This article concerns the leadership and direction of the Democratic Party going forward. Ohio Democratic Representative Tim Ryan plans to run against current House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for her position. Although he did not plan to originally run against her, he changed his mind after Donald Trump won his home town in Ohio (and generally swept Democratic strongholds in the Midwest as a whole). Ryan is clearly not expected to win his bid, as only a few Democrats have publicly supported him. Still, he says he is withing "striking distance."
During the recent election date, Democrats under performed expectations in House and Senate races, as well as the Presidency. Obama prevailed in Ryan's home county of Trumbull County by 23 points, while Trump recently won by 7. Do you think it is time for the Democrats to turn to new leadership to give the party a new face (that is more relatable to a broader base)? Or are you of the belief that now is the time for Democrats to stay united in the face of crushing defeats? Would substantial support for Ryan, even if he loses, signify a division in the Democratic Party?
During the recent election date, Democrats under performed expectations in House and Senate races, as well as the Presidency. Obama prevailed in Ryan's home county of Trumbull County by 23 points, while Trump recently won by 7. Do you think it is time for the Democrats to turn to new leadership to give the party a new face (that is more relatable to a broader base)? Or are you of the belief that now is the time for Democrats to stay united in the face of crushing defeats? Would substantial support for Ryan, even if he loses, signify a division in the Democratic Party?
I don't know how I feel about this. I kind of could argue both ways. Part of me wants to say why shouldn't Ryan run and try to make his voice bigger and reach more people. If you feel capable, there's no reason not to at least try. If you don't try, you'll never know.
ReplyDeleteBut then there's the flipside. Pelosi, as the article mentioned, has been the only leader Ryan has ever known, and according to the statistics, has always won by a pretty large margin. If she's already doing a good job, people are happy, and she would like to continue, why would he try to take that from her? Additionally, I understand his reason for all of a sudden deciding to run. I get it, he wants to make a difference. But wouldn't the election being so close in itself be enough to want to make him run? This announcement seems like a rash decision to me, and I wonder how strong a leader Ryan would be if by some twist he really did win.
Also, if we swap her out for him under the idea that he has a more relatable and broader base, aren't we being just as bad as other groups by electing yet another white male leader for appeal?
No matter how you feel about the results of the election, you must admit this has been a fascinating experience and one that will be analyzed for years to come. Donald Trump emerged as some kind of ultimate underdog during this election with his predicted failure in every poll I viewed, so now the question is this: why? In class we discussed how the republicans need to do a "spring cleaning" of their party to appeal more to moderate voters who are thrown off by their extremely conservative views. While I still believe this to be true for the republicans, perhaps the democrats need to reorganize their party as well. I bring this up because, following the defeat of Hilary Clinton, someone new leading the house democrats could be beneficial for the party. It's apparent that Mr. Ryan respects Mrs. Pelosi from some of the statements he's made; this isn't an overthrow of a despised ruler. I'd say Ryan is feeling that given the results of the election, and I support his endeavors even if he loses by a vast majority.
ReplyDeletePelosi won. She got 134 votes and Ryan got 63 votes from what I gathered from a brief look on CNN. While change can be good, Pelosi has the experience to take on the Republican majority. The party might want to get new leaders at the DNC level to spice things up in terms of the Democrats running for office, but Pelosi is more than capable to handle the situation in the House and maybe the Democrats can explore new leadership in this area onnce they have regained a comfortable footing. I don't think the votes that Ryan did recieve were substantial enough to create a very deep divide within the party.
ReplyDeleteI think it is imperative for the Democratic Party to wipe their leadership clean and start fresh. The coalition that led Barack Obama to victory in 2008 and 2012 has fallen apart. The party has grown highly unpopular in the Rust Belt and pretty much all areas of the country except the Northeast and West coasts. They will not be winning elections any time soon if they cannot make inroads in the center of the country. I am disappointed that House Democrats did not choose Tim Ryan as their new leader because having a Rust belt politician in leadership would signify to the region that the Party cares about their interests and would help rebuild their image. Having all of your leaders come from wealthy, coastal regions is likely to alienate rural Americans.
ReplyDeleteThe Democratic party should definitely take a new direction in their party, and if that means that new leaders have to be taken in, then so be it. Nancy Pelosi, however, won. But she embodies the Democratic party - a majority party that loses because they are concentrated in cities and cannot win enough electoral votes (Nancy Pelosi is from San Francisco, one of the strongest Democratic cities.) However, Nancy Pelosi has the experience to run the House well, and as Analiese said, she is capable of running the party through the times we are currently in. I worry that the Democrats will continue to disconnect from working class voters, however, and can only hope that the leadership that has been re-elected can push the Democrats towards the progressive economics that benefit the working class and that will win back the votes once we speak to them again.
ReplyDeleteThe Democrats definitely need to turn in a new direction in terms of leadership. This should be clear by the results of the election, as a Democratic presidential win was predicted by most, and obviously that didn't happen. If they want to appeal to a larger base, they need to do some cleaning out and put in new faces at leadership positions, people who can relate more closely than those currently in office. If not, the party will probably continue to face defeat in elections, which will also cause a greater rift in the party. I don't think Ryan got enough support to worry any democrats, but it is a sign that a division is there, and is growing larger everyday.
ReplyDeleteThe last thing we need right now is a divide or rift in the Democratic Party. Things are bad enough without stirring the pot anymore. Pelosi won so the party should accept it and move on. She has experience and will be able to handle things well especially in the next four years. The Democratic Party should move with Pelosi to a new perspective over the next four years, but it should not divide nor be angry with the results. The leaders can change next time and the party can revamp its platform, but until trump is out of office I think stability, and sticking together is the party's best bet.
ReplyDeleteI'm kinda divided over this matter. On one hand, potential instability and conflict is the last thing that the Democratic Party needs in a time of rebuilding and having to unify against the Republican Party. But, I don't get the feeling (at least with the limited information that I have now) that Ryan is running just to oppose Pelosi. I felt as if Ryan is trying to still keep the party intact, but also change certain things in order to appeal to a wider voter base and improve the party as a whole, from a not entirely overthrowing but just a different perspective. At this point, I think that the Democratic party could use a new head, IF, and only if, the new leader came into power with tempered goals, more seeking to improve the party and fix what was wrong, rather than turn the party on its head and overhaul everything, which would be incredibly unproductive and could be a catalyst for further damages by Trump.
ReplyDeleteDivision in the Democratic Party is the last thing we need. Democrats were split this election between Clinton and Sanders. Once very liberal democrats saw what the possibilities were, I think the liberal-bar was raised. While high standards can be a good thing, it’s still important that the party stays unified as we possibly reevaluate what the party wants. While reevaluating, it will be important to include the Midwest in the future narrative. As Josh said, the rust belt is very important. What people are saying now is true—the democrats may have forgotten the rust belt during this campaign, which has detrimental effects on the outcome and maybe future outcomes as well.
ReplyDeleteAs others have mentioned, an intra-party division would be detrimental to the Democrats, as the significant losses in the 2016 election require significant unification and rebuilding. Pelosi won the election and is competent enough to handle the Republican majority. Some people may view the results of this election as a cry for change in the leadership of the Democratic party, but I'm not sure that's the best solution at the moment, given the fragile nature of Democratic influence in government. I don't see Tim Ryan's grab for Pelosi's job as signifying a significant division within the Democratic party, but rather a manifestation of the frustration over election results and their boding on Democratic leadership, specifically in the campaigning in the Rust Belt.
ReplyDeleteI believe that change is always good, and the Democratic Party could definitely benefit from it. However, it is not as easy as simply deciding you want new leadership. There needs to be good candidates, but Pelosi seems to be doing a good job right now. However, if new leadership were to come in, it could create a division in the party similar to the one seen between Bernie and Hillary. There could be a disconnect between the more traditional liberals and the millennials due to the polarization of the party, but the best bet right now is to stay united. If change happens right now and ends up horribly, it will only make a Trump second term more likely.
ReplyDeleteFDR created an unstoppable coalition, a coalition that is now largely Republican, and it's time for the Democrats to recreate that. Having a strong leader for life like Pelosi isn't attracting any new faces to the Democratic fold. It makes them seem even more like the big government people in this country seem to despise. We had two candidates this year around 70 years old! That's ridiculous! The Democratic Party, being the progressive party, should have young faces, fresh ideas, it should form a coalition of young people and minorities, and should beat the GOP propaganda machine and show how what it does is way better for Americans than what the GOP does. Because, really, they are better for people, they just don't ever say it, it seems. So, fine, Pelosi continues on, but if the Democratic Party doesn't ask itself what makes it successful, then it won't be successful.
ReplyDeleteThe Democratic Party needs to change what it's doing. Maybe now is not the time to do so, but maybe it is. Pelosi won, so the leadership won't change, but should it have? I think that it's generally good to experiment with new leadership, especially if the current one isn't working too well, but I also think that a crucial time like this needs to be handled by an experienced leader. I don't know if I wanted Pelosi to continue or not. A change would maybe divide the party and create a conflict that the party needs to get back on track, but staying the same isn't getting the party very far.
ReplyDeleteObviously at this point we know Pelosi won, but there is still an important question of whether or not leadership should change. I think that the leadership should change, but now is not the time. Right now, the Republican party is very divided and not doing so hot. The last thing that the Democratic party should do is follow that example and divide. In my opinion, the Democratic needs to stay as a unified minority right now. But even as I write this, I am torn. Is the Democratic party that unified as it is? Maybe a fresh new face and some new ideas are what it needs to attract the public interest.
ReplyDeleteThere definitely is a division in the party as you say, Samir. The fact that Ryan was able to give a fair challenge to Nancy Pelosi- a Democrat who's been seen and acted as a party leader for quite some time- is indicative of this. I'd expect that for the midterm election (and definitely the next presidential election cycle), more extreme left candidates will be elected. I tend to prefer moderate candidates, but given the Democratic Party's stance this past year being less leftist that many wanted it to be I imagine candidates that better fit this orientation will have more success in the future of shaping the party.
ReplyDeleteThe democratic party definitely needs a change of leadership, throughout the entire party. It was obvious from this election that their current strategy is not working out. The Republicans control the Presidency, the House, the Senate, soon the Supreme Court, and a majority of governorships in the US. All this while having more registered Democrats in the US than Republicans. It is truly abysmal on the part of Democrats. I certainly believe what Tim Ryan is doing is needed for the Democratic Party. Out with the old, in with the new.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny; my father told me before the election that the right wing would break apart due to stress, but it seems like more and more is coming out about issues with the Democratic Party. We definitely need a change of leadership if the left is so divided. I feel like this will help the democrats regain some confidence, since a breath of fresh air is just what they seem to need. If Pelosi is getting stale, there's little way for her to redeem herself, especially after this election cycle. We can just hope that Ryan would be the change we need.
ReplyDeleteI think what the Democratic Party really needs right now is to remain united. The division is obviously there, but I feel that a change in leadership would cause the party to divide even farther, which would only end in more issues arising for the party. While I feel that a change in leadership may be necessary in the future, right now I feel it would only divide the party farther as Pelosi still has many supporters. I also agree with Sean that likely in the next election we will see many more highly leftists next election than we did in this one, as the party is so divided.
ReplyDelete