• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats shun idea of Pelosi floor fight in speaker’s race

Make money and marshall votes. Don't leave that second part out. The Speaker's role is also successfully aim the agenda of the House's party members into one coherent direction. So again, when has she been bad at that?

Answered. We just disagree.
 
Oh, give me a break. Anyone that terrified of her obviously has no business being Speaker.


Sorry, it is fact. Congresswoman Fudge already backed off.
 
Answered. We just disagree.

You're free to disagree, but you haven't formed a coherent argument for why she's bad at her job. So far, the only picture you've painted in this thread is that you just really don't like her. You're certainly not obliged to like her, but I hope you have more than that to go on.
 
You're free to disagree, but you haven't formed a coherent argument for why she's bad at her job. So far, the only picture you've painted in this thread is that you just really don't like her. You're certainly not obliged to like her, but I hope you have more than that to go on.


End. Next personal attack is being reported.
 
Actually, I think I'd hang that hat on Hillary.

There are about a dozen good reasons Trump won the election, and this is literally the first I've heard anybody attribute one of those reasons to Pelosi.

That said, I really would like to know whose decision it was to move the Democrats' power base to DC and away from states and local communities. It was that decision that left the rest of the country without a strong Democratic leader presence they could feel connected to. I honestly don't know who chose to do that, but if I find out Pelosi had anything to do with it that would seriously impact my opinion of her.
 
I think dems are pretty unified in general. But comparing one dem to another, Bernie is more socialist then Pelosi, while Bernie is more about grass root campaign and lower income bracket building while Pelosi is more globalist and well entrenched in wall st and corporations.
Well said.
 
End. Next personal attack is being reported.

By all means report away, but that doesn't do away with the fact that you've failed to form any coherent reason for your disapproval of Pelosi beyond your dislike of her personally (for some reason you still have yet to share).
 
My problem is that the Democrat leadership under Pelosi proved so inept that they proudly admitted to not reading what they voted for.

Your problem is with a mythical thing that never happened.
 
By all means report away, but that doesn't do away with the fact that you've failed to form any coherent reason for your disapproval of Pelosi beyond your dislike of her personally (for some reason you still have yet to share).


You failed to make a coherent post.
 
Lmao - she voted for something she hadn't read, and you think this inspires confidence from people my age who want politicians that do more than vote for the same reason I am expected to do more than sign on a dotted line? Yeah, okay you've deluded yourself into believing I care that people didn't like the AHCA and then they did. My problem is that the Democrat leadership under Pelosi proved so inept that they proudly admitted to not reading what they voted for. That alone makes her unfit to lead Democrats. Time to move on, let someone who can spend time reading what they vote for take over.

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.

Like "you didn't build that," the "we have to pass it before we know what's in it" soundbite is much more damning without the context. With full context added, it turns into a very different thing:

"Imagine an economy where people could follow their aspirations, where they could be entrepreneurial, where they could take risks professionally because personally their families [sic] health care needs are being met. Where they could be self-employed or start a business, not be job-locked in a job because they have health care there, and if they went out on their own it would be unaffordable to them, but especially true, if someone has a child with a pre-existing condition. So when we pass our bill, never again will people be denied coverage because they have a pre-existing condition.

We have to do this in partnership, and I wanted to bring [you] up to date on where we see it from here. The final health care legislation that will soon be passed by Congress will deliver successful reform at the local level. It will offer paid for investments that will improve health care services and coverage for millions more Americans. It will make significant investments in innovation, prevention, wellness and offer robust support for public health infrastructure. It will dramatically expand investments into community health centers. That means a dramatic expansion in the number of patients community health centers can see and ultimately healthier communities. Our bill will significantly reduce uncompensated care for hospitals.

You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention–it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting.

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."
 
Really don't care about any of that stuff. She's the past, a hack. Will the conservative Democrats every wake up to the reality that Trump is president because the Dems did nothing.
That "stuff" is the reason a Speaker is elevated!

It's what they do, ipso facto I might add!

:doh
 
Like "you didn't build that," the "we have to pass it before we know what's in it" soundbite is much more damning without the context. With full context added, it turns into a very different thing:

"Imagine an economy where people could follow their aspirations, where they could be entrepreneurial, where they could take risks professionally because personally their families [sic] health care needs are being met. Where they could be self-employed or start a business, not be job-locked in a job because they have health care there, and if they went out on their own it would be unaffordable to them, but especially true, if someone has a child with a pre-existing condition. So when we pass our bill, never again will people be denied coverage because they have a pre-existing condition.

We have to do this in partnership, and I wanted to bring [you] up to date on where we see it from here. The final health care legislation that will soon be passed by Congress will deliver successful reform at the local level. It will offer paid for investments that will improve health care services and coverage for millions more Americans. It will make significant investments in innovation, prevention, wellness and offer robust support for public health infrastructure. It will dramatically expand investments into community health centers. That means a dramatic expansion in the number of patients community health centers can see and ultimately healthier communities. Our bill will significantly reduce uncompensated care for hospitals.

You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention–it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting.

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."

Yeah, there is nothing damning about saying you have to pass a bill to know what's in it. Lol,

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
 
Yeah, there is nothing damning about saying you have to pass a bill to know what's in it. Lol,

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.

Her crime here was in being sloppy enough to utter something that could be taken out of context and turned into something nefarious. The most well-meaning politician will provide the opposition with a good soundbite now and again.

Reading the full context, however, Pelosi was most certainly not saying that she wouldn't know what's in the bill until it was passed. She was saying that there was so much misinformation about the bill that people living with the new rules and protections wouldn't even know about them until they actually had them.
 
Yeah, there is nothing damning about saying you have to pass a bill to know what's in it.

Not really. She was talking to county officials who probably hadn’t read it. Turns out she was right, once they passed it those officials got to see all the public health provisions that made their jobs easier and their communities healthier.
 
Reading the full context, however, Pelosi was most certainly not saying that she wouldn't know what's in the bill until it was passed.

The parts of the speech where she recounted for her audience what was in the legislation are a pretty good clue about that.
 
Her crime here was in being sloppy enough to utter something that could be taken out of context and turned into something nefarious. The most well-meaning politician will provide the opposition with a good soundbite now and again.

Reading the full context, however, Pelosi was most certainly not saying that she wouldn't know what's in the bill until it was passed. She was saying that there was so much misinformation about the bill that people living with the new rules and protections wouldn't even know about them until they actually had them.

The Republicans lied so much about Obamacare that it took the public almost 10 years to realize what a good thing it actually is.
 
Not really. She was talking to county officials who probably hadn’t read it. Turns out she was right, once they passed it those officials got to see all the public health provisions that made their jobs easier and their communities healthier.

Lmao, that's insane. This is the reason I don't want Pelosi lading the Democrats. You genuinely think that jobs in healthcare have gotten "easier" as a result of a legislation that most state officials had no idea how to implement when it first rolled out. That's crazier than gloating about people outside of the political class not knowing what is being passed 'for them', or voting for something they thought was good, they just didn't bother to explain to the people who were involved in executing it.

No, no sir. We won't be supporting that sort of disorganization just because some people ended up liking what they disliked.
 
Last edited:
Pelosi’s House passed comprehensive health reform, the last minimum wage hike, Waxman-Markey, the DREAM Act, the Employee Free Choice Act, got rid of FFELP in favor of Direct student loans, reauthorized CHIP, and on and on.

What passes the house only matters if it makes it to law. Waxman-Markey and the EFCA have not. FFEL is no big deal as soon after inception raised the interest rate to match the Direct student loans. As of February 2018, the CHIP program has been authorized to continue through the year 2027, no Pelosi involved.
 
Back
Top Bottom