nt

Nice

Just an old senator past her retirement date.

She was my senator for most of my adult life until I moved to Canada, so it’s not like I’m just shit posting.

Leaks from DiFi’s own aides portray her as feeble and demented.

She will be 91 in 2024.

Now, Katie Porter? That’s a leader.

that ARE democracy itself to be desirable? To make democracy possible?

Even if a majority chooses to retain a senator whose memory requires jogging by assistants? Acceptance of the necessity and sacred principles of plurality, and of the rule of majorities formed by compromising alliances, is absolutely critical to democracy. Imperfect as it is.

(Btw, minority factions that don't commit to the basic democratic principle of respecting/accepting the will of the majority are defined by political scientists as anti-democratic. It's a very basic thing.)

Fwiw, worrying about Feinstein, her PROFESSIONAL-level staff in DC alone includes several dozen top-level experts in all aspects of government, various felds of policy, legislation, issue positions, legal and ethical issues, negotiators capable of guiding national and international agreements with others of their level, etc, etc. The rest of a party's senate caucus and a senator's staff have a lavish abundance of top-quality memory joggers, and the makeup and very deliberative nature of the senate means they normally have lavish time to do the job. Far from ideal, but this isn't the first time electorates have kept memory-failing senators in office.

As for Katie Porter, before we elect her to the senate (!), shouldn't we check out the admiration expressed for her by people who do not vote for Democrats and openly advocate for bringing down not just a possibly past-her-expiration Feinstein, but the rest of her colleagues? I'm not talking about people who criticize but reliably vote Democrat, but those who don't, among them a few who've even openly put their own political identities on the line by advocating refusing to vote for Democrats. I've read statements claiming Porter for one of their own, though not from her. But what's that about? Shouldn't we know these things before considering giving anyone enormous power? No buyer's remorse allowed, remember.

Btw, with her absence of record of achievement, multiple mistakes in her short time in office and failure to match other newcomers for leadership potential, I'm bumfuzzled as to how could anyone could just assume Porter could be even partially as competent as a failing Feinstein -- in 2024 yet. I liked her once, a lot, before she disappointed me, but always require performance. Fact-based belief, not faith.

She is a strong progressive, although not as far to the left as, say, AOC.

I don’t really care if someone you don’t like has “expressed admiration” for her.

Porter’s work speaks for itself.

As senator, she wouldn’t become another Sinema, nor would she turn into a Tulsi Gabbard.

but because since she's there I won't give up hope she could be the person I once thought she might be. She's no clueless kid, though -- she's 48! What we've seen might well indicate the limits of her ability. Or be a stumbling beginning to a great career that ends with her being carried out 50 years later at 98.

All deserve to move up to the Senate. If she wins, they're not going to want to potentially lose her seat. However, if she does lose, I could see her making a play. I mean, DiFi needs to retire at the end of her term. She's been great, but it's time to move aside for a new generation.

She's not fit entirely well in the house Democratic caucus with Swallwell, which many feel is good of course, but it'd be much the same in the senate, where she'd have more independent power to disrupt the senate agenda if she chose. We've seen that power exercised recently.

She's very talented, of courses. I like her as one of 435 colleagues in the house as long as her constituents choose to return her to office.

That all three of them are outstanding House members from California that I'd like to see step up to the Senate. But, I'm in Maryland, so I have no say in the matter.

at very different levels of power and achievement, and respect earned from those who know them. Different categories. He's proven leadership, and if he runs for senator I'll wish I could vote for him.

She's among 400 or so members with very little. What the movers and shakers in and out of government think of her matters, incredibly more than what CSPAN viewers do, and at this point in her career the reality is that they really don't. Maybe someday.

She's extremely talented, but a problem to her advancement may be whatever's exciting admiration for her from the sorts of LW groups who love Democratic train wrecks. It's certainly a red flag, but hopefully she'll manage a course correction that raises her status among her colleagues and lowers it with those others.

I'm a major fan!

Sadly, she was redistricted this year and is no longer my House Rep, so would love to vote for her as Senator.

I highly doubt she stands for re-election. She has had her time and done an outstanding job throughout her political career. I will never forget her coming forward to lead San Francisco in the wake of the murders of George Moscone and Harvey Milk.

Katie Porter would make a very fine Senator for CA.

My only qualm--one I expressed in another thread--is my belief that her House district (which I know well) would return to the Republicans (it has historically been a deep-Red district).

Katie Porter is exceptional, and even this time her victory is uncertain.

Should she win and then seek to run for Senate we need to know that CA 47 will almost certainly go Red. And that's a high cost. So I'm conflicted.

but Gov Newsom has already stated he'd choose a black woman as Feinstein's replacement.

tons of votes still uncounted, might not know for weeks. Sen. Feinstein endorsed Bass. IF Bass turned out to be free, I'm wondering if Feinstein might retire ahead of 2024 to enable a Bass appointment. Way too many ifs and wonders, of course.

Feinstein's replacement. I don't see Dianne running for another term.

I do hope she finishes her current term.

And I do hope Feinstein will not run again.
If she makes it to the General though, I must give her my vote.

All that said, I’d prefer right now that Katie keeps her seat.

this is a response to #17, above. Feinstein did file with the FEC to run in 2024However, I would think anyone would get the paperwork in, and actually decide about running later. After seeing Nancy Pelosi kicking ass in recent years, I would hope that any ageism would be evaporating. Not to mention Biden's performance. They are the right people at the right time. I remember being thrilled when Feinstein came to the Senate in 1992. I hope that if Senator Feinstein's time is coming to an end, she makes that decision for herself and not due to any outside pressure.

This statement was released by her office:

“To be clear, Senator Feinstein has had a campaign committee since she took office, as all senators must. In order to keep this account active, the senator has to maintain filings with the FEC. Yesterday’s filings merely reflected an updated address.”

I don't think anyone should look at that filing as an "intention" to run. I feel like I'm amongst Dianne Feinstein's biggest fans, and I can't imagine her making another run.

I would love her to be our Senator and eventually a Presidential run. She is great. In the Senate, I would put her on the Finance Committee then eventually she chairs it.

I thought Feinstein needed to retire last time, so it's good to look ahead.

I'm not sure who would run in a primary here, but I'm open to seeing who runs. I think of the names being bandied about, I'd be least enthusiastic about Schiff. The man just grates on me for some reason.

Are you aware of how his political career is faring at this moment?

De Leon only ran because other established figures in the state didn't want to waste their time (or party good will) running against someone as respected as Feinstein. She got a lot of deference.

Had that been an open primary, I doubt De Leon would even be a top two candidate, because the heavies would've waded in.

But yes, agreed. The man has been yikes since that election.

who could have defeated De Leon. Quite possible.

But he had significant support in some quarters.

Which was a little significant, but not that significant. In a D vs. D general, it wasn't going to be close.

The primary was even less interesting. De Leon only managed 12% which is only a fourth of what Feinstein got. Meanwhile over in "Who?" territory, every unknown Republican on God's earth ran and diluted the votes. Had they coalesced behind anyone - anyone at all - they'd have had a candidate in the general.

It's just been kind of acknowledged as her seat until whenever.

over Feinstein, despite that going against the electoral preferences of Democratic Party voters.

Not a great moment in our party's history here in CA from my perspective.

That was amusing.

But I'm very against accumulation of power. I don't like it when people just continue on for decades in a democracy. The system is heavily stacked in favor of incumbents. I don't think it's healthy. I think a lot of our problems stem from this permanent legislative class who control money, favors, and contracts to the donor class, and get put into office for as long as they want in return. There's not a lot of impetus for change or evolution.

So after awhile, I'll vote against whomever because it's time for someone else.

And I know that is really not a popular view in this space.

Nancy Pelosi changed my opinion on that following the last 2 elections. Probably for good.

and they tend to understand how the mechanisms of government work. While those who are new to positions typically do not.

In the latter case, the neophytes are typically dependent on aides, bureaucrats, and lobbying organizations to fill-in for their lack of experience.

I agree that the system is heavily stacked in favor of incumbents, but not sure that's always a bad thing.

The faction who got control of the state party refused to recognize, or care, that California Democrats didn't want what they did. De Leon even lost his own district to Feinstein.

A lesson that what a majority of voters want needs to be considered. On the plus side, their choices for who to represent them are SUPPOSED to win.

De Leon's currently, of course, one of the LA city councilmen being called on to resign after their racist comments and racist power plots to stack the electoral deck against the choices of non-Hispanic citizens were leaked.

CA native here, living in the nirtheast now, so I pay attention but not too closely.

https://calmatters.org/commentary/2022/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-careerist-kevin-de-leon/

Summary from article - "Kevin de León, an extraordinarily ambitious politician, is now facing demands that he end his career due to participation in a political meeting with racist overtones."

involving 3 sitting LA Councilpersons here in LA, where contemptibly racist statements were tossed around.

I listened to the entire thing in hopes that "context might mitigate some of the worst statements.

Sadly, listening to the whole thing made it all more tawdry.

Nuri Martinez resigned almost immediately, while De Leon and Gil Cedillo (a lame-duck who was already voted out) are refusing to step down.

It has been a sad development for Democrats in LA.

that the scandal was greatly overblown. It wasn't. They were betraying their duty to the people of Los Angeles by plotting to depower non-Hispanic demographics through gerrymandering.

Sad development for Democrats for sure. At least he's very unlikely to ever be elected to the U.S. senate. As a Democrat anyway.

... he'd pee himself.

Same with a lot of those turds.

She's make a great President.

I would love to see her there.