Intentionally put into my argumentative collection.
Position, which I will defend: Nancy is going to annihilate that asshole.
Note: This is mildly disingenuous. I want folks to agree with me, but if you think I am mistaken, do tell me! I will explain why I disagree with your assessment.
No Devil's advocacy, bad faith, or ad hominem attacks against people who are not fucking nazi's. You can say bad thing about That Asshole all you want.
Originally shared by Curt Thompson
Holy crap.
Well, Nancy Pelosi needed to shore up her cred as a leader, I guess. But man, she must have seen something that lead her to believe that there is no hope of ever working constructively with Trump on anything. Because his ego will demand nothing less than total war with her, now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/pelosi-questions-trumps-manhood-after-confrontational-white-house-meeting/2018/12/11/2b2111be-fd79-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.25fd80ae5355
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My only real... not even argument....concern I guess... is that nothing seems to really matter. Pelosi winning against Trump only matters if the people able to make changes /care/. And they just don't at this point. I would enjoy being proved wrong.
ReplyDeleteIf nothing else, Matt Johnson, there's a election in two years. At worst, I expect Pelosi to spearhead a larger blue wave than we just saw.
ReplyDeleteI find it super interesting. I've said elsewhere that I question Pelosi's ability to galvanize the far left base because she has too much baggage and is too mainstream of a politician to be radical enough to inspire the cynics.
ReplyDeleteShe or her handlers might well be thinking the same thing, because she's certainly a savvy enough political animal to amp up her radical cred by spitting in Trump's eye...and then having an "unauthorized" person "leak" the story.
"She must have seen something that lead her to believe that there is no hope of ever working constructively with Trump on anything." - Umm...yeah. Like everything Trump's misogynist ass had done the entire previous 3 years.
ReplyDeleteThere was never a time Pelosi believed there was room for agreement with Donald Trump. She's playing politics - and very effectively. She and Schumer are playing political chess while Trump's playing ... well, let's call it Checkers charitably.
The Wall is a red line issue. If Trump were willing to talk some other issue, then maybe they would have played ball. Get a few bipartisan bills through while it's possible, then return to the inevitable all out war. But by starting off with a red line issue? All out war it is, then.
But they went in knowing they could play this and win this as a political game. It was all about trapping Trump into political mistakes while coming off looking better in comparison. Getting him to admit to wanting to shut down the government? That's a win, such as it is. It reduces Trump's leverage, and increases theirs.
And don't think it's an accident that Pelosi took the spotlight rather than Schumer. Pelosi's a woman and as such viscerally despised by Trump and Republicans in general. So much easier to push their buttons with her belittling Trump's "manhood". So much easier to enrage him into making even more mistakes.
Will Pelosi "annihilate" Trump? I don't know about that. In terms of real power, she only has the direct ability to put up an ineffectual impeachment House vote.
But I think she's already toying with Trump. The key is that for all the Republican attempts to slag Pelosi, she shrugs it all off (or at least gives the appearance of shrugging it off, which in politics is just as good). Contrast with Senator Elizabeth Warren, where it's Trump who seems to be the shrugger. He just calls her "Pocahontas" and laughs...he doesn't bother listening to what she says. The dynamic is totally different. Pelosi has both real power that they can't ignore, and the ability to get under their skin.
And that is all she needs to win.
ReplyDeleteWhat's winning look like? Well, this, for starters.
Unless I misremember my constitution (totally possible!), the House controls the purse strings. And the fucking purse. There are a variety of bills that must start in the house. The Speaker has absolute control over what comes to the floor.
She can have the House be 24/7 impeachment hearings, or discussions with Bob Mueller. Or impanel a dozen hearings regarding the affairs and sporting habits of Trump.
Or -- of course -- a dozen things that it'd take a 78 year old mother of five and grandmother to think of, which will drive that asshole truly mad. In a way we've not seen.
They handled this masterfully. I just watched the video. They goaded him into being an idiot and claiming credit for the shutdown.
ReplyDeleteAlso, did you see how much he was saying the phrase "border security?" That's because if you ask "do you approve of how Trump handles border security" per se, it's maybe the only thing he gets over 50% approval on (and just barely that; 53%, last I checked). Someone told him that, probably recently, given how much he was repeating it and that I read a new story about the language issue around border security today.
However, he also said "wall" a lot, and the wall polls extremely badly (mid-to-low 30s, if I remember correctly).
Robert Bohl I'm fairly concerned about that delta. Like, I know what to do with the people who approve of The Wall... but what am I to make of the people who disapprove of The Wall but still somehow approve of "Trump on border security"?
ReplyDeleteMorons who think abstract toughness is good, but specific evil policies are bad.
ReplyDeleteHonestly I almost prefer the people who can accept outright villainy; at least I know where they stand.
ReplyDeleteLike in airport security, there’s a lot of people who feel something ought to be done.
ReplyDeleteSo if you’re clearly and loudly doing something, and it isn’t obviously too stupid or evil, then...they give the benefit of the doubt and move on. Something Different and Noisy is being done, even if it’s not improving the situation in any concrete way, so it’s ok.
I was like that on border security and prison reform during the Obama years. Things looked like they were changing, and probably in good directions, but honestly the fact that somebody remotely trustable was doing things was enough to backburner the whole issue in my mind.
My gut instinct is that nothing that feels this good can be sound social strategy, but I've trained long and hard so that my strategy is not led solely by gut instinct.
ReplyDeleteBut on Pelosi — my concern is that they same machine that spun up people’s hate about an uppity commanding woman will just be turned on her, and she’ll also get buried in a giant mount of implausible but terrible conspiracy theories. You already have dislike of her on both sides of the aisle.
ReplyDeleteShe may have been learning from HRCs struggles — she certainly seems to be going out of her way to drum up fans by spiking things in the end zone, and playing to her sometimes-underplayed reputation as a canny and vicious fighter.
But I have to wonder how long it is before people posing as Bernie Bros start trying to pull the House down around her, with how terrible and mean and corrupt she must be.
Jesse Cox Pelosi's already been a Republican Hate Machine major target for years, decades even, just like HRC. If she was running for President it'd be a serious electoral liability worth accounting for; as a House Rep, it's nothing new.
ReplyDeleteNot only has Pelosi been a major Republican character assassination target since the 2000s, they've been specifically running against her for years - most notably in this year's elections.
ReplyDeleteShe's already very deeply unpopular with the regressive racist sexist Republican deplorables. They were banking on drumming up their voter base by running against Pelosi.
How did that work out for them? It didn't. The Democrats had a 40 or 41 seat pickup.
Oh sure, they pumped up their base. But this time, the Democratic base was also pumped up. It was a crazy high turnout election. And under those circumstances, their base wasn't enough.
.
ReplyDeletePelosi is a once in a lifetime political talent, a GOAT Speaker contender, no question. Her job is not to rally the left of her party's base, or the right, or any part. Her job is to Get The Fucking Votes. It's the base's job to get their representatives moving and the Speaker's job is to corral them. She got the whole Connecticut for Lieberman right-wing Democratic caucus to vote for Obamacare instead of what they wanted: a giant fucking pile of nothing. She's a grandma from a wealthy district, so she's never going to be a Hero Of Socialism, but that's not her job. Her job is Getting The Fucking Votes and she does it better than any Speaker in my lifetime; ever, and it's not a close call, not even close to close. Paul Ryan had as much of a majority in the last two years as Pelosi had in 2007 and what got done with it? Jack shit. Because he couldn't Get The Fucking Votes. Because he's a no talent loser and a complete waste of time as Speaker. It doesn't matter if she's targeted nationally. She was in 2007 too. Guess what. She still Got The Fucking Votes. If she runs for President maybe what people think of her nationally matters. But it doesn't. That's not her job. She represents one district, and holds a position where she has to Get THe Fucking Votes. That's it. And she's a genius at it.
ReplyDeleteIn other words:
ReplyDeleteTrump: I could have the votes for the wall in one session
Pelosi: So go do it
(Ron Howard (narrates): He couldn't.)
"You're gonna need congressional approval and you don't have the votes"
ReplyDelete