Pelosi unsure of her role as Speaker - Image: Time
A rather glowing article on House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, from the WashingtonPost yesterday included a somewhat unusual statement from the Speaker at the end of the article:
"If you're asking me how long I intend to stay here, I don't know. I don't know. I just don't know. I have certain issues that I want to accomplish, but what's more important to me is that we have a strong Democratic majority," she said. "That's more important than who is speaker."
Some may argue that her national favorability rating standing at 11% would give her reason to muse over losing the speakership, however, it is the approval rating in her own back yard that would give Pelosi pause. A Field Poll conducted last October 2009, shows Pelosi with an overall approval 34% in California, with Democrats, at that time, giving the Speaker a 51% rating, with 21% of the Party Faithful having no option, and 23% disapproving of the Speakers performance. In the same poll, Senator Boxer, who is now in a battle for her Senate Seat, has a higher rating, 66% in this particular poll. According to Real Clear Politics Polls Boxer is now within the margin of error in most California polls, giving her Senate Seat the websites “Toss up” status.
The 8th district may not be representative of the balance of California, however, if one looks at the California Secretary of State’s registration statistics, in 2008, 56.49% or 269,664 registered voters identified themselves as “Democrats” , the latest figures show a slight decline in registered Democrats – dropping to 251,516, with the overall percentage remaining basically the same.
Interesting, however, is that 17% of those Democrats voted for Cindy Sheehan, of Code Pink fame, in 2008. What would an approval poll in Nancy Pelosi’s district look like now? See Barbara Boxer.
Nancy also faces opposition from Dana Walsh, the Republican candidate who ran against Nancy in 2008, in a year where the Republican Brand was as bad as the Democrat Brand is today. At that time, Walsh received only 8% of the vote.
However, fundraising in 2010 is telling. Both Walsh and Pelosi have filed approximately the same amount in dollars: Pelosi: 1.7 million to Walsh: 1.4 million. Cash on hand: Pelosi: 172,000, Walsh: 123,000. Both women are not being funded by their political parties. Walsh, however has a primary fight with John Dennis, while Pelosi has recorded a total of $2500 from her Party. That fact, in and of itself, maybe due to the fact that the Speaker’s district seat is considered a “lock” for the Party, but then again, so was the Senate Seat referred to by Democrats as the Kennedy Seat.
One also understands that Dana Walsh is no Scott Brown, nor does she have to be, (or any other challenger with fiscally conservative credentials in 2010), and one would hazard to guess that Pelosi, is watching this more closely than any other race she has faced in the district. Given her popularity nationwide, as well as the statistics favoring a change in majorities – thereby ousting Pelosi as Speaker, the real possibility exists today, that she may also be looking at forced retirement in her own district. Nancy Pelosi's Statement, in the post article, directly stating that it is not important who the speaker is, as long as the Democrats maintain a majority, appears to be forced bravado on her part. Perhaps like Dodd, and others who have “fallen on the sword” so to speak, for the sake of the Party and outright retired, Pelosi maybe thinking along the same lines. It would prevent her from losing face: first by losing the majority, and secondly by losing in her own backyard.
No comments:
Post a Comment