for the benefit of independents and say, “See? How can I be a liberal if Nancy Pelosi’s angry with me?” The One, ironically, may be the only lefty in America who benefits from today’s caucus election, simply because he’s the only one who might be able to turn Pelosi’s bitter political toxicity to his advantage. Had they elected someone else as leader, even someone as far left as Pelosi, then Barney Frank would have been right when he told reporters today that the public doesn’t care about inside baseball stuff like this. As it is, he’s wrong: They will care, but only because it’s Nancy. That’s the ultimate folly of putting her back in charge.
Ah well. This isn’t a moment for righties to point out the left’s strategic errors, it’s a moment to embrace them. If the idea of getting to run against Pelosi again in 2012 isn’t enough to cheer you, here’s a fun item from the Journal about moronic liberals threatening the few surviving Blue Dogs who opposed her; with any luck, that rage will turn into primary challenges, thereby all but ensuring an even bigger GOP majority next cycle. Sounds like a plan. Let the Pelosi attack ads begin!
Update: To grasp the magnitude of what Democrats did today, click here, scroll down, and have a look at Nate Silver’s comparison of various pols’ favorable numbers. Quote: “In fact, Ms. Pelosi is among the least popular politicians in America today — perhaps the single least popular one that maintains an active political role.”
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.
Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2