Honeymoon’s Over
So says Mike Allen at Time Magazine. The leadership battle that Nancy Pelosi injected herself into may be a lose-lose situation for her according to a number of Democratic party insiders. She risks wither losing her first leadership battle or being branded as a dove. This was a fight she could have easily stayed out of.
A Democratic strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity because of ties to both sides, said the next 24 hours will be crucial. "Murtha needed to change the dynamic because he was losing," the strategist said. "Steny had a majority before the letter — he needs to hold on to his people. The question is, Does she do more than the letter, like make calls?"
The incoming Speaker credits Murtha for changing the debate on Iraq, which helped make Democrats a credible alternative to Republicans in the election, according to an official familiar with her position. "She also places a high premium on loyalty," the official said. "When he asked for her public endorsement, she was going to give it to him. He's with the left of the caucus on one issue — the war. Other than that, he's far to the right." The official added that the squabble will not affect long-term public perceptions of the Speaker-to be. "This is like a high-school election," the official said. "People inside the Beltway will buzz about it for a week, but then no one will remember what happened."
….
Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Calif.), an early Hoyer backer, tells TIME that he doesn't think the letter will change votes. "We all believed that Nancy would support Mr. Murtha because of their long personal relationship," he said. "That was all factored in before over half the members committed to Mr. Hoyer. This doesn't diminish Nancy's value as our leader. Leadership races are much more personal than a legislative issue. These are very personal relationships that members build up over time." Of the current leadership team, he added, "I don't know why we would break up something that was so successful."
Another Democratic member said: "There's no one in the caucus who didn't know who Nancy Pelosi was going to vote for."
Hoyer poses a competing power base to Pelosi, and they have not had warm relations. "She wants to purge the leadership of people who disagree with her," said a Democratic official with a front-row seat. "It's about people she can personally control. Hoyer is an excellent public face for the party. She's more a behind-the-scenes player."
I don't think it is quite like a high school election. Most non-political junkies really don't know much about Pelosi. This will be one of her first wide exposures to the electorate. She may have chosen a poor battle to start showing herself to the world with.
By ajacksonian, Tuesday, 14 November , 2006 @ 6:41 am
John Murtha couldn’t see helping Rwanda as it might be a ‘quagmire’. He could have spoken up as he was right on the House floor when that was spoken about, but he made no objection whatsoever. So the Left should really question him about just ‘why’ he didn’t see fit to help out in the humanitarian effort there: http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/2006/11/mr-murtha-then-and-now-rwanda-and-iraq.html
But then, John Murtha sees every conflict that way… except Haiti! Haiti is the type of conflict Murtha supports. I mean, why else give the President a blank check there when a Senior Member of his OWN PARTY wanted accountability… from Bill Clinton! Haiti is Murtha’s kind of war, I guess: http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/2006/11/mr-murtha-then-and-now-haiti-and-iraq.html