The liberal blogosphere backing Rahm Emmanuel as speaker? Do these people even read blogs?

What a bunch of nitwits.

no - Rahm is not the guy at all... I'd like to see Pelosi hold on to the speakership - she runs a pretty tight ship and has held the Dems together very well.

One thing  I will say: If we take the House, we're going to have a BIG voice in who gets what, and we'll use it.

I personally don't have a big problem with Pelosi, especially since she gives the righties such heartburn.

But Emmanuel? The netroots?  This must be a trial ballooon by somebody to make sure that Emmanuel doesn't go anywhere in the leadership, because pigs will fly and Bush will withdraw troops from Iraq before the netroots - the folks Emmanuel disparaged on the 50 state strategy - support that guy.

Look there is no scenario with a narrow win. If there is a narrow win we are going to lay that at Emanuels feet.

Right now very conservative projects are a 15 seat majority. If we are at less than 15 seats next week there will be serious problems at the DCCC.

The really enthusiastic like RTStrategies are looking at a 240-242 dem seated congress. That's like 50 seats!!

No one is going to forget Rahm or anyone else who worked for this majority. To try to fiat to the speakership is just silly.

After the election we caucus. We talk about it on the blogs, we here the ups and downs of everyone and we make a good decision. That's what the wisdom of crowds is about. It has gotten the dems this far, it will be an aide to them to really do something with their mandate.

   Pelosi should be speaker.  Not self-aggrandizing Emanuel.  For god's sake can we please install an actual leftist in this position for once?!  Pelosi will be a strong leader.  She's already proven herself to be a strong leader.

That story is insane - did Rahm buy him dinner last night?

Damn straight I'd go with Pelosi, with Murtha as Whip.

Sure i'd accept an alternate speaker. If Pelosi gets to be the Majority Leader.

Granted, I can't figure out a good candidate to be Speaker. My criteria include (a) could be considered an equal player with Pelosi, (b) someone who is in the middle of the party, idealogy-wise.

I don't think David Price wants the job either.

My understanding is that Rahm is going to be Majority Whip in the 110th, assuming all goes well.  

Plus, since when do the netroots like Rahm?  He's done everything in his power to alienate us.

No house member, no matter how special or how tight the district is, should EVER get more than three million bucks from the DCCC.  Think about it:  ONE house candidate, Tammy Duckworth, has received more than three mil.

Even if she wins, that's a hell of a lot of money for one fucking seat.  

Pelosi, no question.

Emanuel?  No way.

Nancy Pelosi has enforced party discipline in the House in a way we've not seen in decades.  That's going to be essential, and doubly so if we don't have a lot of votes to spare in our new majority.

I guess I could live with Speaker Murtha, though, if we absolutely had to elect someone other than Pelosi.

What a maroon.

Speaker Murtha, perhaps.

Speaker Waxman? OH YEAH (not that there's achance in hell, but hey, they started the fantasy league!)

Speaker Hoyer? Over our collective dead bodies!

Speaker Kucinich!! I'd support it!

But netroots support for Speaker Emmanuel????

You have GOT to be kidding.

It's been a long campaign, and Todd is obviously bored.  There are two options available for Versailles journalists: stupid and insane.  Todd is not stupid.  And he's bored.  So he goes for insane, and writes about what happens after the election.

Once you understand what he's doing, you can stcore him appropriately.  

Remember, "Wildly misrepresenting the liberal blogosphere" is part of the mandatory short form.

When I read that earlier on the National Journal site, I laoughed out loud.  Yes, Rahm is a part of this, but Pelosi has managed to get the Democratic Caucus voting together 88% of the time, which is higher than it has been for like 50 years.  She deserves the Speakership.  Period.  If it weren't her for whatever, it wouldn't be Rahm either.

The notion that liberal bloggers might mount a campaign on Emmanuel's behalf is bogus.  Must have come from the same source that came up with the equally bogus notion that liberal bloggers were reluctant to see the Democratic Party fund a lot of races in a lot of states.

Methinks this kind of crap comes from people who are seeking to create and dispense the 'conventional wisdom.'  They concoct scenarios that they hope will come true.

She's progressive, she's a woman, and her media skills have dramatically improved.  I don't think anybody seriously thinks that Rahm has a shot has been taking shots.

I want to address the annoying chants of "Speaker Murtha."  Yes, Murtha came out strong on Iraq, and I'm so glad that he did.  But on the majority of other issues that are important to our caucus, he SUCKS!  He's anti-choice, pro-drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, and he's repeatedly been willing to sell out progressive values for pork barrel projects.  Murtha is in no way qualified to be Speaker, Majority Leader, or Majority Whip when for years he's been serving as an anti-whip helping Republicans win close votes in exchange for pork and campaign cash.

I definitely support Pelosi.  Frankly, as long as shes in charge, I'm not going to worry about the Maj. Ldr. or the whip.  Shes not perfect, but shes a heck of a lot better than Mr. Reid in the Senate.

Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.

He's the Chair of the Democratic Caucus which would put him behind Pelosi and Hoyer in the leadership pecking order. I don't like Pelosi, Hoyer, or Emanuel.

First African-American Speaker. Dig it.

"RedState.com" is not part of the liberal blogosphere (OK... that's a bit harsh - does the DLC have a site?)

I do, however, think Rahm makes the perfect majority whip... the arm twister, our less evil Tom Delay.

Certainly not rahm.  Nancy's probably the most realistic choice.  But, it's fun to blue-sky some other names though.  Speaker Tammy Baldwin has a nice ring to it.  Speaker Conyers.

Chuck Todd is not bored, he's a Beltway 500 tool.  Let me further add, fuck Chuck Todd, may he soon rot on assignment covering the rapidly shrinking Greenland Ice Cap that reporters like him helped enable, and tell us how the shilling that he has been doing for the GOP and the DLC earned him this important post.

Those comments are absurd from top to bottom, and amply demonstrates why progressives need to stop listening to or relying on self serving low life scum like Todd and Halpern and Charlie Cook (oh I know, he's so fucking smart, right?) and the rest of their revolting ilk.

18 seat gain is an abject failure by Rahm, that control will be entirely in spite of him, not thanks to him.  What a crock, Crock Todd, Fucktard.  

Pelosi is too good on message control and cracking the whip.  

Rahm is a DLCer redux.  That's what his book is... warmed over DLC claptrap.  Half of it repeating Republican talking points about Democrats.

And is he such a great strategist?  Who pushed Christine Cegelis out for Tammy Duckworth, whose campaign is now being saved by the DCCC's 3-4 mil ad buy which could easily have expanded the playing field by 6-10 candidates.

The netroots are progressive and we're pragmatic, and Nancy is both.  

This trial balloon is nonsense.  Someone was smoking something with somebody.  Because Rahm would be a step backward to 90's triangulation, coopting Republican policies and using Republican talking points against Democrats.

I had just such an encounter with him at the White House right after Gingrich took over. There was a horrible bill I wanted to bring to his attention because it was a 90's Alien and Sedition ACt.  His response was that the Dems would offer their own version to coopt the Rethugs.  I was stunned... why would any Dem want a Democratic party version of a 90's Alien and SEdition Act?

People like Thomas Riehle in that DLC world are already misrepresenting us when they said the netroots wanted to play it cautious and not expand the Congressional playing field.  No one who understands Rahm's political philosophy versus Nancy's would think he would fulfill the vision the netroots has about American politics.

Speaker Pelosi with Murtha either Majority Leader of Whip.

We could win 100 seats and the netroots would still say we did it in spite of Rahm, so this theory is obviously way off.

Leading the Democrats is a tough, tough job.  You have to deal with all the factions, the CBC and their issues (how dare you discipline William Jefferson!), the Blue Dogs and their positions on the issues.  It's virtually impossible.  What Pelosi has done to date as far as caucus unity is just amazing.

Not only has she earned the job, but it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Dems to conduct any kind of intra-party fight without lurid details being spewed all over the media.  That's not the kind of soap opera I want to see to kick off a Democratic majority.  So no fights, please.

This makes no sense to me. Perhaps in 6-8 years, Emanual might be up for speaker, but I don't see Pelosi losing it this time around. Especially the whole Emanual-netroots thing, as he is NOT a favorite among them.

I wonder if this doesn't have something to do with the coming Murtha-Hoyer fight over who gets to be majority leader. Isn't Emanual in Hoyer's camp? Could this be a shot across the Pelosi/Murtha bow to help Hoyer out? Sounds like it to me.

Hmm...  Well, who's more likely to impeach the Prez and Veep and assume the presidency?  I'll take that one.

If Democrats did this, I can't think of a better way to shout "We're weak and cravenly even when in the majority"

The speakership is rightfully pelosi's at this point.  No one in the caucus has managed to find great reason to unseat her as Minority leader, to do so after she leads them to a majority would be seen as despicable washington cynical politics and would ruin any sheen the democrats might have had with voters.

The house is not the Senate and bi-partisan cooperation is largely unnecessary for any reasonably sized majority.  The Democrats will have no real incentive to placate Republicans with a conservative democratic speaker.  

Finally, tossing a woman under the bus in favour of a white guy would seriously damage the democrats with women.  She's already being touted as the most powerful woman ever in Washington and the first female speaker.  You can't play cock-tease (pun intended) with the electorate like that.

Fucking pop this trial balloon hard.  Far from working for this, the netroots will fight against it and the ensuing divisions and inevitable circular firing squad would ruin the Democratic agenda before it started.

Netroots support Murtha for whatever job he wants.  'Nuff said

No way that Rahm Emanuel should become Speaker of the House!  Nancy Pelosi has outlined a great plan for action if the Dems take control, and she will exert great energy and influence to see that it gets carried out!

So we're gonna stop citing Chuck Todd going forward right?

I'm usually not into the idea of making statements of diversity for their own sake, but we've pretty much seen the nadir of what old while males can deliver as Speaker of the US House of Representatives. We owe it to each other as rational people to at least give a woman a shot at the thing, shouldn't we? Not to mention she's actually qualified for the job, let's see what a new dynamic brings us.

She spoke in Portland with the OR delegation (minus Walden of course), and was pretty good. I even got to ask her a question during the official PC part, which was a first. They were on message, but she hits the right notes it seems to me. And you can't argue with her vote counting.

According to the latest column from The Hotline editor Chuck Todd, a Rahm Emanuel speakership is not only possible, it could come as a result of a grassroots effort spearheaded by the liberal blogosphere.

WHAAAA?!?!?

HUH?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Damn, my sides hurt now.

Someone cut off Chuck Todd's opium supply, OK?  Criminy!

Rahm Emanuel epitomizes everything that is both right and wrong about Chicago politics and its pay-to-play, bare knuckles rules. If you want an crazy good fund raiser who's the DLC's dream as Speaker of the House then Rahm's your man. However, if you want a tough, compassionate, articulate Chicagoan who actually gets progressive values and isn't just out for personal aggrandizement, then the far better choice for speaker and the far better human would be Jan Schokowsky.

Yeah, Rahmn raised a bunch of bucks, but it was Dean's 50 State Strategy that Rahm fought tooth and nail that has revitalized the Democratic Party and is giving us chances to win in places like Idaho, North Carolina and Eastern Washington where we never expected to have a chance to win this election cycle.

So, while Rahm is to be commended for his bulldog fundraising, he's also the heart of bad-old-politics-as-usual and is no friend of the progressive movement and is no friend of a more honest and transparent United States.

Certainly not Rahm.

Chuck either hasn't been reading liberal blogs or he's been smoking. Sure, we've sometimes been critical of Pelosi's TV presence (although she's shaped up significantly in the last year or so). She's also done a good job of "herding the cats." We need a liberal to pull the Dem's back from right of center where they've drifted in pursuit of GOP votes.

Strongly suspect some games are being played here and Chuck is either naive or complicit. Running the idea up the flagpole to gauge response is one possibility. Are the netroots powerful enough at this point that the DLC is checking to see how loudly we scream at the notion of Rahm as Speaker? They may not want to take a chance after the Lieberman fiasco - and the success of the 50 state strategy.

I imagine losing power, especially to a liberal woman, is quite threatening to them. Good grief! If she does a credible job, she might even get uppity and decide to run for president.

hahaha

I usually agree with Chuck Todd's analysis, but this idea that the netroots will support Rahm over Pelosi for Speaker is entirely divorced from reality.  Pelosi has done a great job as Minority Leader, and she'll have my full support to become Speaker.

As for Rahm, I think we would actually do quite well with him as Majority Leader or Majority Whip.  You need someone who can kick ass and not take shit from anyone in those types of positions in order to keep everyone in line, and Rahm certainly fits that criteria.

No way would I ever support a Speaker Emanuel.

But you know what, folks: most importantly, this is NOT THE TIME to be talking about this. In a week, sure. Today, let's keep working.

If the 110th congress had anybody but Pelosi as speaker I would lose any tiny bits of faith I've started to have in them.

As other's have said already: she's good at keeping her troops together, she has progressive values, she's already leading the dems, ect, ect.

Plus, she'd be the first women speaker. That alone is enough for me. (Only 2nd in line to the presidency!)

When Dems reclaim the House [knocking wood], I want Pelosi to have her shot.  After being The Demon San Francisco Liberal for the last several weeks, she deserves an opportunity to show that evil, Frisco, pinko, pervert-lovers care more about average Americans than do rural Pharma Republicans.

w/o a doubt

It's not "Who do you want for Speaker?"

It's "If Nancy can't hold the gavel, then who?"

If we gain 15, 16, or 17 it's a nightmare. A couple of turncoats or sellouts or members with personal beefs, and the gavel could be back in Republican hands. Or we could keep the gavel, but lose the ability to carry a close vote.

In this case we might be better off with a Speaker (or candidate for Speaker) other than Pelosi. Things would get ugly and stay ugly.

A gain of 18 is probably the threshold of safety -- on a margin that can evaporate in a literal heartbeat.

The alternative is probably not Rahm -- too many sharp elbows, too much whiplash and backlash..

I discussed the 15-18 scenario briefly with Rep. Pelosi earlier this year, and with another progressive Member earlier today. It's a legitimate big worry. Chances are we'll avoid it, but it is within the range of plausible outcomes.

YOU MUST BE JOKING!

Pelosi, hands down as Speaker. End of story. In fact, the mere point that this is being discussed here is quite sad.

No less than $10 million dollars has been misallocated by Rahm Emanuel's ego this cycle. And, if anyone would like to know what the Dems in CA-11, NY-19 (my CD), and NH-01 feel about this, I would think their/our sentiments about Mr. Emanuel fall somewhere between a public lynching and/or disembowelment!

In fact, I won't be donating a CENT to the DCCC until after Emanuel's no longer running the show. (I'm only giving directly to the campaigns, themselves.) Consider this: how about a class action lawsuit for fraudulent representation against the asshole on behalf of everyone who donated money to the DCCC in the primaries in CA-11, NY-19 and NH-01 (perhaps in the general election, too) for blatant misrepresentation?  These are the districts where the primary winner was not Emanuel's handpicked choice. And, NOOONE--and I mean noone--has paid more of a price for this than McNerney, Hall and Shea-Porter this year.

Imagine being a supporter of one of their candidacies in the primary, then donating to the DCCC only to later realize your money went to their opposition?!?!? Why? Because Emanuel's ego overruled the public!

John Hall has not received one red cent from the DCCC this year, and he's going to win in six days; and, you can pretty much guarantee that he's going to be looking to bitch slap the asshole within the first 10 minutes after he arrives on the House floor. Then again, he may have to wait a little longer, because there will probably be a take-a-number queue for that.

How freakin' DARE someone--ANYONE--undermine the will of the voters of their own party in the Primary! And, then, to have the hubris to solicit their money under false pretenses, too!

Oh, and as for Chuck Todd, I know firsthand that the PRIMARY method by which the National Journal ranks their races is almost ENTIRELY based upon following the DCCC/DSCCC money distribution, then ranking based upon that (no matter what they may claim to the contrary).

Three freakin' million in IL-06? Almost the same in CT-05?!?!?!? This has LITTLE to do with any numbers. It's Rahm Emanuel's own (not-so-)little power trip. And, it's everyone else in the Party  that's getting screwed right now!

I don't care whether it's 215, 225, or 250 Dems come next Tuesday. Rahm Emanuel is guilty of GROSS malfeasance, and it's been playing out in front of everyone's eyes for many, many weeks.

As long as that type of behavior continues to be endorsed and tolerated, WE ALL LOSE.

As for me, the thought of looking forward to a public disembowelment of Mr. Emanuel seems pretty damn sweet!

Come to think of it, let's have Dr. Dean lead the crowds with a buck knife while we all watch with glee, too!
 

Rahm?  As Speaker?  Of, like, the House of Representatives?  Are you crazy?  NO.  I like the job Nancy Pelosi's doing.  

I mean...what the hell? Why even ask that?

Hands down.

OOOoooo, what a blow THAT would be!!!

Never happen, of course, but...y'gotta dream SOME time.

AG

Pelosi has herded these cats better than anyone so far.  And I'm smelling a little sexism here, goddammit.  Bottom line for me:  Pelosi has been there for Charlie Brown and Rahm has not.  

First of all, for someone to even discust the possibility of the netroot supporting rahm emmanuel, has to be a fool...The netroot hates rhan because of his beef with howard dean and rhan and a well know rhino DLC in the same cut of joe lieberman...I remember when some reporter asked him about lieberman possiblity to hurt the 3 house seat because he could turn out GOP voters, he dismissed it and said that joe lieberman is a democrat and he will help the down ticket....Its all about israel with those DLC fools and i dont trust them.

If we win 40 seats, i still wouldnt give the credit to rhan, i think the war would be the reason for victory and rahm just happened to be in charge.

Emmanuel can go to hell, as far as im concern and someone needs to tell him to stop drawing plans to unsit pelosi..him and the new democrats are bunches of morons that needs to stay in their place.

Nancy Pelosi is the wrong person to represent the Democratic party in this day and age. From San Fransisco, weak voice, stereotypically liberal in looks and manners. She energizes the GOP base for the wrong reasons (not for her stands but for her persona) and does not play well among moderates.

We need a southern or western populist with strong convictions who never backs down from a fight. A Tester-type. But preferably a woman.

They keep saying she's a San Francisco liberal, but I know the truth.

She's a Baltimore girl, and that scares the crap out of them.

The only way I would support someone else in the Speaker's chair come January 30 would be if Bush & Cheney both dropped dead January 21 and she had to step up to the Presidency.

Mmmm.

No Way - Rahm is our "Tom DeLay" bomb waiting to explode.

Definitely Speaker Pelosi-

As to Majority Leader - BARNEY FRANK, I believe is our guy for a host of all the right reasons. Most importantly being that he doesn't have lots of dirty laundry sitting in his closet. In order to move forward where we need to go, we need someone who's past doesn't become the focus of converstation and attacks DuJour in the MSM.

Should the netroots have a conversation and campaign for leadership - ABSOLUTELY

Then WE will have the voice we long for.

Rahm -- surprising to me considering how effective he often was at defending Clinton -- has proven to be very weak as a media spokesperson for the party. His MANNER is aggressive, but his arguments aren't. His responses are frequently weak in terms of strategy and logic and his media appearances always make me groan because of one lost opportunity after another. He's not, I've been surprised to observe, too quick on the uptake.

Pelosi, on the other hand, is a sharp, disciplined strategist who is able to formulate strong arguments. But, the strength of her aruments are undermined by the fact that she does not, on the surface, project much personal strength -- or, the kind of aggressive confidence that Rahm has in mostly unjustified spades.

In this Pelosi shares a short-coming of many successful female politicians of her generation -- on both sides of the aisle -- for whom the need to find the correct balance between strength and aggression has presented a problem that they most often have solved with an excess of somewhat dishonest decorum. The various versions of buttoned-down Chairwoman of the Garden Club demeanor political women of Pelosi's generation often adopt may have proven necessary to minimize hostility toward them -- but, unfortunately, it often does so at the expense of gut level confidence in them.  

So, there is reason to be nervous about either one of these people spending the next couple of years as the face of the Democratic congress. Nonetheless, given the choice between Rahm, who is not quite as tough and smart as he first appears, and Pelosi, who is much smarter and stronger than her demeanor may first lead some to believe, I'd vote for Pelosi.

And then there's the history making aspect. Which is incredibly important for a party so dependent on support from women.

C-Span gives Chuck Todd frequent opportunity to hold forth in the Washington Journal segment. He's often as much off-the-mark when giving his comments there as in this story.

When he offered his version of The Daily Show, that was the last straw for me. Hmmm, is he trying out a script with this prediction?

Pelosi = Speaker
Murtha = Whip

She has earned it (by raising a lot of money and giving her own to other Dem candidates), and Murtha has supported her. Hoyer sucks...

I dunno. I don't think Pelosi and Hoyer have been that strong, In fact in some cases they have been terrible. Specifically as media spokespersons. We need a stronger public presence. Didn't Hoyer support the Bankruptcy bill? I'd be willing to look at someone different.

Murtha was the first dem w/ the military cred to call for a pull out of Iraq - He came out, he stood his ground and the rest ran behind him - He may be awlful on everything else but he was right on this - So, the biggest reason the dems are poised to take advantage of the unfolding disaster is Murtha - He wont be the Speaker (he has a problem w/ speaking) but he will take, and deserves,  a prominent place - R.E. is just a beltway guy- nobody else knows him

Rahmbo picks the wrong fights.  He fights more effectively with other Democrats than he does with the Republicans.  I can't imagine the netroots -- largely supporters of Dean's 50 state strategy -- siding with Rahm on anything, much less against Nancy Pelosi. He doesn't know how to lead. He's my congresscritter, and when I see him on the TV I wince: come on Rahm, you don't have to parrot Rethug talking points, stand up for the Democrats!  Geez.  And also, I can't imagine supporting anyone who has made his disagreements with other Dems -- esp. with Howard Dean -- so public.  Its one thing to disagree over strategy: its quite another to allow those disagreements to be public knowledge: bad form.

Emanuel is my congress critter - he's a jerk

I'm for Pelosi. She was cool and human on the Daily Show, and that's my litmus test for media presence.

Beyond my aching desire to have the most powerful American political figure ever be a Democrat, I'm for Pelosi because Republicans hate her. They're trying to make her emblematic of something negative about Democrats, and I think it will only make her stronger. Think of how much we progressives disliked Newt from the start. That's what I want for those hill Republicans. Everybody needs a signal that there's a new sheriff in town. Americans are going to the polls for a change. You can't come back with Republican Lite.