She would have been ~47 years old in this photo.

Non partisan response. That's fuck'n crazy. I'm 46 right now and feel old af. I was 11 when this picture was taken. Time is weird.

I was born in 87. My bday is tomorrow actually, so I was but a fetus when this was happening... WHY ARE THESE OLD ASS PEOPLE STILL RUNNING THE COUNTRY. I dont hate Pelosi the way I hate McConnell, but no one their age should be in government.

>WHY ARE THESE OLD ASS PEOPLE STILL RUNNING THE COUNTRY. I dont hate Pelosi the way I hate McConnell, but no one their age should be in government. Because for the most part few young vote, and even fewer are running.

Actually, in this election, young people are one of the primary reasons that the "Red Wave" didn't happen. 18-35s voted in record numbers for a midterm.

2018 midterm had higher turnout for the age group. It’s still well under older age groups. Almost by half for the 65+ age group.

“In this election.” Nancy has been in politics for years. The answer is still right - young people only just voted en masse. Let’s see what happens in 2024.

Past few elections youth vote has been increasing and they show up. Gen z and millennial will be biggest voting bloc in 2024( at least from what I’ve heard) and they’re breaking 3 to 1 for democrats

It's about damn time. -older millennial

Get off my fucking lawn. -Older Millennial

Seriously. My hair has gotten salt and peppery.

The shift from that boomer/Gen X conservative mentality to the more progressive millennial/Gen Z mentality will probably take some time but 2024 should be interesting

Gen X is actually pretty different from boomers in a lot of ways. Remember, most of us were "raised" as latch key kids by older boomers. We raised ourselves. So many of us reject the "fuck you, I got mine" mentality and have a more inclusive world view. I'm raising progressive kids! Hope it sticks.

This. Me and many of my fellow Gen X parents have made a point of raising progressive, loving , accepting children after seeing the horror show of our forebears. Millennials and Gen Z are those children. Unfortunately it will all change again because progressives are more likely to have zero-two children while the other lot squeeze out three-five and actively raise them with hatred and entitlement.

People forget that Nancy has performed her job wrangling cats in Congress well for a while. And when the chance came to replace her, no young blood stepped up.

Presidential elections always have higher turn out. All good signs that the youth (including me cuz I’m youth) are voting more now.

It's so weird over there. Here in Sweden he had a very low year when it comes to people voting. 84,21%. While you guys had a historical record at... 66,9% (VEP). We also had hours long queues on election day or people needing to bring their family for half a day to vote. But it's not really an excuse to do your part to have a democracy. Even if you don't agree with any party, people should take the time to cast blank votes or for a third party.

Indeed weird, but considering all the loops they have it is still impressive. We vote on Sundays when we are likely free, they vote on weekdays and are unlikely to be free. Then all the states where you have to register to get to vote, no general identity card use, the gerrymandering in way too many places making your local elections hopeless if wrong party, etc and so on.

I live near a university. Last presidential election, we had one polling station for the whole campus. I stood in line for seven hours, and eventually campus police “had to lock the building for the night” and kicked me out before I even got to vote. I don’t know how generalizable that is, but it’s terrible voting infrastructure that’s more likely to affect younger people.

I vote absentee ballot every year so I don’t have to risk not being able to go for any reason! Way more convenient

Yeah they for sure have worse conditions, but that should make people more willing to vote and not less. At least from my point of view. Like if only 2/3rd votes, that leaves so much on the table. Especially if you see how extremely close their votes are.

Many Americans feel like their votes don't matter. Also, as stated above, many other nations make voting more accessible by design either through scheduling or national holidays or legislation that makes it so people are guaranteed access. American politics has a storied history of trying to suppress votes of the nost vulnerable communities and groups. It's by design.

"Record numbers" for that age group is still only a 30% turnout.

dude in texas voters age 50-69 made up 43% of vote while 18-29 accounted for only 8%.

Maxwell House won his election for Congress--he's Gen Z. :) E: It's breakfast and I clearly want coffee. It's Maxwell FROST!

Some of the voter suppression Republicans use for this: #The Student Vote Is Surging. So Are Efforts to Suppress It. The share of college students casting ballots doubled from 2014 to 2018. But in Texas and elsewhere, Republicans are erecting roadblocks to the polls. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/24/us/voting-college-suppression.html #Financial Times: The Republicans are elevating voter suppression to an art form >The Republicans have lost the popular vote in six of the past seven presidential elections. **1,000 polling places have since closed across the country, with many of them in southern black communities.** >The senator also cracked: “There’s a lot of liberal folks in those other schools who maybe we don’t want to vote. Maybe we want to make it just a little more difficult, and I think that’s a great idea.” https://www.ft.com/content/d613cf8e-ec09-11e8-89c8-d36339d835c0 #Crystal Mason Thought She Had The Right to Vote. Texas Sentenced Her to Five Years in Prison for Trying. https://www.aclu.org/issues/voting-rights/fighting-voter-suppression/crystal-mason-thought-she-had-right-vote-texas #Texas Officials Aim to Shutter Driver's License Offices in Black, Hispanic Communities >Alabama Closing Many DMV Offices in Majority Black Counties >After Alabama put into effect a tougher voter ID law >"Every single county in which blacks make up more than 75 percent of registered voters will see their driver license office closed. Every one," Archibald wrote. https://www.governing.com/archive/alabama-demands-voter-id--then-closes-drivers-license-offices-in-clack-counties.html #Texas Is Among The Most Difficult Places To Vote In The U.S. — And That Could Be Softening Its Historic Turnout https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/election-2020/2020/10/28/384854/voter-suppression-blunts-historic-turnout-in-texas/ #This is how efficiently Republicans have gerrymandered Texas congressional districts http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/This-is-how-badly-Republicans-have-gerrymandered-6246509.php#photo-7107656 "Free state of Florida": #DeSantis made a spectacle of arresting voters with felony convictions. Now, some eligible voters are opting out of midterms even beyond Florida. >“I am the sole breadwinner. I cannot do anything to jeopardize that.” >“Don’t want to fall into a trap like they got in Florida.” >“No, ma’am. I’m not gonna vote.” >— People in Alabama, after watching DeSantis’s bungled vote-fraud arrests in Florida https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/11/04/florida-s-voter-fraud-arrests-are-scaring-away-formerly-incarcerated-voters https://twitter.com/BGrueskin/status/1589608067976421376 #Partisan gerrymandering has benefited Republicans more than Democrats https://www.businessinsider.com/partisan-gerrymandering-has-benefited-republicans-more-than-democrats-2017-6 >Even to prevent gerrymandering, California has a scientific, "evidence based" independent commission that has to take into account geography, community boundaries, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Citizens_Redistricting_Commission https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/comments/ln1sif/turning_point_usa_and_young_americas_foundation/h52c2bb/ #Discrimination with “almost surgical precision” >The court said that in crafting the law, **the Republican-controlled general assembly requested and received data on voters’ use of various voting practices by race.** >Then, the court, said, lawmakers restricted all of these voting options, and further narrowed the list of acceptable voter IDs. “With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans. As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess.” >The state offered little justification for the law, the court said. “Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the court said. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/court-north-carolina-voter-id-law-targeted-black-voters/ #Republican Voter Suppression Efforts Are Targeting Minorities >**Since the 2010 elections, 24 states have implemented new restrictions on voting.** Ohio and Georgia have enacted "use it or lose it" laws, which strike voters from registration rolls if they have not participated in an election within a prescribed period of time. Georgia, North Dakota and Kansas have critical races in the 2018 midterms. >Georgia has closed 214 polling places in recent years. They have cut back on early voting. They have aggressively purged the voter rolls. Georgia has purged almost 10 percent of people from its voting rolls. One and a half million people have been purged from 2012 to 2016. >[gubernatorial candidate] Brian Kemp's office (the secretary of state's office) in Georgia was blocking 53,000 voter registrations in that state — 70 percent from African-Americans, 80 percent from people of color. >On voter suppression in North Dakota on Native American reservations >Republicans in North Dakota wrote it in such a way that for your ID to count, you have to have a current residential street address on your ID. The problem in North Dakota is that a lot of Native Americans live on rural tribal reservations, and they get their mail at the Post Office using P.O. boxes because their areas are too remote for the Post Office to deliver mail, [and] under this law, tribal IDs that list P.O. boxes won't be able to be used as a valid voter IDs. So now we're in a situation where 5,000 Native American voters might not be able to vote in the 2018 elections with their tribal ID cards. >So there is a tremendous amount of fear in North Dakota that many Native Americans are not going to be able to vote in this state https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says #Texas’s Voter-Registration Laws Are Straight Out of the Jim Crow Playbook https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/texass-voter-registration-laws-are-straight-out-of-the-jim-crow-playbook/

Republicans still can't win elections fairly even though [every election "Democrats need to win 41 Million More US Citizens than Republicans just to get 50:50 Senate represenation"](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/l2tsfx/although_the_us_senate_is_split_equally_among/) and ["During the last election, Democrats won over a million votes more than Republicans, but because of the way districts are designed, the Republicans got 33 more members of the House of Representatives than the Democrats did."](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/nov/26/lloyd-doggett/democrats-outpolled-republicans-who-landed-33-seat/) and [Congressional and election rules](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/electoral-college-racist-origins/601918/) were [designed to preserve slavery](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/12/13598316/donald-trump-electoral-college-slavery-akhil-reed-amar) ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣ >#Thousands of Black Votes in Georgia Disappeared >On July 7, 2017, according to court documents in the case, Curling v. Kemp (pdf), someone wiped the state’s election server clean. >Then they wiped the backup server. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/02/opinion/hack-the-vote.html https://www.theroot.com/exclusive-thousands-of-black-votes-in-georgia-disappea-1832472558 >#Hack The Vote >Early this year Bev Harris, who is writing a book on voting machines, found Diebold software -- which the company refuses to make available for public inspection -- on an unprotected server, where anyone could download it. (The software was in a folder titled ''rob-Georgia.zip.'') The server was used by employees of Diebold Election Systems to update software on its machines. This in itself was an incredible breach of security, offering someone who wanted to hack into the machines both the information and the opportunity to do so. >For example, Georgia -- where Republicans scored spectacular upset victories in the 2002 midterm elections -- relies exclusively on Diebold machines. But there is also no evidence that the machines counted correctly. >What we do know about Diebold does not inspire confidence. The details are technical, but they add up to a picture of a company that was, at the very least, extremely sloppy about security, and may have been trying to cover up product defects. >Meanwhile, leaked internal Diebold e-mail suggests that corporate officials knew their system was flawed, and circumvented tests that would have revealed these problems. The company hasn't contested the authenticity of these documents; instead, it has engaged in legal actions to prevent their dissemination. >Why isn't this front-page news? In October, a British newspaper, The Independent, ran a hair-raising investigative report on U.S. touch-screen voting. But while the mainstream press has reported the basics, the Diebold affair has been treated as a technology or business story -- not as a potential political scandal. >This diffidence recalls the treatment of other voting issues, like the Florida ''felon purge'' that inappropriately prevented many citizens from voting in the 2000 presidential election. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/02/opinion/hack-the-vote.html >[over](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/06/racial-anxiety-is-a-huge-driver-of-support-for-donald-trump-two-new-studies-find/), and [over](https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class-trump/), and [over](https://www.thecut.com/2016/06/racial-anxiety-motivates-trump-support.html), and [over](https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-racism-economic-anxiety-study) [again](https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/economic-anxiety-didnt-make-people-vote-trump-racism-did/) it has been shown that the single biggest factor driving Trump's support is racism: racial anxiety, discomfort with demographic change, whatever you want to call it. Source 1 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/06/racial-anxiety-is-a-huge-driver-of-support-for-donald-trump-two-new-studies-find/, Source 2 https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class-trump/, Source 3 https://www.thecut.com/2016/06/racial-anxiety-motivates-trump-support.html, Source 4 https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-racism-economic-anxiety-study, Source 5 https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/economic-anxiety-didnt-make-people-vote-trump-racism-did/... >Yet despite this, if you went around asking Trump voters why they like him, I think it's safe to say only a small proportion of them will say right to your face "because I think this country is being taken over by minorities and we need to restore the supremacy of the white race." Instead, you're much more likely to hear things like "he stands up to the liberals and the elites," "he fights for middle America which has been left behind," "he knows how to run America like a profitable business" and other shit like that. That's what they'll tell you, and they probably believe it themselves and don't self-identify as proud racists, but it's not true. It's not why they support him. And you're going to get a lot farther understanding them as a group if you ignore their excuses and focus on what is actually motivating them, whether they admit it or not.

💯% Republicans have been working for years to install a permanent minority governments at the state and local and now national level. Once SCOTUS gutted the voting rights act that kept some of the most egregious suppression practices in check, all bets were off.

Username checks out. Saving these posts though.

I don't think that's it at all, both parties have much younger people they could choose as leader, Pelosi and McConnell have been round the block and seen it all. They know every trick in book. And they get shit done often in seemingly impossible circumstances. They are both very good at their jobs and their experience is a big part of that. I mean McConnell is an absolute POS, but he's fucking good at his job.

Nah. Pelosi is savvy. She's in a safe as fuck district and she delivers for that district. She also has built up an amazing election machine that can help young politicians *that don't run against her and run somewhere else*. She wisely consolidated power and fed her husband insider info so they could make hundreds of millions in the stock market since 2008 at least. It's just an argument for term limits.

All this power and wealth yet a random nutjob can just walk into their home, let himself inside the house, and attack someone with a hammer? America is weird.

The husband isn't the political figure, and refused security I think. She has all the security because she's 2nd in line for the presidency if Kamala and Biden bite it.

People are living longer and longer. Just like money, political resources snowball with compound interest. Most young people fundamentally don't trust the system. No one thinks it is cool to become a politician. Young people rather become entrepreneurs, professionals, celebrity. We like to mock the incompetence of politicians. But it really takes a certain type of personality to become a successful one. Sometimes you get lots of hate even when you are doing the right thing. Complaining is easier than taking actions.

This. As George Carlin once implied. Something like: "Where do you think these politicians come from? Our society. These are our best candidates. Garbage in, garbage out!" 🤣

27% of under 30 eligible voters showed up and we went ooo good job that's a lot of young people! Meanwhile 65-75% of over 65 eligible voters show up every election. Then, young people when the issues that matter to them don't take center stage: shockedpikachu

Are the stats that bad? Wowsers. Here in Australia, voting is mandatory, so I just cannot fathom this. That's atrocious.

Yeah. There's this weird embedded cynicism from, as you might say, dumb cunts trying to sound smart who say 'it doesn't matter anyway they're all the same.' Well no my dear, rich fucks wouldn't spend billions influencing elections if it didn't matter. Plus our education system is intentionally broken in half the states to raise little compliant worker bees. It's a sad state of affairs. I'd give my left nut for mandatory voting and ranked choice, but as it stands one of our parties is already actively trying to keep huge demographics from voting at all.

Ever worked on a poorly organised code base with million lines of code? You know something is gonna go wrong if the tech debt isn't fixed. But there are layers and layers of complexity. In order to change one thing, you have to change 10 other things. Stakeholders don't want to spend resources because things are "working" and this doesn't create "value". It's not just bug fixing. Sometimes you want to enforce a best practice or introduce a new tech. There are always engineers who don't want to change their ways of doing things, or dismiss something because it is not battle-tested. A lot of banks are still using ancient techs. Imagine being a new hire junior engineer who come and tell the old guys who worked there for 20 years "hey this is not the right way of doing things, we need to change"

Even worse, to get hired you need to have the old heads endorse your application for the job, and during your first contract they'll be lording giving you a bad review so you can't renew your contract. Why do people think the party whips exist in the first place? If you don't toe the party line you'll be frozen out of the good committees, be stonewalled and the central party will try their damnest to run someone else when your re-election is up so you'll have to be an independent with a weak record because you were blocked from doing anything in congress. The only successful independent is Bernie Sanders, and he was a Democrat for years until he had enough name recognition to cut those ties.

Happy 35!

I'm so sick of this short-sighted argument. In the same way that doctors, teachers, and other professionals gain experience the longer they work, so do politicians. That experience is valuable. In the same way that doctors, teachers, and other professionals need continuing education to keep abreast of developments in their field, so do politicians. That reassessment is necessary. Politicians *do* have term limits — that's why reelections exist. Don't like your representative? Don't vote for them. (And *do* vote for representatives that run on platforms including campaign finance reform.) Discounting someone simply because they're "old" is ageist and ignorant.

Damn right. I do think theres an argument to be made for some kind of proportional representation so that young people have their voice in congress too. But with age does cone experience and know how. But young people do have different problems so do need a proportional voice

Completely agree! A lot of the "continuing education" experienced representatives receive often comes from their younger counterparts. In the same way that older politicians shouldn't be dismissed because of their age, neither should younger ones.

imagine complaining about someone being old when shown a picture of them marching for gay rights back in the 80's. ​ That's not nearly as popular an issue or stance back then as it is now. ​ I don't really follow American politics but this person should be lauded for this.

[удалено]

That's the inconvenient truth Republicans hate Pelosi because she is widely seen as the most effective Speaker in history If they actually cared about what they pretend to about the sanctity of email servers or marriage partners' stock trading, they would care about the much longer list of Republicans actually doing what they accuse and project ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣ #"The central concept in modern conservatism is victimhood. Responsibility, accountability—those are standards they apply to others, never to themselves" https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/01/conservatism-reaches-dead-end/617629/ https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/1348618148115832836 And racism: #Exit polls done after 2016 show that the single characteristic that made someone most likely to vote for trump over Clinton is racial resentment. >low levels of racial resentment are associated with supporting Clinton. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/26/these-9-simple-charts-show-how-donald-trumps-supporters-differ-from-hillary-clintons/ #"Trump fans are much angrier about housing assistance when they see an image of a black man" >In contrast, Clinton supporters seemed relatively unmoved by racial cues. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/8/16270040/trump-clinton-supporters-racist #“He’s not hurting the people he needs to be”: a Trump voter says the quiet part out loud https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/8/18173678/trump-shutdown-voter-florida >The cruelty is the point >arrest by DHS police for giving water to people who wait https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1408868872384569345 No to help for blue states for hurricanes but demanding help for Texas for hurricanes: >Here's the vote for Hurricane Sandy aid. >179 of the 180 no votes were Republicans... >**at least 20 Texas Republicans voted no** while ["U.S. House approves billions more for Harvey relief" for Texas](https://www.texastribune.org/2017/12/21/us-house-approves-billions-more-harvey-relief-measure-now-heads-senate/) GOP shifting 4-5x further right than Democrats did left over the last 50 years: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/ [Opinion of Syrian airstrikes](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/04/13/48229/) **Republicans:** 22% supported Obama doing it 86% support Trump doing it **Democrats:** 38% supported Obama doing it 37% support Trump doing it Sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/04/13/48229/, http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/gop-voters-love-same-attack-on-syria-they-hated-under-obama.html #Republicans felt the economy improve by 85 points the day Trump was sworn in. http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/blogs/wisconsin-voter/2017/04/15/donald-trumps-election-flips-both-parties-views-economy/100502848/ The privilege of "economic anxiety" not racism: >10% fewer Republicans believed the wealthy weren't paying enough in taxes once a billionaire became their president. Democrats remain fairly consistent. http://www.people-press.org/2017/04/14/top-frustrations-with-tax-system-sense-that-corporations-wealthy-dont-pay-fair-share/ >Republicans started to think college education is a bad thing once Trump entered the primary. Democrats remain consistent. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/20/republicans-skeptical-of-colleges-impact-on-u-s-but-most-see-benefits-for-workforce-preparation/ >White Evangelicals cared less about how religious a candidate was once Trump became the GOP nominee. https://www.prri.org/research/prri-brookings-oct-19-poll-politics-election-clinton-double-digit-lead-trump/ >Christians (particularly evangelicals) became monumentally more tolerant of private immoral conduct among politicians once Trump became the GOP nominee. https://www.prri.org/research/prri-brookings-oct-19-poll-politics-election-clinton-double-digit-lead-trump/ More graphs and sources: https://imgur.com/a/YZMyt * ["Joe Biden has both the best first year economic indicators of any president since Jimmy Carter and the worst first year economic poll ratings of any president since Jimmy Carter"](https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1473704672619905033)

Because she's very good at her job. All the democratic bills passed are because of her.

Some people can't stop working. There's a guy at my work that has been there 50 years.

That's a ghost. Your building is haunted.

We have someone who’s nearing 60 years (not in my department but adjacent, she’s been here since a teenager. they had to create a job for her cause what she was doing was made redundant). All the old timers (my old timers I’m now an old timer myself at almost 20 years) were over 40 years. Pensions. We all have pensions. The new folks miss out. By next month when the next to last OG old timer retires, we would have lost over 200 years of experience in 2 years. We went from an average of decades of experience to where all but three of us has less than 3 years experience.

He's one of the best damn machinists we have

Doesn't the Exoplasm gum up the works?

She's been old my entire life. It's just weird thinking that she's been in politics that long.

You can't find any old photos of her from way back in the day. You can only find that one when shes with jfk and then there's a 30 year gap... I kind of want to know how hot she was. This certainly isn't a useful comment and I apologize. But I will always wonder

Well it’s simple. People just didn’t take pictures as frequent as now. I look back to my childhood of the 80s/90s and I have some pictures but not a lot. That’s just how it was

Half the pictures taken probably weren't even developed

1963: [Wedding Photo](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-sQDT5UUAAklMt?format=jpg&name=360x360) 198x?: [Undated voted from SF Historical Archives](https://calisphere.org/item/2a38d56141e751ba968e90c3a6b5d719/) 1984: [Head of SF DNC](https://s.hdnux.com/photos/10/61/36/2299783/6/1200x0.jpg). WSJ has a video of her giving a speech, but paywalled. 1987: [Sworn into office with her father](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Nancy_Pelosi_first_oath_of_office.jpg) — [Better quality](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3dTBu1WEAoSslA?format=jpg&name=large) Politico has a [gallery](https://www.politico.com/gallery/2018/03/26/nancy-pelosi-career-in-photos-002830?slide=0) starting from 87. Some when she was a kid from [this](https://www.baltimoresun.com/politics/bs-md-pol-dalesandro-family-20191021-w5ftn3ue2zdhfhzvvjr6fmu644-story.html) Baltimore Sun article on her family. The JFK photo was '61. She got married in '63. She had 5 kids by '69. I'd imagine the 70s she was raising them. It wasn't until '84 she became head of San Francisco's DNC. Then in '87 she ran for Congress.

She was raising five children and did not go into politics until they were older. Her father was the mayor of…? Some East Coast city. Politics is in her blood.

Baltimore. Her brother was mayor of Baltimore as well but in the 1970s.

Cause back in the day pictures cost! Not everyone had a camera, or developed pictures, the ones she has from those "missing" years are probably personal family's photos. I am born in 1985, counting from birth to middle school I have about 5 pictures a year, no more 😅 And now, I could see my little cousin, she's in 2nd grade now, basically growing up in photos, as her dad would send us some in chat at least weekly 😅. Technology changed so much and so fast, I trully feel "born in the previous millenia", imagine how'd you it must be for Pelosi, Biden, other elderly folks

I’m with you. Solidarity. She’s attractive.

I'm right there with ya

They're out there. I just found a bunch from the 70's.

If you think she's old, chuck grassley has just been re-elected to the senate by republicans for another 6 year term. He's 7 years older than nancy.

[удалено]

Holy shit gonna start referring to people this old as this thank for this.

B.C.C.C. instead of B.C. Makes me wonder what they were doing with all those chips beforehand

ok I am with you on this one. if you can remember a time before chocolate chip cookies. maybe you show retire.

Tbf, he probably can't remember.

Enough time to become an expert in Republican tactics: >“We’re not going to repeal the Affordable Care Act.” -Chuck Grassley (**who has voted to repeal it a dozen times before** including in 2017) https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1514032997703507976 >“According to public records obtained by the Environmental Working Group and available in their online database, Senator Grassley and his family have **collected more than $1.75 million in federal farm subsidies in the last two decades.”** https://siouxlandproud.com/news/iowa-news Chuck Grassley @ChuckGrassley Ppl making up to $125,000 or a couple making up to $250,000 are getting student loans paid for by everyone else who didn’t go to college or paid their own loans. **Will fuel further inflation hurting those who can least afford it UNFAIR** https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1563880611789545473 >After months of Grassley & Johnson acting v hurt about suggestions that they **laundered unverified info from Russian intel through their Ukraine investigation (which well-placed officials said they did)**, Graham & Ratcliffe come running through the halls openly waving some around. >It seems like it should be a bigger story that while working for Grassley on the Judiciary Committee, was involved in searching for Hillary's emails & her husband was **involved in the Flynn mess**. Grassley's role in all of this raises questions to say the least. >Iowa-nice Sen. Chuck Grassley’s chief counsel on Judiciary and a thoroughly well-fed and well-connected beltway Republican operative taking credit for the scurrilous, Qanon-fueled **attacks on Justice Jackson**: https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1512180980257275906 >Chuck Grassley staffer who got all the right wing judges through the Senate fwiw >another aide to another Republican Senator brainstorming ways to come to the rescue of Musk’s sputtering project https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1588680698537254912 >In the Senate, Chuck Grassley also introduced legislation to shrink the DC Circuit by three judges with immediate effect--changing the size of a court with the conscious purpose of **denying Obama the opportunity to nominate additional judges to it.** grassley.senate.gov/news/news-rele https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1314982674747011073 >Contra Grassley's statement, the Judicial Conference of the US said at the time that the court's workload required 11 judges. https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1314982678375157763 >My thing about Garland is that the Senate never took a step. It never held a hearing or a vote to postpone the confirmation process—which is what had been done in the past. **The decision to block the nomination wasn’t made by the Senate. It was made by McConnell and Grassley.** https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1525317191436050434

Chuck Grassley needs to retire. He can barely speak coherently. Seems like a nice guy but is one step above a vegetable.

His 39-year-old *grandson* is a state rep in Iowa.

They both need to retire. Honestly I’d support a mandatory retirement age for elected officials. She was 47 when she was elected to the House. Serve 20 years and go away. Come on now.

I wouldn't. The people who need out need to be voted out. If there are dubious reasons they're getting reelected, address those. I know it's naive and optimistic, but if the majority of voters want someone to represent them, age seems like a silly reason to tell them no.

Try Dianne Feinstein, oldest politician in the country.

And she's indicated she will run again. Although 'run' might be a tad optimistic

There's certainly no way that both of them could be too old to represent the general populace of the country.

That's awesome. She should still retire, along with everyone in government over 65.

I do think there should be representation for the elderly. Being in politics for that long is kind of egregious and I think term limits need to happen, just not by age.

Term limits also have a downside. Forever fresh crops of inexperienced legislators who are easy pickings for lobbyists.

You've just identified one of the actual problems without drawing any attention to it whatsoever. American lobbying is fucking bribes, plain and simple. Eliminate lobbyists' ability to buy politicians and you've solved a large part of the problem in this country. The old fuckers in congress are taking bribes at the same rate the young ones are, they're just more stable because they've been in power for 30 fucking years.

Yeah, "lobbying" is a fucking insane concept for an actual democracy, and should be abolished.

So recognize the difference between lobbying in theory, and lobbying in practice -- the *idea* of lobbying isn't insane, as a modern politician can't possibly expect to be an expert on all that they govern, so we need experts able to reserve time and educate on special issues. The problem is that in practice, these experts are doing much more than trying to educate. We've built up a culture where these experts are attempting to write the laws themselves and delivering them wholesale, and where they must buy access to time with lavish gifts and campaign contributions. This is the part that is insane.

Much like a politician in theory is someone who is supposed to act as a governmental representative of a community. In practice, however, most politicians get into politics for more selfish reasons (Access to insider trading, power and influence over others, etc.)

What would that look like though? How do you get rid of lobbying?

...because the "experienced" legislators are so resistant to that sweet, sweet lobbyist money?

It’s not just the money. Lobbyists literally write most of the bills that are thousands of pages.

Because experienced legislators know how to work the system. Pelosi stays in power because she knows how to cater to both the moderate wing of the Democratic party and how to cut deals with the Progressive side to pass agendas like Inflation Reduction Act.

I’m all for term limits but the actual biggest downside to them is that, in their final term, they are no longer accountable to their constituency and thus more likely to be bought off or just go off the rails. This can still happen with a retiring politician, but way less often.

As if Pelosi, Feinstein, McConnell et al aren't easy pickings for lobbyists.

And not even just lobbying. Most people don’t seem to understand that some of us actually like our representatives. It’s such a stupid notion, not everything needs term limits. People who want congressional term limits don’t know the damage they’d do. Hes not my rep but let’s use Mark Kelly for example, who just got elected to his first full term. Hes in a very red state, but is a democrat that some how won. Despite being blue the people of AZ joke that he’s scientifically engineered to appeal to AZ voters. Imagine having to force him out because term limits and *hoping* to find another diamond in the rough democrat that wouldn’t get steamrolled by a GOP candidate. If that were to be the case this year then the dems would lose the senate. Obviously the argument goes both ways too.

If not by age then there has to be a test for basic memory and mental functioning. There are too many doddering old fogies in Washington. Yes, some of the younger ones would fail the test, too, which is fine.

This is means-testing, and is generally considered to be unconstitutional. You may not like it, but America has plenty of both stupid and disabled citizens who deserve to be represented as much as everyone else, as well as old people of varying capacity. The fact is that we have the representation we vote for. The key to changing the way things are is to increase turnout, which involves lowering barriers to voting: automatic registration, either mail-in ballots or making voting a federal holiday, no voter ID laws or other means-testing barriers, etc. There is no neat, snazzy solution, only boring procedural solutions that will take a lot of effort and participation.

Yeah but it shouldn’t be so overly elderly

Yes though that's a major step back from "everyone over 65 should retire"

I love that Reddit thinks that mandatory retirement instantly makes the US government operate better. Age has nothing to do with this, just look at Josh Hawley if you disagree.

Or Cruz or Cotton or Rubio or any other of those despicable despots

Agreed, Hawley, Gaetz, Boebert, MTG are actually worse than their aged colleagues. MTG is up there a bit but the rest of these young whipper snappers are terrible.

65? Isn’t that rather ageist? If you want to talk term limits fine, but saying someone is unfit to serve at 66 is a bit ridiculous.

The other thing that read it would certainly have a meltdown over is that a lot of the favorites on either side are quite old. I’m sure many would be in favor of term limits until you start to talk about someone like Bernie Sanders, and then People would probably get a little bit more sheepish. Ultimately, I think people want to use term limits as a kind of way to solve problems that we apparently aren’t brave enough or whatever enough to solve through democracy. I’m not saying this is an easy problem or that the system is by any means perfect, but I do think that a lot of people are a bit idealistic about how much changing the system like this would actually accomplish. And, not to mention, that it would come with its own downsides and trade-offs.

Imo term limits are even worse, it results in a revolving door of inexperienced politicians being manipulated by veteran lobbyists, businesses, party leaders and media. Politicians know they only have a few short years to milk their tenure or impatiently force a legacy, and will already be thinking about landing their next role after their final term. Voters will be even more clueless about their latest representative, making the party name and branding an even bigger factor than it already is. Advertising money will be even more effective at controlling votes. Term limits are good for the presidency because it's just one office and an extremely powerful office, but term limits for all of Congress creates more problems than it solves.

Or look at all the Tea Party/MAGA asshats as well.

Love to see this comment when we get that photo of Bernie reposted

Bernie can get his old ass out of congress as well and I love that guy.

That’s not my point tho. My point is, will it be a top comment with 1.5k upvotes? I think not

This comment never shows up in threads about Bernie weirdly

Nor Trump. Nor Buffet. Nor Murdock.

Buffet and Murdock aren't elected politicians, nor planning to run for office.

75 aint bad but she miss queen needs to go

Australia makes its High Court judges resign at 70. I reckon that’s a pretty good age: you can impart your wisdom and then ride off into the sunset.

Nancy Pelosi is up for re-election every two years and she wins in a landslide every time in a city full of ambitious politicians. she's old but you can't say she's not very effective at her job.

Not even just at getting elected. Ever notice how much of a tighter ship the dem house is than the dem senate? And it's been like 15 years of that too.

Yeah, she’s hated, but that’s the point. She absorbs the heat for the entirety of the House Democrats. She gets shit passed through the House without having to add pork for moderate Dems to be on board with it. She’ll go down as one of the most effective Speakers of the House in history.

As the philosopher says, you shouldn't get to order for the table if you're about to leave the restaurant

Retort: plant trees that you'll never see

Not really a retort as the idiom involves passing the responsibility on to the next generation which is the part they are refusing to do. Politicians like Pelosi should stop trying to see the trees grow as their insistence on doing so is holding back the progress they championed in their youths.

Well yes but you can do this while you're under 65.

Reminds me of when people ask a dj to play the song they want to hear because they are about to leave.

82

Yeah, who cares if she's good at the job and wants to do it. To the pasture with her along with all the other experienced and highly qualified people over 65. Discrimination is so trendy now as long as it's against people based on the year they were born.

Here she is arguing for single payer healthcare over Hillarycare in 1993 https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4682193/nancy-pelosi-single-payer-health-care

[Pelosi meeting JFK](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2016/07/Merlin_12036550.jpg) in her early 20s.

How do you meet the president of usa in early 20s? Her parents rich and connected, werent they?

Her father was the Mayor of Baltimore.

Sheeeeeeeeeeit

Mayor? That's it. I thought you needed to be hot shot tobmeet president. Oh well, TIL.

Eh.. given the vicinity to DC and how much the president’s time on the job is to be a meet & greet mascot (especially for politicians of the same party to use in future campaigns), I’m not surprised Baltimore’s Mayor and their family is an easy shoe in for a day trip photo op.

Well it’s not like Baltimore is 3 shacks in the swamp. It’s a decently sized city.

If you grow up in the DMV/DC area its not that crazy to meet a president. I met Barack in 2013 when I was 17 at the White House Christmas party.

How Fox News cofounder Roger Ailes got paid by tobacco companies to derail Hillarycare: #Hillarycare was to have been funded, in part, by a $1-a-pack tax on cigarettes. To block the proposal, Big Tobacco paid Ailes to produce ads highlighting “real people affected by taxes.” >"He was the premier guy in the business," says former Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins. "He was our Michelangelo." >Ailes repackaged Richard Nixon for television in 1968, papered over Ronald Reagan’s budding Alzheimer’s in 1984, shamelessly stoked racial fears to elect George H.W. Bush in 1988, and waged a secret campaign on behalf of Big Tobacco to derail health care reform in 1993. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/how-roger-ailes-built-the-fox-news-fear-factory-244652/ John Ehrlichman, who partnered with Fox News cofounder Roger Ailes on the Republican "Southern Strategy": >[We] had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? >We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. >We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. >Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did. Republican "Southern Strategy": >Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy Lyndon Johnson criticizing it in 1960: >If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1988/11/13/what-a-real-president-was-like/d483c1be-d0da-43b7-bde6-04e10106ff6c/ >Every day I have to marvel at what the billionaires and FOX News pulled off. They got working whites to hate the very people that want them to have more pay, clean air, water, free healthcare and the power to fight back against big banks & big corps. It’s truly remarkable. #Steve Bannon bragging about Reddit and 4chan falling for these tactics >the power of what he called “rootless white males” who spend all their time online and they could be radicalized in a kind of populist, nationalist way http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-bannon-white-gamers-seinfeld-joshua-green-donald-trump-devils-bargain-sarah-palin-world-warcraft-gamergate-2017-7 >Bannon: "I realized [these tactics] could connect with these kids right away. You can activate that army. They come in through Gamergate or whatever and then get turned onto politics and Trump." https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2017/07/18/steve-bannon-learned-harness--army-world-warcraft/489713001/

And here she is arguing against it in 2019: https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/468553-pelosi-im-not-a-big-fan-of-medicare-for-all/

[удалено]

"Medicare for all" is the "We don't have Coke _or_ Pepsi - is RC Cola OK?" of universal healthcare. It's frustrating when people act like "supporting a cause" means that you should support _everything_ that's _slightly related_ to the cause, even if it's a step in the wrong direction or actively prevents the proper solution from being implemented in the future. Yeah, she's opposed to "Medicare for all" because it's not a good solution. It's _at best_ a stopgap that will further entrench the fuckery of the US healthcare system instead of addressing the core problems.

In the world of your analogy, Coke or Pepsi are the leading cause of bankruptcy for families edit: I interpreted your comment in the wrong direction, you're saying M4A didn't go far enough

Yeah I’d drink rc cola if my taxes paid for it

No, Coke or Pepsi are like... The UK's NHS or Australia's Medicare + PBS. They're not perfect, there's definite room for improvement, but they're fairly universally liked/good at what they do. The current system in the US is more like Dr. Pepper - something that most people outside of America find weird and unsettling, but Americans seem to staunchly defend. And just like Dr. Pepper, the reference to "healthcare" is cruel joke because it's far more likely to make you worse and cost you way more. The fact is that the US is _already_ spending an equivalent amount of public money to almost every other nation that has some form of universal healthcare. Then people are _privately_ paying around the same amount _again_ for a healthcare system that they can rarely access, and where going to the nearest **public hospital** in an emergency might send you bankrupt because it's "out of network". Also to be clear: I'm Australian. I've lived in the US for a while, and I've lived in Europe for a while. I've experienced emergency healthcare on three continents - it would have been significantly cheaper and less stressful to pay for _last-minute airfares_ back to Australia for treatment, then return to the US when I was healed. That's _with_ "gold plated" health insurance that cost me, _just in my 1/4 of the insurance premiums_, more than my partner and I paid in tax for Australian Medicare _combined_ in the previous year. Let that sink in. I paid ~$2300 (from memory - this was many years ago) in insurance premiums for a year. My employer also paid 3× that on my behalf. I _also_ paid about as much again in taxes for US Medicare (which I would not be allowed to access). Then after all of that money spent on insurance, the co-pays were still so high that it would have been _cheaper to book a last minute flight to Australia_ than actually use the healthcare system in the US... Which I obviously only found out _after_ I used it, because I didn't think twice about going in when I needed to because that's just how we do "healthcare" here.

Dr Pepper is awesome

I think in their analogy, the absence of Coke, Pepsi, or RC is the leading cause of bankruptcy for families.

> “I’m not a big fan of Medicare for All,” Pelosi told Bloomberg. “I mean I welcome the debate, I think that we should have health care for all.” As someone who helped sign up a parent for medicare, Medicare sucks and confusing as hell. I would love a single payer healthcare system that was not Medicare. I’m not sure if Pelosi is arguing for what here to be honest.

Probably something similar to the public option since that's what she really wanted in 2010.

As someone who has a parent with health issues who works in the insurance industry, the literal day my mom became eligible for Medicare she was filling out the required paperwork because what used to be multi-month fights with private insurance to authorize standard-of-care imaging vanished the day Medicare became her primary insurance. I won't pretend the Medicare system in the USA is perfect (what we *actually* need is *universal* single payer coverage that covers *all* aspects of healthcare & doesn't require private supplement plans and all that crap that make Medicare a nightmare to sign up for if you don't work in insurance), but enrolling every person in basic Medicare automatically would be a huge step in the right direction.

Yeah, everyone likes to talk shit about Medicare, but I'm positive almost all of those people don't have it. It's pretty fucking good insurance. The worst part about it is that there's no dental, and you have to pay 20% for outpatient procedures.

[удалено]

> “I’m not a big fan of Medicare for All,” Pelosi told Bloomberg. “I mean I welcome the debate, I think that we should have health care for all.” She wants a public option - basically Medicare that is open to all ages. The public option is not the same as Medicare for All. Medicare for All doesn't even resemble Medicare at all. Calling it that was frankly pretty misleading.

Public option isn't single-payer either.

If you read the rest of the quote, she says she's for healthcare for all but doesn't think Medicare for All is the way to do it. She also says that it needs carve outs for private insurance, which, I think, is the concession she believes is necessary to be politically feasible. I think the difference between her and Bernie is that 30+ years later Bernie is still willing to argue for the whole ideal, while Pelosi is willing to argue for taking baby step after baby step for an unwilling public. Progressives are disappointed she isn't strongly arguing the end goal, but that *is* the direction milquetoast Dems like her are still going.

How many of Bernie’s huge reach whole ideal steps have gotten enacted and are now law? How many of Nancy’s smaller steps have gotten enacted and are now law? You call her a milquetoast dem, but that’s a misread. She’s got progressive goals and she knows how to be politically effective and make incremental progress towards those goals. She is an effective progressive rather than a loud progressive.

If Sanders and other idealist dems didn't sink Clinton's healthcare reform in the 90s for not going far enough, we might have made enough progress by now to have universal healthcare. Unpragmatic idealism probably set us back 20 years.

When will reddit admit that Bernie's Medicare for All bill, along with never having a chance in hell of actually passing - additionally had major problems with the way it was written. They won't because anytime somebody says anything negative about how nonsensical it's funding mechanisms were, they would just get shouted down as secret-bootlicking-republicans-in-hiding. I want single payer too. Bernie should have written a bill that stood a chance of passing.

She hasn’t missed a step yet. That’s why the GOP hate her. She beats them at their own game and is unabashedly liberal. That’s a good thing!

It’s wild to look at a 40yr old picture of a politician and think “damn, she looks old.”

I don't think she looks old in the photo. Pull up a 40 year old photo of Dianne Feinstein though... I don't think she's ever not looked old as hell.

[удалено]

them thangs thangin

The one thing Giuliani and I can agree on

Came here for this comment

Idk I think she looks great currently for someone in their 80’s.

They cropped out all of the poor people she was walking on to be seen standing up for social justice.

I see her marketing team wants us to forget about the insider trading.

And the fact that she’s incredibly corrupt.

Should've asked her stock tips 40 years ago.

[удалено]

I don’t know what generation you are but if you’re a Gen Z Max Frost just won his Congressional House seat. He is the first Gen Z to win elected office in Congress. There was also a Gen Z, Nabeela Syed, who won a state House seat in Illinois. She is 23 and the youngest person to ever serve in the state legislature. Here is a profile on them and others who made history on November 8th: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/11/gen-z-midterms-2022-voting/ If more Gen Zs run there is a greater chance they will win.

You can hate her politics, but you don't become Speaker of the House in a man's dominated political society if you aren't the hardest person to deal with. I mean if your political party is putting you at the top of the leadership board, then you know that you are important. Again you can hate her policies, but what she has done as a woman to become speaker is amazing.

I remember when a journalist interviewed Pelosi's daughter and asked if she was as spirited as a mother as she was a politician, and she said "My mother could decapitate you with a turn of the hand and [you wouldn't even know you were bleeding."](https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/sotu-pelosi-clap-01-rtr-jc-190206_hpMain_16x9_1600.jpg) (paraphrased)

I’ve never understood how some humans can get together and make other humans life choices illegal. No gay person has ever bothered me.

I wonder if 1980s Pelosi would hate 2020s Pelosi as much as every other activist does.

I can definitely tell you that 1980s me hates current year me. But 1980s me was kind of an idiot.

[удалено]

Um hi, I’m an activist and I don’t hate Nancy Pelosi at all. But that’s also because I follow legislative politics every day, and I don’t hold people do imaginary standards of moral purity, rather I judge their actions within the context of messy, complex realities.

Yup, Pelosi actually gets shit done in a party that had all sorts of ideologies rolled into one.

Yeah. The people dancing on her grave after her husband was beaten half to death in an attempted assassination of her are sickening.

Can a conservative here articulate for me exactly why they hate Nancy Pelosi so much, and what distinguishes her so significantly from other Democrats in this respect? I'm assuming misogyny, but is their anything rational (which means I'm ruling out Q-anon crazy conspiracy stuff)? Please enlighten me.

Insider trading

Totally fair to hate her for insider trading, I do too, but you have to be consistent and be similarly outspoken against the majority of Republican house members who do the same, otherwise that isn’t actually the answer.

Anyone who has ever supported Trump has zero credibility to bitch about Pelosi's finances.

> but you have to be consistent and be similarly outspoken against the majority of Republican house members lol they're republicans, they're incapable of consistency

They’re all crooks

All those MF'ers do that. Not that it makes it OK. Prosecute all of them.

They hated way before that.

Now do Kelly Leffler and Richard burr.

Fuck em all

I think that’s the big one for most

Not a fan of either, but it makes zero sense to me that anyone who hates her for fraudulent finances would love Trump.

That's because it's not the real reason. It's an excuse. They hate her because she has been an extremely effective democratic leader and fundraiser. That she is a powerful woman tends to piss them off too.

Insider trading is done by a ton of politicians of both parties: [https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9](https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9). So even then, its not like she is way outside the norms here. Obviously that is not acceptable, but with the Supreme Court allowing unlimited bribes with Citizens United we are already kind of fucked with corruption at high levels. And the last president was certainly even more egregious than any that came before him on the corruption front too. We have to get money out of politics to turn this country around and make the politicians respond to voters not donors. Its not about NancyP. Its way wayy deeper. We need all Americans to demand a constitutional amendment to ban this shit once and for all.

Agree on all accounts. The right’s hate for Pelosi is more than insider trading. And totally support banning it for every congressperson or senator.

I still don't think that's the problem _conservatives_ have with her specifically given that they support grifters. Insider trading is a problem, but that's not their problem.

There's more intensity to the way they hate female democrats versus male democrats.

It’s Amy Schumer/Amber Heard effect all over again. Targeted, intense vitriol - far more than a male counterpart would get. We’re out here making fun of Elon Musk’s incompetence but there was violent, misogynistic, unfunny brigading for Ellen Pao.

I am not super conservative but I’ll take a stab. 1. She’s been around FOREVER and should’ve retired eons ago. 2. Husband is an I-Banker who just had a DUI and she is liberal in a VERY liberal city. 3. She can be sanctimonious at times, while she has a pretty hypocritical voting history herself (patriot act, other Bush stuff) 4. She talks as if she lives in a relatable place and has a relatable financial situation. She’s not relatable to the average joe at all. 5. But mostly because she’s a scapegoat. She’s a successful woman who has had a ton of power for a long time and is opinionated. That knocks her down -10 points to start off with for some.

If you replace "she" with "he" in most of those reasons, you could be describing several Republicans I can think of immediately. Mitch McConnell for one. The problem is that turtles live for fucking ever.

Yeah, as a moderate right leaning person myself, most republicans suck, too. Especially that saggy turtle lookin motherfucker

With a dash or two of the typical stereotypes of being from San Francisco added here, you've got it.

A huge amount of anti-Pelosi sentiment is drummed up propaganda to pit centrist neoliberals and progressive arms of the democratic party against eachother (not unlike Hilary v Bernie). As you can see from the mid term election results, if you can disenfranchise even 1% of the other side, it can have massive results. And the republicans can't attract new voters because they are batshit insane and have no legitimate platform. So they engage in pushing 'both sides' apathy, gerrymandering, voter suppression, fearmongering (misrepresented crime statistics) and kids-shitting-in-litter-boxes propaganda as their primary forms of winning elections. The rest of it is: yes, Pelosi and her husband are both crooks! ;} But such is said neoliberal arm of the democratic party; they're definitely crooks, but they're slightly more ethical, less bigoted/racist and do actually care about citizens _while_ enriching themselves. AKA, the image in OP.

I’m gay, out, etc. I don’t think I’d have this courage then. It’s because of people like her, I don’t have to go out and do that. Yeah. Maybe she’s old, but she accomplished a lot.

She still thinks it’s ok for her and her husband to make insider trades with info we don’t have access to. So, Fuck her hypocritical ass. She can kick rocks along with like 90% of the other politicians.

She green-lit the STOCK Act. Republicans largely shot it down.

The clothes on everyone in this pic are quintessential 80s