Pelosi has been a reactionary leader. (Hard to the use word 'leader' after reactionary.) Its not that she needs to force 200 people to see her way, its that in this time in history that great leaders are born and rise to inspire hope and movement and make hard choices for the future. (She has done nether)
I can't think of a period in history where the Speaker of the House led the nation out of a crisis. I can barely think of an instance where the Speaker focused the public on any particular important issue. Maybe a few times a few Senators have risen to the occasion. But the place most people look to for leadership is the president, not the legislature. And our system just seems ill-designed to fill a leadership gap when the president is unwilling or incapable of rallying the public.
I'd bet a substantial portion of the public can't even name the Speaker of the House, much less have any understanding of the current risk to the national economy. Nor is there any time to educate people on the crisis even if they were interested (which, I'd guess, many are not).
The priority was to get a deal done. It appears to be done (again). Given that the Speaker's position does not appear to be one that lends itself to national "leadership" capacity and the urgency of just getting a solution, it seems to me that she's done what was needed in a difficult time, as have many of her colleagues of both parties. I think it's hard to do or expect much more than that, especially when power is so divided not only between the executive and legislative branches but within the legislature.
Sure, I would have liked more lofty rhetoric and an appeal to our sense of the common good. (And though there were some partisan attacks, there was also a lot of talk about bipartisanship.) But given the difficulty of the situation, I'm impressed that a deal has gotten done and done quickly (assuming it doesn't fall apart again).