President Trump, who likes to say Democrats are obstructing him while he whines about why no one will work for him, demonstrated precisely why his false claims for unity are falling flat by tweeting Thursday morning, “I certainly hope the Democrats do not force Nancy P out. That would be very bad for the Republican Party – and please let Cryin’ Chuck stay!”
I certainly hope the Democrats do not force Nancy P out. That would be very bad for the Republican Party – and please let Cryin' Chuck stay!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 22, 2017
When a man with the strategy sense of Donald Trump attacks someone, it’s because they are effective, not because they are not good at their job. Donald Trump would very much like the resistance to be less organized, so he’s trying to undermine the leaders of the resistance in the House and Senate by latching on to internal criticism of Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in the wake of Karen Handel’s win in the very red district of Georgia.
Some Democrats are blaming Pelosi for the “loss” in Georgia, but it was actually not a loss at all, according to the math. Jason Easley broke down in these pages, “Three different examinations of the performance of Democrats in the special elections revealed that the Democrats are performing better than expected in these elections and are in a position to win back the House in 2018…
The lessons for Democrats are that the map is broad in 2018. There should be an emphasis on competing across the country, and that the question isn’t if they will gain seats in 2018 but will they gain enough to take back the majority. Democrats were not expected to win in the heavily Republican special election districts, but if they replicate the same 15 point gain in the midterm elections, they will win back the House, and deal a fatal blow to the Trump agenda.”
Democrats who hear President Trump echoing their sentiments might want to check themselves. None of the special elections were supposed to be even in play for Democrats, in fact that is why the people were chosen from those “safe Republican districts” for Trump’s cabinet.
The fact that they are in play is proof that the Democrats are on the right path. Are they doing everything perfectly? No. But to suggest they need new leadership when they are advancing on safe Republican territory and forcing Republicans to spend millions to defend safe districts is purely emotional.
It’s disappointing to lose, but I never expected Jon Ossoff to win, as I said in our Politicus Podcast hours before the polls closed. The win was a district that was strongly Republican, that Karen Handel barely won and it was a fight. Certainly that is not as satisfying for the resistance as a win would have been, but the math tells the real story and it’s not pretty for Republicans.
It’s disturbing to see Democrats attacking Nancy Pelosi like Donald Trump is. Republicans tried to run against Nancy Pelosi in Georgia’s special election – they are that devoid of ideas and policies they can tell the people about. Why did Republicans choose Nancy Pelosi after their other favorite fictional boogeyman under the bed President Obama is no longer available?
Well, both are minorities. In Pelosi’s case, the former Speaker of the House managed to get Obamacare through a rigorous process of debate and sunshine, and then got it passed by keeping the Democratic caucus unified. It’s clear by looking at the last two Republican speakers that this feat is something worth respecting, and is, in fact, in addition to her being a woman, the reason why they attack her.
They attack Pelosi because their base finds it easy to hate women in power and Pelosi is effective enough to warrant the need to undermine her.
Democrats might want to avoid mimicking President Trump, who foolishly is pretending to believe that Pelosi is helping the Republican Party. In fact, running against Pelosi does not move voters, and meanwhile, she keeps Democrats on point in the House.
President Trump mocks Democrats and makes fun of them like a two-year-old child, so the next mainstream media pundit who suggests that Democrats aren’t working with Republicans needs to explain in what way Republicans have expressed an ounce of unity. Let it not be forgotten that President Obama not infrequently chose Republicans for positions he thought they were best suited, whereas in the Trump administration, we have a who’s who of radical extremists who are at times completely unfit for their position.
The media, Republicans and some Democrats are hyping the ‘Time to get rid of Pelosi’ narrative based on not one actual reason that is based in fact. Get rid of her because Republicans demonize her like they demonized Obama and Clinton?
Maybe Democrats should try having their people’s back for once. That might be different and certainly more successful than caving to every ridiculously transparent Republican narrative, which are – DUH – designed to hit and undermine the most effective Democrats.
Lastly, women see this for what it is. Republicans are attacking the most powerful and competent Democratic woman, just like they did to Hillary Clinton – and women are in no mood for the Democratic Party to stab them in the back by betraying Nancy Pelosi just because Republicans don’t like her.
If there is any doubt as to how angry women are, look at the box office this summer and ask yourselves, why is Wonder Woman outperforming the male dominated summer blockbuster season. If Democrats fail to stand up for and by Nancy Pelosi, who by the way showed how this is supposed to go when she stood by President Obama when he was under attack, they will see women revolt against the party.
Ms. Jones is the co-founder/ editor-in-chief of PoliticusUSA and a member of the White House press pool.
Sarah hosts Politicus News and co-hosts Politicus Radio. Her analysis has been featured on several national radio, television news programs and talk shows, and print outlets including Stateside with David Shuster, as well as The Washington Post, The Atlantic Wire, CNN, MSNBC, The Week, The Hollywood Reporter, and more.
Sarah is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.