The Fall of the House of Pelosi
By Daniel Greenfield
The D.C. press has built up the myth of Speaker Nancy Pelosi as a brilliant strategist. That’s nonsense.
Pelosi is in power for one reason and one reason only. It’s the same reason that Schumer is the Senate Dem leader.
American elections are being bought up by San Francisco and New York money. Pelosi is the direct liaison to the SF cash and Schumer is the connection to the NY money.
The money showed up. Lots of it. Republicans were outspent at every turn. But that wasn’t enough.
And strategically, Pelosi oversaw a disaster. Schumer may be getting some flak because Democrat Senate ambitions are not paying off, but Pelosi’s public behavior was disastrous. Trying to take coronavirus relief hostage, and then attacking Wolf Blitzer was not a good look. Even while the media was touting her genius, Pelosi reacted with a hauteur that won over no one.
Add on the salon video and it was an added scandal that no one needed.
House Democrats had expected to expand their majority. Instead their majority shrunk. Republicans get to tout a new class of female House reps and Democrats face a risk of seeing their majority shrink further or even disappear depending on the outcome of certain races and certain voter fraud projects by Democrat political machines.
Even if the Dems retain a House majority, it may be the smallest majority since the New Deal.
Despite the House majority, Pelosi barely eked out a stay of execution by promising to leave when her time was up. Before the election, she suddenly began suggesting that she would continue to stick around.
That’s a whole lot less likely now.
A lot of Democrats, from both wings, want her gone. And the only thing keeping her in place is that the lefties will fight the more moderate Democrats over who should replace her. But the status quo isn’t likely to keep Pelosi in power. The legislative races were a disaster for the Democrats in which donors spent a lot of money and got little to show for it.
Someone will have to pay the price. And why not the top national Democrat who is also the connection to many of those angry donors?