The New House of Representatives.

The "Progressives" have struck a deal with Nancy Pelosi. I think it's a good thing. The Democratic Caucus should be united under a strong leader in order to deal with Trump.

Once the current crises is over Nancy can consider retirement and the Dems can look for a new leader.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/16/pelosi-speaker-progressives-congress-998595

I expect disagreement but in addition to that can we use this thread to continue discussing the new House what we want them to do and then, after they take over, continue the discussion while observing them?



Really? I heard a comment that there were 16 or 17 votes against her. OK I'll read it.


God bless Nate Silver.

On the morning of Election Day his 538 Blog predicted that the most likely result based on three models would be a Democratic gain of 36-38 seats.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/

And the most recent results are:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/2018-midterms-democratic-win.html

Democrats have gained at least 37 net House seats, 14 more than they needed to gain control of the chamber; of the four races still unresolved, they lead in one district (New York’s 22nd) and trail in three (Georgia’s Seventh, New York’s 27th, and Utah’s Fourth). 

This may be even more up-to-date:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/19/politics/2018-election-update-democrats-pickup/index.html


Dems just flipped another Congress seat.


Utah.


That Pelosi sure did screw up the mid-terms, huh?


We picked up 38+ seats in the house. If we pick the right candidate for prez 2020, we will crush whoever the republicans come up with.


Apparently the Dem advantage in congressional voting this year was the biggest margin since 1974.


"But, but, but I won the Senate!"


gerritn said:
We picked up 38+ seats in the house. If we pick the right candidate for prez 2020, we will crush whoever the republicans come up with.

 39.

No love for Mia:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/20/rep-mia-love-loses-to-democrat-in-utah-1009545



drummerboy said:
That Pelosi sure did screw up the mid-terms, huh?

 You mean all the Democrats who ran and won by saying they'll vote against Pelosi?


All? C'mon. The superstar of progressives, Ocasio-Cortez is onboard; Marcia Fudge, the only alternative candidate, is now onboard; and the MA dude is being hounded as a misogynist by his constituents.


BG9 said:


drummerboy said:
That Pelosi sure did screw up the mid-terms, huh?
 You mean all the Democrats who ran and won by saying they'll vote against Pelosi?

 But who will they vote for? There does not seem to be an alternative. And this:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/21/poll-democratic-voters-back-pelosi-1009351


BG9 said:


drummerboy said:
That Pelosi sure did screw up the mid-terms, huh?
 You mean all the Democrats who ran and won by saying they'll vote against Pelosi?

So who are they actually voting FOR then?


GL2 said:
All? C'mon. The superstar of progressives, Ocasio-Cortez is onboard; Marcia Fudge, the only alternative candidate, is now onboard; and the MA dude is being hounded as a misogynist by his constituents.

My brother and his spouse are in his district.  Seth Moulton is definitely "Dead Man Walking" right now, if he thinks he is going to run in 2020.


Saw a clip of the town hall. Wasn't pretty.


WTF is he thinking? I can't understand the "progressives" problem with Nancy. And I really can't understand Seth's. Isn't he pretty moderate? Or is Pelosi caught in the middle; i.e., too moderate for progressives and too lib for Seth?


Nancy Pelosi has picked off another Democratic detractor who vowed to oppose the long-time Democratic leader, putting her one step closer to regaining the speaker’s gavel in January. 

Rep. Brian Higgins, a New York Democrat who has criticized Pelosi for months and promised to vote against her in the new Congress, announced his support for the California Democrat Wednesday.


politico


GL2 said:
All? C'mon. The superstar of progressives, Ocasio-Cortez is onboard.

 AKA, flavor of the month.


GL2 said:
WTF is he thinking? I can't understand the "progressives" problem with Nancy. And I really can't understand Seth's. Isn't he pretty moderate? Or is Pelosi caught in the middle; i.e., too moderate for progressives and too lib for Seth?

 Exactly.  She's too left-wing neoliberal for anybody.


Then there's...


One day after a group of 16 Democratic politicians pledged to oppose Nancy Pelosi's bid to become the next speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, an equal number of donors released a letter to the lower chamber of Congress' Democratic caucus in support of its leader.

"Because of her diligence, her powers of persuasion, her enormous effectiveness and her adherence to our values, we have provided a portion of the financial resources required to be competitive cycle after cycle," the 16 Democratic donors wrote in their letter, which was shared with HuffPost.

"When it came to funding this recent effort to retake the Majority, would we have contributed anywhere near as much as we did if Nancy was not the Leader? We think not," they wrote.

In the letter, the donors warned that they may not be willing to contribute as many funds to Democrats if the next speaker is someone other than Pelosi.

"[W]e do believe the competence and effectiveness of the Leader is a critical component in motivating us to reach in our pockets. On that basis it is hard to imagine a replacement for Nancy engendering the same level of confidence at this critical time," the donors wrote. "Your recent success in winning the majority is only a first step in changing our country's direction. As critical as it was, the coming cycle is even more so."


salon.com



What exactly is the problem with Pelosi? (serious question)


Depends on one’s POV:  for GOP, it’s her effectiveness; for progressives, somehow they translate age to mean she’s out of touch. Classic “young folks” stuff. Me, in an earlier time, before I became such a wise elder.


LOST said:


BG9 said:

drummerboy said:
That Pelosi sure did screw up the mid-terms, huh?
 You mean all the Democrats who ran and won by saying they'll vote against Pelosi?
 But who will they vote for? There does not seem to be an alternative. And this:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/21/poll-democratic-voters-back-pelosi-1009351

 Interesting quote from the article:

A group of 16 fractious Democrats — most of whom are moderate and male — released a letter Monday pledging to vote against Pelosi in a closed-door conference meeting


yeah, the congressional opposition among the Dems is mostly coming from the conservative side of the party. It's one of the most inept insurrections I've ever seen. Morons.


It's mostly posturing to negotiate with Pelosi to get legislative concessions and committee assignments. Supposedly she just plays one side against the other. To conservatives, "Well, you may not love me, but if a progressive gets the job, your side will be completely screwed." Then she says the same to the progressives regarding a potentially more conservative Speaker.


"Dems' national lead in raw House votes - now 8.8 million - just broke the record for largest for either party in the history of midterm elections (previous record was 8.7 million set by Dems in 1974)."

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1065087965498679296



cramer said:
"Dems' national lead in raw House votes - now 8.8 million - just broke the record for largest for either party in the history of midterm elections (previous record was 8.7 million set by Dems in 1974)."
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1065087965498679296


The R's have done a remarkable job, between gerrymandering and vote suppression, to diminish the power of the left.  It's a story that needs to be told and re-told until the general population gets at least a glimmer of how the playing field has been rigged. Right now, it's still kind of complicated  for the majority of people who just barely pay attention to politics, but still like to vote.



Rumor has it that Rep. Marcia Fudge who decided not to run for Speaker will be Chair of a Committee on Elections. Let's see what they come up within terms of legislation.


cramer said:
"Dems' national lead in raw House votes - now 8.8 million - just broke the record for largest for either party in the history of midterm elections (previous record was 8.7 million set by Dems in 1974)."
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1065087965498679296

1974: 8.7 million lead out of 52.3 million votes cast. (Margin: 57% to 40%.)

2018: 8.8 million lead out of 111.7 million votes cast. (Margin: 53% to 45%.)


DaveSchmidt said:


cramer said:
"Dems' national lead in raw House votes - now 8.8 million - just broke the record for largest for either party in the history of midterm elections (previous record was 8.7 million set by Dems in 1974)."
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1065087965498679296
1974: 8.7 million lead out of 52.3 million votes cast. (Margin: 57% to 40%.)
2016: 8.8 million lead out of 111.7 million votes cast. (Margin: 53% to 45%.)

 oh, you elitists and your numbers.


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.