Archive

ShareThis Page
Party outlook, post-election II | TribLIVE.com
News

Party outlook, post-election II

Tribune-Review
| Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:00 p.m

If I were one of the many incumbent Democrats ousted by Republican challengers on Nov. 4, I would blame Nancy Pelosi and soon-to-be Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Their shameful behavior since the Democrat “wave” of 2006 not only cost the Democrats both houses of Congress but led to my party’s overwhelming unpopularity with the electorate. Both leaders are out of touch with young voters, who often align themselves with Democrats, and should not be voted minority leaders when the next Congress convenes.

As House speaker, Pelosi infamously said of ObamaCare in 2010, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” The Democrats passed ObamaCare and millions found their health insurance plans would be canceled. Pelosi also gave Democrats false hope in 2012 and 2014 that they would regain House control. Reid has run a dysfunctional Senate by forbidding amendments to bills and suppressing the then-Republican minority by limiting its voice in confirmation votes and refusing to address bills on the floor.

Pelosi and Reid should not have the privilege of leading the Democrats because they lost their party’s majority.

Joseph Samuel

Rogers

Brookline

The writer, a 2014 Central Catholic High School graduate, is a freshman at La Salle University in Philadelphia.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.