Pros, Cons of Pelosi as Minority leader

There are definitely two sides to the argument. For one side the "San Francisco liberal" label that Pelosi had seemingly stitched onto the front of her jackets by the Republicans led, in part, to the GOP takeover that happened just a week ago. Her voting record and how often the incumbents voted with them was a potent point that brought down several Democrats. Mike Arcuri, the Democrat to be replaced in January by Richard Hanna was the result of attack ads like this. In a future 2012 environment where new blue dogs like Arcuri will be running for the same purple districts that were lost in 2010 the effects of having her once again to tie these candidates to might cause another upset. Of course this all depends on the political climate of the future which none of us can foresee as of now. With that as a possibility what might wonder why not replace her with a more moderate Democrat? People point to Pelosi's leadership of the caucus and her being a great speaker during her tenure but that does not mean there is no one else up for the job. Surely there is someone up for it like a James Clyburn or Steny Hoyer who are currently in a petty fight for caucus whip. So let me make an analogy to wrap things up, would it be easier to hunt a peacock or a snipe? Meaning Pelosi, an obvious target, or a moderate Dem, a bland and hard to hit target? The results of that remain to be seen as no one has stood up to challenge her thus far...