An editorial board meeting with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi never fails to remind why she is the longest-serving party leader in the U.S. House since the two-decade rule of Speaker Sam Rayburn, who died in office in 1961.

As usual, her intense energy filled the room for more than 90 minutes Monday. The San Francisco Democrat covered wide territory — from local to global, from past to future — with her distinct skill of blending graciousness with a sometimes sharp edge. It’s readily apparent why she is so successful at drawing monetary pledges from donors or commitments from colleagues who might be hedging on a key vote or on whom they might support for leadership.

Also not unusual: Pelosi did not miss the chance to take issue with a recent Chronicle story. In this case, it was a piece by senior political writer Joe Garofoli assessing the Democrats’ myriad problems and why some Democrats were questioning whether she was the right leader to pull them out of the mire.

“I thought your article, if I just may say, demonstrated a lack of knowledge of Washington and how it works, and what it is that we do there,” she said in her straight-ahead way.

To condense extended conversation to one paragraph, it appeared that Pelosi’s issues were with passages that Democrats were reduced mainly to playing defense in the GOP-controlled capital, that the party lacked a coherent message, that her signature accomplishments were seven years ago and that her distinguishing asset as party leader was her ability to raise money (“I am a master legislator.” ... “I consider myself a policy wonk,” she said at different points).

It’s noteworthy that Pelosi never raised her voice during her vigorous rebuttal to the story’s premises, and, as she often does, spoke of the importance of an independent press as she was leaving the office. I’ve experienced similar “Pelosi treatment” in the past, such as a January 2014 meeting when she dissected our editorial calling for the Presidio Trust to hold off approval of filmmaker George Lucas’ plans to build a museum on the grounds of the national park. Again, that meeting ended with Pelosi expressing her regard for journalists and their role in holding politicians like her accountable.

This is how it should work in civic discourse, whether between politician and journalist or between Democrat and Republican, or even within a party’s factions: disagree while appreciating our differing roles and values, and recognizing that the system is stronger because of these healthy tensions.

Speaking of which, Pelosi has long been a target for vilification by the right, and it’s hard to escape the feeling that it is due in part to her being a woman and being from a city that was in the forefront of gay rights. The disdainful references to “San Francisco values” in political advertising have become more subtle than when scenes from the Gay Pride Parade were employed to scare voters in the Bible Belt. But as Pelosi suggested, there was no missing the subliminal code in the sight of cable cars and the Golden Gate Bridge in ads such as the ones that were used against Democrat Jon Ossoff in the recent special election for a U.S. House seat in suburban Atlanta.

“LGBTQ,” she said.

Ossoff’s defeat was the fourth in a row for Democrats in special elections, leading some party members to grumble about the need for a changing of the guard at the top, as Garofoli detailed in his story. President Trump even tweeted that her ouster would be “very bad for the Republican party.” Similar discontent emerged after Democrats lost the House in 2010. It is rare for a speaker to remain as party leader when party control changes hands.

Yet Pelosi knows as well as anyone that the tides of American politics can shift abruptly and profoundly. Going into the 2008 elections, she envisioned her party on the brink of gaining a long-term majority, just as Republicans did in the Reagan era and even after the 2004 re-election of President George W. Bush. Pelosi had plenty of company in October in her certitude that a Hillary Clinton landslide would help lift Democratic congressional candidates nationwide.

An editorial board meeting never ends without Pelosi noting the plight of children in America — 1 in 5 lives in poverty — and everyone in the room convinced that her drive to address that issue has not wavered, nor has her determination to pursue it from the highest office in the U.S. House.

This time, however, she offered no predictions when asked who would be speaker in January 2019, after the midterm elections.

“We’ll have to see what happens,” she said.

Don’t bet against her leading the Democrats, either way.

John Diaz is The San Francisco Chronicle’s editorial page editor. Email: jdiaz@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @JohnDiazChron

Political prognostication can be precarious

Here is what House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has said in past meetings with The Chronicle Editorial Board:

June 2008

“We won in 2006 — that was step one. We couldn’t get what we wanted accomplished, especially on the war, because we didn’t have a Democratic president and the Republicans were obstructionists.”

Democrats will reclaim the White House in 2008 and “strengthen our majority” in Congress, she predicted. In 2010, “getting ready for redistricting,” Democrats pick up more seats. By 2012, Washington will be dominated by a “solid, confident, assured Democratic majority for a long time to come.”

The party, she said, will then frame the debate on issues such as health care, education and global warming.

“The stronger our majority, the more cooperation we’ll get from the Republicans. And then maybe it won’t matter anymore who’s in charge, because the American people will have made their views known.”

Outcome: Democrat Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008; two years later, Republicans gained 63 seats to reclaim control of the House, with the Democrats’ passage of the Affordable Care Act a major issue in many districts. Republicans regained control of the Senate in 2014.

October 2016

“No way, ain’t gonna happen,”

she said, refusing to engage a question about how she would deal with a Trump presidency.

As for the U.S. House of Representatives, she suggested Democrats would pick up 20 seats, possibly more depending on voter turnout and the magnitude of Hillary Clinton’s victory. “I’ve never seen a political situation where it’s so hard to handicap, because you just don’t know who will turn out and where.” Earlier in the month, she had told House Democrats in a conference call that the party would pick up the 30 seats required to retake control of the 435-member chamber — if the election were held that day.

Outcome: Trump won the presidency; the Democrats gained just six House seats.