Nancy Pelosi Gets ‘It’ Done

John Cole is ashamed that some House Democrats are running against Nancy Pelosi, given her effectiveness. It's all a matter of perspective.

Reacting to a WaPo story titled “Even if Democrats win, Pelosi faces opposition to remain as speaker,” which notes that five Democratic incumbents — Reps. Jason Altmire (Pa.), Bobby Bright (Ala.), Jim Marshall (Ga.), Mike McIntyre (N.C.) and Gene Taylor (Miss.) — have “declared their opposition to her,” John Cole observes,

Looking back at the last two years, if there was one portion of the government that acted pretty much EXACTLY the way you would think Democrats would want it to act, passing great legislation in a timely manner and really advancing the ball on issues important to Democrats, it would be Nancy Pelosi’s House. She’s pretty much been the glue that that has kept the entire party together, as was evident during the HCR saga.

So of course, it would make complete sense if Democrats would stab her in the back. If there is anyone in DC right now who I trust almost completely, it is Pelosi. She gets shit done.

My initial reaction was that the shit Pelosi’s getting done is get Democrats defeated.   If you’re a Democrat, that’s some shit you really don’t want your most senior legislative official doing.

More importantly, the shit Pelosi’s getting done is wildly unpopular in the districts of these five Representatives.  So much so that, despite all the advantages normally associated with incumbency, they’re quite likely to be ex-Representatives.*  That’s the type of shit sure to engender some animosity from said Representatives.

Now, on the bright side for Democrats more supportive of the party agenda, we’re talking five Representatives.   Out of 255 House Democrats!  That’s just 2 percent of her existing caucus!  That’s pretty decent solidarity, all things considered.  Bonus:  It’ll likely to be an even higher percentage, what with the detractors being defeated and all.

_____________

*Which, naturally, put me in mind of this classic bit:

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2010, US Politics
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Lynne says:

    Well, to Cole and the rest of the Juicers, the defeat of the blue dogs is a feature, not a bug.

    Cole like to crow about the fact that he used to be a Republican until he saw the liberal light and registered as a Democrat. To this day, I keep trying to figure out why he would have ever been a Republican, given that he doesn’t seem to identify with anything the Republican party stands for, either now or in the past.

    Everyone changes over time, usually from being fairly liberal in your youth to becoming more conservative as you grow older and have a responsibilities that you didn’t have when you were younger. Cole has gone the opposite direction, identifying more and more with liberal causes as time goes on. I guess in the past he was really what would be considered a RINO, rather than a true Republican.

  2. Steve Verdon says:

    ….passing great legislation….

    Wow…of course I guess great could mean great in a really bad way like health care reform. Somehow I don’t think that is what John means.

  3. sam says:

    BTW, and I hope this isn’t too far OT, the Iowa Electronic Markets, as of 10/13, have the Republicans gaining the Senate and the Democrats holding the House!?

    The market says the most probable outcome of the election is still a Democratic House-Republican Senate. That contract is selling for 54.6 cents, representing a 54.6 percent probability of a split Congress. The price is down from 61 cents at the start of the month, as traders sell contracts in favor of outright Republican control.

    That’s the only place I’ve ever seen that prediction.

  4. sam says:

    Wait a minute, I need some sleep. Disregard that last.

  5. ponce says:

    “Cole has gone the opposite direction…”

    I have gone in the same direction, rabid Republican to conservative Democrat.

    The reason for my switch was George W. Bush.

    BTW, was does the Republican party stand for these day?

  6. Franklin says:

    Everyone changes over time, usually from being fairly liberal in your youth to becoming more conservative as you grow older and have a responsibilities that you didn’t have when you were younger.

    That’s not really true. For one study that shows the opposite (I’m sure that, like everything, there’s a study that shows both sides): http://www.livescience.com/health/080310-liberal-seniors.html

    My point-of-view formed completely from meaningless anecdotes: views can of course change wildly in early adulthood, but the smartest people I know tend to gravitate towards the center as they learn more.

  7. James Joyner says:

    the smartest people I know tend to gravitate towards the center as they learn more

    I’m not sure which way we skew the data, but Steven Taylor and I are both examples of this phenomenon. Having known each other for 12 years now, we can attest to each other’s evolution. Part of it is that the GOP has moved much further to the right and part of it is that evidence has come in to move us off of previously held positions.

  8. Steven Donegal says:

    I’m 59. When I was younger, I was a solid liberal. As I got older, I saw the Rs had a few decent points and started to vote for them when they weren’t complete social conservative crazies. I just voted today and for the first time in a long while I voted a straight Dem ticket. It will be a long time and a thorough cleansing of the Tea Party nonsense before I vote for an R again.

  9. reid says:

    I was never an official Republican, but I’m another one of those people that became a Democrat later in life. (I’m 42 and registered D in 2004.) Yeah, thank Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the GOP march to the right for the change. The Democrats also seem less liberal than they used to be, despite the rantings of wingnuts, so identifying more with them hardly makes one a “liberal”. That old canard about young liberals growing into older conservatives doesn’t seem to apply anymore.

  10. anjin-san says:

    > usually from being fairly liberal in your youth to becoming more conservative as you grow older and have a responsibilities that you didn’t have when you were younger

    Personally, I was fairly conservative when I was younger. I had a privileged upbringing and just could not see why all those folks out there were not as well off as the people I knew. Surely they must just be lazy.

    Years have gone by, and I have seen a lot more of life. And I seem to get a little more “liberal” each year, if you mean liberal to be caring about the well being of our society as a whole, and being away of one’s blessings and hoping to have a chance to give people who are not as lucky a chance for a better life.

    As this process has evolved, I have gone from having close to no responsibilities to having a vast amount of responsibility. To say that growing more conservative as once accquires more responsibility is to make the mistake of assuming one’s own life experience is somehow representative of the natural course of events.

  11. G.A.Phillips says:

    ****That old canard about young liberals growing into older conservatives doesn’t seem to apply anymore.****

    Ya, it comes from cradle to grave mass indoctrination attempts, complete societal breakdown, the wrong kind of faith, and watching to much comedy central!

  12. Davebo says:

    “Ya, it comes from cradle to grave mass indoctrination attempts:”

    Yes, Limbaugh and Fox have indeed indoctrinated the idiots such as yourself.

    I’m glad you can admit it because seriously, you’d be freaking scary if you formed your own opinions.

  13. Davebo says:

    And is it just me, or has James used the word “shit” more in this post than any other.

    There’s a George Carlin reference I’m drawn to here.

  14. Trumwill says:

    That’s not really true. For one study that shows the opposite (I’m sure that, like everything, there’s a study that shows both sides)

    Actually, that really makes sense. It seems to be looking mostly at social issues and the “norms” on social issues have largely been moving to the left over the last few decades. I mean, when you look at seniors, they were growing up during the Civil Rights era where segregationism was considered a valid political position.

    For my own part, what I have seen in myself as I have aged is the deterioration of certainty on most issues.

  15. superdestroyer says:

    the reason that so many hip white progressives love to talk about becoming more liberal is that white Democrats have the ability to forget that they are in the same party as the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the extreme greens.

    One of the things that the media has been very good about is making the action of any Republican appear to be the action of every Republican. Yet,the actions and voting of the CBC and CHC is never associated with white Democrats.

    The black Democrats in the District of Columbia just voted out a very successful mayor because he was too nice to whites. Yet, no hip progressive ever says that they do not want to be in the same party with such blatant racist because to the white progressives, they are not in the same party.

  16. davod says:

    “Yeah, thank Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the GOP march to the right for the change. ‘

    What did they do to move you into the Democratic camp”

  17. Don L says:

    Instinct tells me that it’s election time in an angry America, therefore, the least principled politicians in the leat principled party are starting to show their admirably strong lack of principles by deserting their least principled leader.

    At least that abhorant man-Teddy Kennedy- was consistenly abhorant!

  18. davod says:

    I can understand why John Cole is happy with Pelosis’s performance. Pelosi moved the Left’s agenda forward. Do you think the 2000 pages of stimulus and 2700 pages of HCR was all about compromise within the Democratic Party. Lots of the content had been sitting around for years waiting to be inserted into a bill.

  19. reid says:

    davod: Do you really need to ask? A book could be (and no doubt has been) written on the subject. Propagandizing us into Iraq, engaging in torture, Schiavo, politicization of the government, playing up to religious groups, cynically anti-gay, ignoring the environment. That’s just a start.

  20. Steve Verdon says:

    And is it just me, or has James used the word “shit” more in this post than any other.

    There’s a George Carlin reference I’m drawn to here.

    I think he is poking fun at John Cole’s use of the word.

    TL;DR John Cole:

    Nancy Pelosi does lots of cool and great shit, so support her.

  21. G.A.Phillips says:

    ****Yes, Limbaugh and Fox have indeed indoctrinated the idiots such as yourself.****lol, dummy, I grew up being indoctrinated by the tv, and Rush nor Fox was on it, only liberals…..

    ***I’m glad you can admit it because seriously, you’d be freaking scary if you formed your own opinions.***

    lol half the shit I joke about around here come to life far after I joke about it. Take the tea party for example. Not to mention how so many of you copy my writing styles, lol, thats the funniest part.

    Form my own opinions lol

    Liberal and origanl just don’t go together……