But can Americans really believe that Nancy Pelosi should be shaping the nation’s policy on war; our safety; the economy; or nail polish regulation? John Conyers, aging Commie, running the Judiciary Committee? Charlie Rangel at Ways and Means? There are, we are all aware, real threats out there. ~Lisa Schiffren

Of course, most Americans have no idea who Nancy Pelosi is.  The extreme vagueness of future Democratic policy, normally a weakness for them, has proved to be a blessing in disguise.  Voters cannot be frightened of Pelosi’s wild-eyed agenda because…she has no discernible, concrete agenda besides raising the minimum wage (something, by the way, that an overwhelming majority in places such as Ohio support on a state level and would probably also support at the federal level).  You cannot scare people with the demonic Nancy Pelosi because most people have never heard of her, or don’t remember who she is if they have.  Charlie Rangel?  Which one is he again?  Of course, political junkies, bloggers and pundits know who these people are, but we are so unrepresentative of the nation that it is sometimes painful to consider just how little the voters know about elections by comparison.  Simply put, the slogan of “better the devil you know” is not a winning one.  Another losing slogan: “Yes, we’re failures!  But we’re not dangerous failures like the other guys would be!”  These people at NRO (with the exception of Robert Moran, who makes the credible argument for why losing wouldn’t be so bad for conservatives) sound like the liberals in their salons in 1994, “There is simply NO WAY the American people will ever vote for a boorish monster like Newt Gingrich!  Ha ha!  Pour me some more chardonnay, darling.”  The results that year were enough to make them choke on their manchego.  The disconnect from the people of the country is what is most striking about NRO’s little “symposium” on GOP strategy and the elections.  They speak about winning on the “issues” and how Republicans are better on judges (does anyone think that that old song and dance is going to motivate very many this year?), and seem to think that it is 2004 all over again.  But the old terrorism-gays-judges spiel is old and does not resonate as it once did.  Things have changed, and the GOP has not adapted; worse, they don’t even understand that they need to have adapted.  They can bang the terrorism tocsin if they choose, but no one will be rallying to them.  The simple reason why is Iraq.  Voters make a simple assessment: “You said Iraq was vital to fighting terrorism.  It is having the opposite effect.  Iraq is mainly your fault, and it is because we are concerned about terrorism and national security that we must now vote you, the failures, out of office for your misjudgement.  “Stay the course” has not simply been the failed strategy in Iraq, but has effectively been the defining phrase for the GOP for the last four years.  Both the government and the war in Iraq need a course correction.  Maybe if there is someone, even if it is the dreadful Nancy Pelosi, holding Bush’s feet to the fire a little more often, that correction will happen sooner rather than later.  So it may be for the good of us all that few people have any idea who she is or what she represents, because if more people did know how awful she is they might very well stick with the incompetent bunglers we have now.