Pelosi rejects litmus test on abortion

[S.E. TN Liberal]

"...Pelosi eluded to her recent backing of Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D), a seven-term abortion opponent in Illinois, who survived a tough primary contest last month from a liberal challenger who made reproductive rights central to her campaign.

“I supported him. I took heat for it. He’s pro-life,” Pelosi said. “But we will have a pro-choice gavel when we win the Congress. We need to have at least 218 votes to achieve that. ..."...

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/384638-pelosi-rejects-litmus-test-on-abortion

I hope Democratic voters are listening to the wisdom of Nancy Pelosi. She knows what is needed to get Democrats back into power.

[Me.]

1. Now That Is Pragmatism

[BigmanPigman]

2. Thank goodness!

I have been saying that the Dems need to keep away from some issues in the midterms...abortion is one of them. The 2nd amend and immigration are the others. Dems need to stick with the two issues that voters in both parties favor...affordable healthcare and the tax cuts. Let the candidates stick with the local issues that they are familiar with. I am glad Pelosi is smart enough to realize this. I hope she drives it into all the Dem candidates' heads before they campaign.

[S.E. TN Liberal]

4. BigmanPigman,

It also needs to be driven into the heads of Democratic voters everywhere, including many here in DU.

[BigmanPigman]

5. It is all a game that has to be played.

The GOP knows how to play it with their eyes closed. Tell the voters what they want to hear, get elected then do whatever you want. The Dems need to play the game this way too. During the special elections the Dems that did well stuck to the local issues and nothing controversial and it worked. Really, how many people seriously expected the moron to release his taxes once elected? That was lie #1 on a list of thousands.

[BoneyardDem]

6. Pelosi is acknowledging that there is not a "one size fits all" for any candidate

Each candidate is supposed to represent the needs and desires of the constituency they that voted them into office. There is nothing more reprehensible than a politician whose goal is to press and implement their own personal value system and agenda.

Here on Du we recognize that lack of representation concept all the time. For example, when Reps press their own version of 2ndA interpretation regardless of what their constituency wants to see happen with gun laws.

[bluestarone]

12. THIS 100000000000%

[David__77]

3. Purists might insist on all sorts of things.

The most important thing might be electing somebody, anybody.

[HeartachesNhangovers]

16. I'm a grammar purist. The word this writer is looking for is

"alluded", not "eluded". I studied the minimum amount of English necessary to get through high school and then got an engineering degree (one English class required), and even I know the difference. Hang your head in shame, Mike Lillis, "writer" for The Hill. Mr. Lillis' editor is a hack as well.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

7. Meanwhile, Republicans make sure they elect

full on anti-choice candidates every time. This guy should be a Republican so that it would be possible to have a real Democrat run against him .

If anti-choice, anti-women (because anti-choice is anti-women, pure and simple) Democrats are elected, pretty soon we'll have a full-on return to the days before Roe v Wade. Unfortunately, anyone under the age of 60 really can't remember those days.

[GulfCoast66]

11. But he is a democrat and will be running against a republican

Pretty much a no brainer who we support.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

18. He's a Democrat who doesn't want women

to have control over their own bodies.

Personally, as a woman, I'm not willing to vote for a man who does not respect my ability to make my own choices about certain things. Fortunately, I'm not in his District.

But so long as people keep on saying, "Oh, but he's got the D after his name, so it doesn't matter that he opposes women's rights!" we will lose more and more of our rights.

[GulfCoast66]

19. I would have never voted for him in the primary. But a majority did.

This is a binary choice. We don’t always get to choose what we want. Either we get a Democrat who is anti-choice but will vote for our leadership, are we get an anti-choice Republican who will support the Republican leadership.

There is no other choice. This is where purism kill us. Sitting out the vote makes it more likely that the Republican can win. That is not a good outcome. We have a slim chance to win a majority in the house this year. Would you really not to vote for an anti-choice Democrat increasing the chance that an anti-choice Republican will win the seat and risk the Republicans keeping the house? Because that sure as hell doesn’t help our cause.

[NCTraveler]

8. I understand her position and believe it is a solid path.

That doesn’t mean the rank and file shouldn’t let her know it’s unacceptable.

Dear Pelosi, this person isn’t to negotiate the attachment of anything having to do with limiting my rights to any piece of legislation.

[dameatball]

9. My significant other is anti-abortion, but her family votes Democrat.

Not all voters are single issue.

[Freddie]

10. But

I can vote for a "personality opposed" candidate (Kaine, Biden) but not for an anti-PP, "no exceptions for rape" politician. No matter what else their other views may be.

[dameatball]

13. Not sure what your point was, but no...she understands rape is a different issue, as is incest

Where I live, local churches still hold sway for a lot of people...Appalachia. right now I just want some votes.

[Freddie]

15. True

We have to elect Democrats, full stop.

[dameatball]

17. And that was not a slam....I just missed it for some reason...:)

[50 Shades Of Blue]

14. So what else beside's women's reproductive rights is considered expendable?

Let me guess.

[GulfCoast66]

20. You do know the real situation right?

Would you rather Nancy Pelosi encourage the Republican to win? It’s a crappy situation all the way around. But that’s life.

His primary opponent had tremendous support but lost the primary. So it’s either him, an anti-choice Democrat, who will support some awful thing that will vote to support our leadership. Or we could get an anti-choice Republican who will support nothing good and vote for Republican leadership. There is no other choice.

We have got to learn to be pragmatic when it is absolutely called for.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

21. So what else is expendable?

[GulfCoast66]

23. How are we sacrificing our values?

There is no prochoice candidate in the race. Had you rather the republican win?

[BannonsLiver]

22. Most people who understand politics get what youre saying

And what Pelosi is saying as well. Then you have people from deep blue states like Vermont or Oregon who think politics is one size fits all in flyover country. Of course that’s silly and demonstrably wrong but it’s how you get intellectually shallow responses like those you’re receiving from that particular poster.