Oh for fucks sakes.
Fuck’s sake *
Yes. Fuck posses the sake.
Is it for the sake of just one fuck, or for all of the fucks?
One must consider both, the aggregate (greater fuck group) and the individual fuck as well.
She’s only one more reelection to lichdom.
We should turn her into a giant baby.
We need to find her phylactery first, otherwise she’ll always return.
No.
No, no, no, no, no!
Is she looking at Feinstein and thinking “well, I don’t need to be propped up yet, so I should still be able to run the country!”
I don’t care on which side of the aisle these oldies sit. They do not represent the will of a people who are largely younger than they are by two decades.
No, she’s looking at her and her husband’s bank accounts and thinking “well, I don’t need to be propped up yet, so I can continue to be grossly corrupt and get even richer”
Well, she is the queen of congressional insider trading…
She was # 6 in 2021, # 1 to 5 were all Republicans.
Then things didn’t go as well in 2022
So how about we start paying attention to Republican tradings? 👍
Republicans are masters of messaging. They latch onto one thing for one person and pound it over and over again. The left accepts that these are bad things (they are) but won’t whatabout enough about the Republicans that do it worse, so this becomes Pelosi’s image while those that do it worse are unknown.
deleted by creator
While you are right this has zero to do with whatever party you want to idolize it’s a problem for all sides we need to focus on all of them, none of these clowns should be able to make trades, they are in positions where they actually can shape the outcomes of their trades that’s fucking ridiculous
And on topic there needs to be some realistic term limits for these jackasses especially when they start to get older, nothing wrong with being old but if you are running a country and you get stuck staring at cameras in a daze it’s time to go… ffs most people I know can’t wait to retire and would do so even earlier if they could yet these goblins are slopping it up at the trough
This is a class issue always has been
Never said it wasn’t the case, I just pointed out the Pelosi is always the target when the fact is she’s not the worst and there’s zero attention put on any Republicans regarding that.
deleted by creator
I’m just pointing out the fact that people are always pointing at Pelosi but she’s not the biggest culprit and no people aren’t putting as much attention on the people who are actually worse than her.
deleted by creator
That’s her investments, not her gains.
Explain how. Can you cite any trades that are particularly suspicious?
You’re basically espousing right wing talking points that they came up with to divert attention from the republicans who are actively insider trading. There are plenty of things to criticize pelosi for rather than this stupid argument which isn’t backed up by facts.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-07/pelosi-s-husband-locked-in-5-3-million-from-alphabet-options?srnd=premium#xj4y7vzkg Paul Pelosi is forever making suspiciously well-timed trades. When it became a scandal, they intentionally sold Nvidia shares at a loss to try to end scrutiny of that trade.
It’s not a Republican talking point. I’m as far left as they come and I’m offended by her corruption (even if Joe Manchin’s family seems worse).
So, he exercised his options he held for quite a while, a “week before House panel considered antitrust bills”. What exactly was the insider information? And, he just exercised the options to hold the stock. Not sure how that’s evidence of insider trading
I mention her trading because this is a post about her.
Corruption is corruption and it spans both chambers and all layers of government.
So you don’t care if it’s true or not, you’re just mentioning it because you associate insider trading with pelosi for just random unrelated reasons?
deleted by creator
Younger by two decades is still mid 60s/retirement age
The average age of constituents in her district is 40. I cant figure out how she keeps getting elected, unless she’s just never had a peimary challenger worth a damn.
She predates the baby boomers. She was in diapers when pearl harbor was bombed. Two decades younger should be the mandatory retirement age for politicians.
Hi, dem here. WE DONT WANT FUCKING ELDRITCH GODS REPRESENTING US anymore. Term limits. Term limits. Term limits.
Term limits and age limits.
The age thing I’m less interested in, but competency tests and health checks probably more so. Think they’d do the same thing but more precisely (some people shit out in their 70s, some people stay sharp until they’re 100)
The age limit thing is definitely a tradeoff. We would lose people like Pelosi and Trump (and Biden), but we’d also lose Bernie Sanders.
Good. There’s tons of younger people who stand for the same things that Bernie stood for.
Anyone you’d like to shout out specifically, nows the perfect op
deleted by creator
The Squad only exists in social media, in reality and practice they are run of the mill neolibs
And probably a lot less delusional.
Some people shouldn’t be eligible in their 30s. I don’t know how we decide it though is the issue, and I don’t trust that some conservative won’t gain power and say “anyone who thinks corporations shouldn’t be regulated is mentally ill” won’t gain power.
But can you trust that they will remain sharp for 4 years (or whatever the term of the position they’re running for)?
This is the key to term limits right here imo
She is widely credited with marshalling the passage of former President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare legislation, as well as bills to address infrastructure and climate change under incumbent President Joe Biden.
Her big claim to fame…
Getting republicans to vote for a more conservative healthcare plan than what the Republican candidate for president wanted to pass if he had won.
It’s fucking disgusting moderates still act like that was the finish line over a decade later and oppose any more improvement to it, while demanding we call them progressive for it.
Although, once you’re in your 70s, a decade probably feels like two weeks. Time flies when age related mental decline stops you from noticing the passage of time.
Hey, they had to get rid of the public option part and gut the bill to get some republican support! Ignore the fact that it was still passed entirely from a down party lines vote with zero republican support. They had to make it a shitty gutted bill for some reason. It was such an accomplishment forcing everyone to get healthcare from multi billion dollar companies with fat profit margins.
They had to get rid of the public option to get enough Democratic support to pass.
It was not a party line vote, 34 Democrats joined all the Republicans in voting No. It squeaked through the House, 219-212.
So, what you are saying, is that Democrats are extremely bad at getting their own party members to vote in line with what their voters want them to accomplish? Sounds about right.
“Getting their own party members” to vote for something is not as easy as you think. Just ask the current majority leader how easy it is to push around his “Freedom Caucus”.
And the public option was not killed in the House. It was killed by Joe Lieberman, who was not even a Democrat any more. But he was the 60th Senate vote, he was opposed to it, and nobody - not even you - could have changed his mind. Consider that his final “F*** you” to his former party. So you can blame the people of Connecticut for that, not Pelosi.
This could perhaps be excused if it was a one-off freak happenstance, but with Manchin and Sinema, it’s obvious that the ol’ switcharoo is intentional.
Manchin, Sinema, Boebert, McCain, Lieberman, and many others all serve to demonstrate that you shouldn’t expect party members to vote together all of the time. Even if everyone in that list voted with their party >90% of the time.
It’s not a “switcharoo”, it’s baked into a system in which representatives are ultimately chosen by constituents, not by party leaders. If anything, Congress was originally intended not to have longstanding parties or factions. It was originally intended for everyone to be like Manchin and Sinema. So like it or not, lack of party discipline is a feature not a bug.
Yet the republican party has no trouble keeping their dogs in line.
Getting republicans to vote for
No Republicans voted for it.
In fact, she had to work to get Democrats to vote for it. It passed the House 219-212, with 34 Democrats and all the Republicans voting No.
That was the joke…
TESTIFY!
deleted by creator
Its a shame more people, especially younger people in the US, aren’t more into things like primaries and other voting besides presidential elections. Makes me wonder who would break through future elections and who they would appoint as a result.
because the system is designed to check against this! we cannot realistically outvote the cartoonishly dumb and convoluted primary system or the electoral college. after bernie got fucked over twice, how can anyone even have hope anymore? no one more progressive that pete fucking buttigeg is getting anywhere
Yeah Bernie losing the primary felt odd I thought more people preferred him over the rest
I live in a red state and during that election Bernie came to our state capitol and the crowd to see him was literally three city blocks deep from the stage. I had not seen anything like that in my life, ever.
The only person Trump was scared of during that election was Sanders. He’s on tape talking about it privately.
because the system is designed to check against this!
Is it? Or is it only sustained by, let’s call it, a minimal voter turnout? That is, the system works as expected by those in play so long as voter turnout remains within historical trends which appear to sit under half of all eligible voters during non-presidential election years.
If, however, people were moved to vote more between presidential elections, might that system not potentially begin to falter? Maybe it’s naive, but if one really believes they’ve rigged the system in their favor, don’t you think part of that rigging is built around downplaying the votes outside of those for president?
What are you talking about? “Young people” are turning out more at their age than prior generations at that age.
Now 3 of them instead of 2!
Just kidding but it is nice to see voting percentage in the US go up
I’m in her district. This has given me a possibly-crazy idea. What if I registered to run against her? Hear me out.
I don’t think that I could win. She’s been in the game for so long, I have no illusions. But, registering and announcing a campaign to challenge her might result in some national publication contacting me for a quote. I might be able to get a line in said publication and get people talking about it.
“Nancy Pelosi should get out of the way of younger generations and let those who came after her have a seat at the table.”
I’d appreciate feedback on the value of doing something like this. Also, the likelihood that it would have the desired outcome. Also, thoughts on how this might be done.
I’ve been kicking this idea around since this morning when I first saw this. I’m increasingly thinking that it sounds like a good idea. Thoughts?
I think the local DNC would have to “allow” it. Otherwise you’d run as something-other-than-Democratic.
But all it would cost you is time, and maybe a small filling fee to find out.
I say, go for it! It would at least shake up the geriatric incumbents a bit.
The local DNC could potentially work against you but they can’t stop you from running in the primary as long as you meet the requirements.
Awesome, that’s good to know! I just assumed they picked if there would be competition due to how some Republicans threatened to “primary” incumbents that didn’t fall in line.
Do it! As one of the most notable Democrats alive it’d be a near impossible task to unseat her, but maybe you get 20% of the vote and that’s not a terrible result. After that maybe someone more notable like a Mayor or state rep would run and maybe win. Shoot your shot!
deleted by creator
We need a competitor. Please do it.
Running in such a prominent campaign would probably make your life suck. Pelosi’s seasoned team would probably go through your entire life with a fine-toothed comb and spin anything remotely negative about you to make it seem like you were a serial killer. The Republicans, meanwhile, might throw money into supporting you without caring if you wanted their “help” just to make Pelosi’s life hell.
There are probably already real challengers who actually want the job who you could support instead. If you donated to them and volunteered for them, they might make enough noise to at least get some headlines. And, you wouldn’t have to stick your own neck out.
have you heard of Shahid Buttar
Apparently, I had. The first two links on a search had already been visited. That’s discouraging. Thanks!
deleted by creator
He had a good platform too; a true leftist planning for the future of AI, UBI, etc. She just straight out refused to debate him. Then she ran a smear PR campaign on him just to be sure
“Nancy Pelosi should get out of the way of younger generations and let those who came after her have a seat at the table.”
Don’t stop with her. Make your platform about Glitch McConnell, Dianne “The Wraith” Feinstein, Chuck “Touch” Grassley, and every other member of Congress who can’t even claim to be a boomer because they were born before the end of WW2. Their generation built the America we have now; how’s it working out for y’all?
Here’s what you do, announce that you’re running, say your peace, and when you’re surfing that publicity wave, announce that you’re running for governor of California. No flaw!
Do it!
I wish you would. Get your friends to do it too… “Nancy Pelosi Faces a Dozen Primary Challengers” might draw some more attention.
We need to put an age limit on political offices
I think we should also include term limits for these offices in addition to the age limit.
You can’t be president for more than 8 years, but you can be in the same political office more or less for almost 40? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me lol.
Yes, term limits are a much better solution as age restrictions can be a slippery slope.
It would also make you useless as your term comes to an end. Political capital and IOUs are the currency in the capitol
Right, I mean those are the things we are saying are bad.
The culture of the Senate and Congress would need to change, and I think it would rather quickly. Unfortunately this is an issue both Republicans and Democrats will never support because the very people entrenched in power would need to vote themselves out of power. It will literally never happen.
Why do you think that term limits will solve it? If there’s no seniority whip, what other motivation do they have besides corporate donations? I.E., take all the bribes they can in their short tenure?
Don’t tell me more idealistic politicians will make it to the top. I don’t believe that for a second.
I guess I’d flip that question. Why do you think being career politicians gives them motivation besides bribes and money?
Because that’s the thing, they know they’re running another campaign in a couple years, they always need to be raising money for the next one. They always need to solicit donations. And they can’t do anything that rocks the boat because it affects the next election.
Presidents very commonly get more done during their second term because they aren’t worried about the political impact of their actions affecting their ability to get elected again. I don’t see why this effect wouldn’t be the same for Congress and the Senate.
Can’t we just vote for younger candidates?
Doesn’t make sense to subvert the will of the people when they clearly support this.
Also, her age isn’t what makes her shit. She’s a corporate democrat just looking out for different rich people.
The problem is that this isn’t the will of the people. Preliminaries don’t count as an election so your vote for which candidate that appears on the actual ballot is just a suggestion.
The party committees gets final say on who’s on the ballot for that party to vote for.
Which leads to the problem of the 2 party system where we vote for the least worst candidate
Then vote for independents, or people whose parties don’t pull that shit.
And that is the problem with the 2 party system. No one votes that way because not enough people do. Instead everyone voted for less bad option between the 2 major parties. Which happen to be the choices the political committee chose, not the people.
Yeah, you might as well not vote. You’re never going to sway enough people to vote independent to challenge one of the big two, especially since the choice right now is between old people or people trying to establish a fascist theocracy.
Alright, then these problems don’t get solved.
Now, you’re getting it.
You are correct. Voting isn’t going to solve this problem.
deleted by creator
Cornel West laughing…
Second least worst in most cases
You’re absolutely right.
Collectively we vote for the representation we deserve.
Maybe in a true democracy. No more gerrymandered districts, ranked choice voting, and term limits would be a good start. Let’s kill citizens united while at it.
In a true democracy, we’d have direct voting.
Which I’m a huge fan of. Not sure why we’d vote for people who won’t agree with us on everything when we can just vote ourselves and get true representation.
I’d prefer a republic, what the hell do I know about complex foreign policies with the relationship between Sudan and Egypt, or which tax policy will spur economic growth?
That’s fine. Just don’t complain when the people you elect go against what you think is right.
Personally, I think direct voting would result in people voting for the matters they care about, while ignoring the ones they don’t.
Nah, I blame the Republicans for most of the nations current woes since, you know, they tend to be behind most of them.
Plus, how can you see how the average American acts and think we’re still good for a democracy? We need a more fitting class of people to rule, as Adams and Hamilton envisioned it.
I really think we need to amend the constitution to allow a true democratic vote of no confidence for all federally elected positions.
I disagree. Fundamentally we have the final authority to elect our representation. Collectively we decide (and are ultimately responsible for) who is elected to office. Districts don’t vote, and corporations don’t vote. The people do.
It is the collective responsibility of those not disenfranchised or otherwise excluded from the political system to rectify those problems. Failing to address those problems (or any political problem) isn’t a failure of the politicians–it’s a failure of us, as a collective, to choose the appropriate lawmakers. Especially when we repeatedly elect the same people over and over.
I know it sounds naive to frame the system this way. But fundamentally the political system operates under the collective authority of voters.
Can we not be ruled by geriatrics anymore?
Geriatocracy
I’m angry at her, but more angry at the voters that reelect her. Get new blood into these positions.
Two party system that the party gets to choose who runs.
While that does suck, there are options in the primary. So you can vote her out without voting for a Republican, if that’s anathema/unrealistic in her district.
Only if there is a primary. There often isn’t much of a challenge to the incumbent.
Also, Bernie Sanders. If they don’t want one particular person to win the primary, they’ll make sure it works out that way.
Should be anathema in every district.
Fuck this horrible bitch. She fucking enriches herself via a marriage of her position and decision making with the stock market.
Fucking disgusting, no fucking politician that votes on policy should be allowed to trade stocks.
GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR
Settle down, trumper.
Nothing to do with Trumper, he’s right. Just like Trump should go to prison along with anyone who helped him on Jan 6
You agree with this crap that person posted? --> (GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR) NO. He/she/they are NOT right.
You can dislike Nancy Pelosi and not be a Trumper. They are not mutually exclusive.
Yeah. I hate Nancy Pelosi. I hate Trump MORE, but I hate him more than just about anyone. Pelosi is still a garbage person.
Okay, but “traitor”? Let’s not devalue the word by throwing it around at everyone who engages in systemic graft.
Sure. But the statement made by the user I was responding to was pure trumper BS.
I don’t see how what they said has anything to do with supporting Trump, Pelosi is corrupt and too old. You should focus your anger on actual Trump cultists.
They accused her of being a traitor. Read the all caps portion of the trumpist rant.
deleted by creator
It’s up to her and her constituents. But she IS NOT a traitor.
I’m a lifelong dem and I generally agree with the sentiment, minis the name-calling on his part. Her shady stock market trades are problematic at best, and we need young blood in the game. I’m hoping for a strong contender against her and I think many folks feel the same.
You’re what’s wrong with politics these days. You don’t have to be fully locked in to one side you know?
f*ck trumpism
The fucked up thing is that people are still gonna vote for her. No one cares about corruption or acrually having good political leaders, they just need their team to win like it’s some kind of stupid sport.
Blues and Greens…just like the Byzantines
Or they know how important it is that the Republicans not win.
It’s not just about keeping score and keeping points for the red team. The blue team is currently fighting for white supremacy, christian supremacy, male supremacy, and to change the rules to make any other political party irrelevant.
If someone as wonderful as Mr. Rogers ran against Nancy Pelosi, but that person said he’d vote with his Republican colleagues on every important issue, his own personal qualities wouldn’t matter. He personally might not lie, cheat or steal, but he’d be supporting a party that openly does all those things.
It sucks, but when it’s a first-past-the-post system with 2 major parties, you mostly have to hold your nose and vote against the greater evil.
Because there is no corruption. Right wing conspiracy theories aren’t fact
There’s corruption. The whole system is corrupt and Pelosi is a whirlwind of corruption. Does not make right wing conspiracy theories any more correct, though.
“the whole system is corrupt”
Take off your tinfoil
Stocks aren’t going to inside trade themselves! Get out of the way you old cunt. Hopefully someone primaries her and the people in SF vote her out. Still worse to have a Republican in the seat but jfc this is infuriating.
There really needs to be age limits on government positions.
Term limits, too.
Trading limits, too.
Well, I’d say some sort of blind trust. That way, the only way they can influence their investments is making good decisions for the overall economy. Toss in some restrictions to require they avoid boomer-chip stocks. (Ie, s&p500 type investments would be okay, but not msft or any specific company. ETFs in general are too…easy to get around though.
Yeah, I agree but the problem with that is they can still time macro events that affect index funds and ETFs when they know about something big before the public, like covid.
It should be managed and timed by someone independent and the trust just pays a salary or allowance on a schedule.
That’s the point of the BLIND trust.
They’re not making the trades. They don’t even see where things are. they can’t time trade’s because they don’t make investment decisions. At all.
They can still invest by dumping cash into an account and somebody managing it for them. Like the 401k managers the poors get :)
We do have age limits, but only minimum age. Any time there’s a min age, there needs to be a corresponding max age.
But then again Bernie Sanders has done a lot to help “wake up” the minds of many millennials and zoomers.
He’s also too old imo
And some psychiatric tests, to see if she still has all the necessary faculties for decisions. The cognitive decay is as sure as death and taxes
TOO OLD
another canidate question what has your past politics done for me locally? even nationally? if the answer is unsure or maybe some tv propaganda answer that was fed to you then why do they deserve votes
You don’t think Pelosi has done anything to advance the Democratic agenda? I don’t live in her district, so I’m not sure about locally, but I do think she’s been highly influential nationally, and I personally think she has done a good job.
That being said, her district is safe Democratic even if she doesn’t run. She should retire, enjoy the rest of her life with her family and leave feeling good about her accomplishments. It’s someone else’s job to carry on the work.
deleted by creator
She also helped pass loads of legislation in Obama and Biden’s first term.
Absolutely
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
That was half a decade ago.
Nice disingenuous framing there. That’s 2 elections. Pelosi needs to go but saying shit like that doesn’t help anyone.
Would you perfer I pointed instead to it being about 1,825 days ago?
Why? A congressional term is 2 years. A Senate term is 6 years. Saying “it was x years/days/weeks ago” is totally unhelpful to the larger conversation. It’s reductive for no reason. And I think we both know you chose “hAlF a DeCaDe” for gravitas.
Now, if you had said something like “Pelosi hasn’t sponsored any major legislation since x”, sure. Let’s talk. Honestly, fact is she’s a fundraising dynamo. I fucking hate it, but that’s the framework we’re working in. She brings in money and is thus valuable to the DNC. In an ideal world she’d be replaced with a progressive who isn’t an octogenarian. But that’s clearly not where we are yet.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Well we sure know she used her position to advance her wallet
But yeah go off, defend this geriatric corrupt traitor. She’s not fucking special she’s a literal enemy of the people due to said corruption
Keeping it classy, I see.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
