Quick(ish) take: Why Nancy Pelosi's job is difficult, and what makes her the best at it

 Right now, Congress is doing something very strange.  It's called... "something."  For Congress, that's strange.  The big "something" right now is the pair of spending bills consisting of an actual infrastructure bill, being passed with... [checks notes]... bipartisan [checks notes again]... support.  Um, really?  OK, sure, yeah.  The second bill is a budget reconciliation bill which uses reconciliation rules to prohibit filibusters in the Senate.  Thus, if the Democrats can keep every Democrat on board, including Manchin, they can pass the bill without any Republicans.  They are calling it "infrastructure" by using the modern, lefty trick of redefining the word, "infrastructure," and calling basically everything, "infrastructure."  A floor is a chair because you can sit on it.  Therefore, even if you have no furniture, you have furniture.  Your floor is a chair!  See?  All you have to do is redefine every word!  But enough of that for today.  For today, let's have a quick explanation of why Nancy Pelosi is god.

The task of passing this set of bills is actually really hard.  The far left keeps looking at the federal government and saying, "hey.  We have unified control!  We should be able to get everything we've ever dreamed of having!"  No.  It doesn't work that way.  Functionally, the Dems don't even really have the Senate.  They have 49 plus Manchin, and Manchin is just a douche, but that's only part of the challenge, because he's in the Senate, and Pelosi doesn't even have to deal with him directly.

She has two types of problem people.  She has a clump of people who will just vote for whatever bill she sticks in front of them, like the un-picky eaters who will politely gobble down whatever food is shoved in front of their faces.  She doesn't have to worry about them.  But...

Problem Type #1 is the self-interested, strategic actor.  The self-interested, strategic actor just wants to negotiate.  Hans, bubby.  I'm here to negotiate.

There are two reasons Ellis may want to negotiate.  First, Ellis may have policy preferences.  Second, Ellis may represent a moderate district, and Ellis may fear that if the bill is too extreme, he can't vote for it without putting himself at risk.  So there is a balancing act, and I wrote a lot about this in my last book, Incremental Polarization: A Unified Spatial Theory of Legislative Elections, Parties & Roll Call Voting.

Pelosi can't just pull a Gruber on Ellis the way Lauren Boebert would.  Instead, she has to figure out how much she can give, and how much she needs to give, with the problem being that every bit she gives to this coke-head dipshit runs the risk of costing the vote of another Ellis elsewhere.

But these are the easier people to manage, in some sense, because they are actually trying to negotiate in a semi-rational way.  Just get 'em off the coke, and you can work with 'em.

Problem Type #2 is the purist/extremist.  Problem Type #2 demands that Pelosi make no concessions to Ellis.  And yes, Ellis may be a coke-head dipshit, but actually, scratch that.  Frequently, Problem Type #1 is not a coke-head dipshit.  Frequently, Problem Type #1 just can't vote for an extremist bill without losing the next election.  So Problem Type #1 is really just being rational and sane.

Problem Type #2 is not.  The choice is between a bill that doesn't go far enough for Problem Type #2, and no bill.  Why?  Because Problem Type #1 can't vote for an extreme bill.  He just can't.  So the choice isn't a bill that doesn't go far enough, and one that does, because a bill that does go far enough for Problem Type #2 isn't on the table.  Problem Type #2 is a problem because Problem Type #2 is too stupid to understand this.  That's why Problem Type #2 is a problem.  These are your "we just have to fight" types.  These are the ones who don't understand that legislating is about arithmetic.  Not "fighting," but arithmetic, and arithmetic is unimpressed with your fightin' spirit.  Why?  Because arithmetic is non-sentient.  It just is.

The balancing act between all of the problem types is why Pelosi's job is difficult.  That's the challenge.  Having a majority?  Yeah... that doesn't mean you get what you want.  There's a long history of nominal majorities failing to achieve much.  And part of it is that the task of cobbling together a majority by solving these problems (collective action problems, as I argue in Incremental Polarization) is just hard.

The only one who actually has the perspective of thinking about it at that level is the Speaker.  Individual legislators are thinking about it from the perspective of their individual districts, their individual goals, or maybe just whatever will get them more 'likes' on social media.  Lookin' at you, Ocasio-Cortez!  Only the Speaker has the job of putting everything together.

Many, nay, most Speakers work within a range.  You know who's fuckin' awesome at this?  Nancy Pelosi.  She understands the strategic challenge of balancing the moonbats on the far left with the cross-pressured legislators representing moderate districts, and the Ellises just anglin' for their next hits.

It still baffles me that there are fools in the Democratic Party who want her out of the job.

Nancy Pelosi rules.