California Senate 2024 - Schiff (D) vs Garvey (R)

[Greedo punched first]

Also, I don’t believe Lee would be in office in 2034.

That's also the subtext here. Lee was reaching the expected retirement point for the house anyways. It's not hard to shake the impression that her campaign is just a fancy retirement option. From that perspective,  it makes prefect sense for her to want to be a placeholder.  But she already committed to the run and all that entails,  so the placeholder option that would make sense in isolation becomes an impossibility.

What I meant was Lee will probably die within a decade from Feinstein.

[President Johnson]

This is one of the most disgusting campaigns for senate I’ve ever seen. Barbara Lee should apologize on behalf of herself and her surrogates and drop out.

https://twitter.com/pramilajayapal/status/1707985811617063056?s=46&t=o2RmfeV...

I agree (with you, not Jayapal). Playing the race card here is kind of lame. Especially when you're already running for the seat and down in the polls. Yes, black women are badly underrepresented in the senate, but fortunately Democrats have at least two excellent candidates in 2024 that are strong favorites to win (Lisa Blunt Rochester and Angela Alsobrooks).

I wonder whether Newsom would consider someone like Jerry Brown as a placeholder. I saw an interview with him a few months ago and the guy is as mentally sharp as ever.

[Del Tachi]

I hope Weber gets appointed and runs herself.  Schiff, Porter and Lee are all pretty lame.

[President Johnson]

I hope Weber gets appointed and runs herself.  Schiff, Porter and Lee are all pretty lame.

Schiff has a national profile though and he triggers Trump. Even earned two nicknames from him.

[Aurelius2]

I hope Weber gets appointed and runs herself.  Schiff, Porter and Lee are all pretty lame.

Schiff has a national profile though and he triggers Trump. Even earned two nicknames from him.

Okay, and?

[brucejoel99]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/29/newsom-feinstein-senate-seat-appointment/

[...]

Newsom's task has been especially complex because several of the governor’s top potential candidates have been closely allied with Lee for many years and are now juggling high-profile jobs of their own. That includes newly elected Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, San Francisco Mayor London Breed and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who is viewed by many Democrats familiar with the deliberations as Newsom’s most likely choice.

Newsom's office declined to comment Friday about the process or the candidates he is considering, as they insisted that the governor wanted to keep the focus on Feinstein’s career as a "trailblazing senator," describing her in a statement as a "dear friend, lifelong mentor and role model of “what a powerful effective leader looks like."

But frustration was once again rising among liberals Friday that Lee would not get consideration even though she is one of the most experienced Black female leaders in the state. Newsom said recently to NBC News that he would not choose anyone currently running because he did not want to tilt the balance in the open-seat Senate race.

[...]

Newsom has closely guarded his list of potential appointees to Feinstein's seat, which has included some of California's highest-profile Black female lawmakers as well as civic and judicial leaders who will be virtually unknown to the state's voters. His office refused to comment on the list Friday, or the vetting process that he has undertaken, and insisted that he had not yet made his decision.

Along with Bass, Breed and Weber, other top candidates — including Los Angeles County Supervisor Holly Mitchell and Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove — have fielded concerns from Lee allies who believe she should not be passed over. Angela Glover Blackwell, an attorney and civil rights activist who is the founder-in-residence of the advocacy group PolicyLink, has also been mentioned as a possible pick, as well as Associate Justice Leondra R. Kruger, who serves on the Supreme Court of California. Blackwell and Kruger could not be reached for comment.

Though Mitchell is a close ally of Newsom who is viewed as a rising star within the party, Mitchell's aides previously told The Washington Post that she is fully committed to running for reelection in 2024 and "therefore would not accept an appointment to the Senate."

[...]

[Senator Incitatus]

The odds that the most qualified candidate for this appointment is someone holding office in California are infinitesimally small. Newsom should appoint a private citizen.

[brucejoel99]

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-09-29/who-newsom-appoint-to-fill-dianne-feinsteins-senate-term-what-we-know

The top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, Waters joined those calling on Newsom to appoint Lee.

"I'm a big supporter of Barbara Lee … who has identified herself as a very highly competent legislator, leader and organizer who has advanced progressive politics throughout her career. You can't find a better committed legislator than Barbara Lee," she said.

"I think there is no better person than Barbara Lee for Newsom to live up to his commitment to appoint a Black woman."

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He should

[Alben Barkley]

It was dumb for Newsom to box himself into picking a black woman after Padilla replaced Harris just like it was dumb for Biden to box himself into picking a black woman as his running mate in the first place. Democrats really gotta get over this diversity quota crap. Pick the best person for the job. It's almost insulting to black women actually to imply that couldn't possibly be them unless the job pool is narrowed down to only them. Of course, this all came out of the 2020-21 racial hysteria that does seem to have fortunately died down a little bit, but we still are living with the consequences.

Also now the idea, based on that stupid Tweet, apparently is that it's not good enough to pick a black woman as a placeholder, but they would ALSO cry if Newsom reneged and picked someone like Jerry Brown as a placeholder instead. God forbid Lee has to actually earn her seat. Anything but handing it to her on a silver platter is racism!

[Greedo punched first]

If Newsom appoints Shirley Weber or Malia Cohen, and the incumbent decides to run for a full term, with Schiff and Porter dropping out, I bet Lee decides to primary the incumbent, just like Kevin de Leon in 2018.

[Horus]

I hope Weber gets appointed and runs herself.  Schiff, Porter and Lee are all pretty lame.

Schiff has a national profile though and he triggers Trump. Even earned two nicknames from him.

Right, because the number one attribute we should be looking for in a candidate is whether they trigger the people we dislike *insert eyeroll*

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

The funny thing is that I think Lee would've been a shoo-in appointment if she hadn't started her campaign months ago. But she got way too greedy way too early and now her whole camp sound like petulant children.

[Mr. Smith]

The funny thing is that I think Lee would've been a shoo-in appointment if she hadn't started her campaign months ago. But she got way too greedy way too early and now her whole camp sound like petulant children.

With London Breed right there? Fat chance.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/Erika_D_Smith/status/1708234887034257708

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

At this point he should just appoint Schiff as a f*** you to Lee.

[Aurelius2]

"This sisterhood of support could crack if Newsom were to offer more than an interim appointment."

Newsom does not have the power to offer "more than an interim appointment". We have this thing called democracy, and there's an election in a year.

[Kung Fu Kenny]

I’m really disappointed in the way that Lee and her surrogates have treated a potential appointment. It was always clear that Newsom would not appoint a current candidate no matter who it was, and for Lee to treat that like it’s a race thing is lame. I prefer Porter but respect Lee a lot—both have done things to leave sour tastes in my mouth.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I really don’t get the hate for Lee. Newsom said he would appoint a black woman, but not a candidate for Senate. He said he would appoint a black woman in a bold face pander now the chickens are coming home to roost. There aren’t many black women in CA politics, and most of them had already lined up to support Lee in her actually campaign, so it makes sense they want her to be appointed. He’s trapped himself in a paradox and is getting called out for making promises he can’t keep.

This is what politics is, Lee’s supporters aren’t acting abnormal, especially when what’s at stake is a senate seat that’s yours for as long as you want it in the nation’s most populated state.

[Greedo punched first]

If Lee is elected, there's a very high risk of death in office within a decade. The last time this happened was when W. Kerr Scott from North Carolina died.

[MargieCat]

It was dumb for Newsom to box himself into picking a black woman after Padilla replaced Harris just like it was dumb for Biden to box himself into picking a black woman as his running mate in the first place. Democrats really gotta get over this diversity quota crap. Pick the best person for the job. It's almost insulting to black women actually to imply that couldn't possibly be them unless the job pool is narrowed down to only them. Of course, this all came out of the 2020-21 racial hysteria that does seem to have fortunately died down a little bit, but we still are living with the consequences.

Also now the idea, based on that stupid Tweet, apparently is that it's not good enough to pick a black woman as a placeholder, but they would ALSO cry if Newsom reneged and picked someone like Jerry Brown as a placeholder instead. God forbid Lee has to actually earn her seat. Anything but handing it to her on a silver platter is racism!

I agree. I thought it was a gaffe when Newsom said his next appointment would be a Black woman.

And he said it long before Diane Feinstein died.

If I were him, I would have said that I don't expect an appointment to open up and dodged the question.

[Хahar 🤔]

I really don’t get the hate for Lee. Newsom said he would appoint a black woman, but not a candidate for Senate. He said he would appoint a black woman in a bold face pander now the chickens are coming home to roost. There aren’t many black women in CA politics, and most of them had already lined up to support Lee in her actually campaign, so it makes sense they want her to be appointed. He’s trapped himself in a paradox and is getting called out for making promises he can’t keep.

This is what politics is, Lee’s supporters aren’t acting abnormal, especially when what’s at stake is a senate seat that’s yours for as long as you want it in the nation’s most populated state.

There's a committed core of posters here who hate Barbara Lee and want Katie Porter to win and are always looking to seize on anything they can to criticize Lee and get supporters. If you've been reading this thread, then you know who they are; the most obvious example is jdb. This is stylistically equivalent to the criticism that you would see from Elizabeth Warren supporters of Bernie Sanders and his supporters. (Schiff's appeal is to cable news viewers, which is why his supporters are essentially absent from this forum.)

Beyond that, I think that what I said before still applies:

I think people in this thread are failing to think like Democrats. I imagine that nobody here actually thinks it's important that a black woman hold one of California's senatorial seats, but there are obviously a lot of Democrats (and not just black women) who are sympathetic to this line of argument. If you do believe that it's specifically important to have a black woman in the Senate in recognition of the work that black women have done to save the soul of America, then obviously it's not sufficient to just have a token placeholder who will be replaced come next election. That wouldn't accomplish anything and it would be an insult to the black women of America to think that they wouldn't deserve any more than a placeholder.

The identity-based argument for Barbara Lee doesn't appeal to anybody on this forum. It doesn't appeal to me, either, and I plan to vote for Lee for policy reasons. The problem is that people in this thread are taking their distaste for that argument and assuming that it is universal: that large numbers of voters will both care about this and react in the same way that they are. I think that both of these are incorrect. We know that identity politics has very strong appeal within the Democratic electorate. We also know that, based on polls, most voters are not thinking about this race at all, let alone following minor events such as this one. In practice, this is unlikely to swing any significant number of votes.

Arguments that Barbara Lee has somehow alienated the Democratic establishment also appear to me to be backwards thinking, an attempt to find a justification for the conclusion that this must be bad for her. What I see is prominent established Democrats like Maxine Waters and Ro Khanna being the ones calling for Lee to be appointed to the senate. What exactly is the establishment supposed to be if these people aren't part of it?

[Greedo punched first]

Maxine Waters voted for Feinstein in 2018. Ro Khanna voted for de Leon. The only establishment House Democrats to vote for de Leon in 2018 were Jimmy Gomez and Lou Correa.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I really don’t get the hate for Lee. Newsom said he would appoint a black woman, but not a candidate for Senate. He said he would appoint a black woman in a bold face pander now the chickens are coming home to roost. There aren’t many black women in CA politics, and most of them had already lined up to support Lee in her actually campaign, so it makes sense they want her to be appointed. He’s trapped himself in a paradox and is getting called out for making promises he can’t keep.

This is what politics is, Lee’s supporters aren’t acting abnormal, especially when what’s at stake is a senate seat that’s yours for as long as you want it in the nation’s most populated state.

There's a committed core of posters here who hate Barbara Lee and want Katie Porter to win and are always looking to seize on anything they can to criticize Lee and get supporters. If you've been reading this thread, then you know who they are; the most obvious example is jdb. This is stylistically equivalent to the criticism that you would see from Elizabeth Warren supporters of Bernie Sanders and his supporters. (Schiff's appeal is to cable news viewers, which is why his supporters are essentially absent from this forum.)

Beyond that, I think that what I said before still applies:

I think people in this thread are failing to think like Democrats. I imagine that nobody here actually thinks it's important that a black woman hold one of California's senatorial seats, but there are obviously a lot of Democrats (and not just black women) who are sympathetic to this line of argument. If you do believe that it's specifically important to have a black woman in the Senate in recognition of the work that black women have done to save the soul of America, then obviously it's not sufficient to just have a token placeholder who will be replaced come next election. That wouldn't accomplish anything and it would be an insult to the black women of America to think that they wouldn't deserve any more than a placeholder.

The identity-based argument for Barbara Lee doesn't appeal to anybody on this forum. It doesn't appeal to me, either, and I plan to vote for Lee for policy reasons. The problem is that people in this thread are taking their distaste for that argument and assuming that it is universal: that large numbers of voters will both care about this and react in the same way that they are. I think that both of these are incorrect. We know that identity politics has very strong appeal within the Democratic electorate. We also know that, based on polls, most voters are not thinking about this race at all, let alone following minor events such as this one. In practice, this is unlikely to swing any significant number of votes.

Arguments that Barbara Lee has somehow alienated the Democratic establishment also appear to me to be backwards thinking, an attempt to find a justification for the conclusion that this must be bad for her. What I see is prominent established Democrats like Maxine Waters and Ro Khanna being the ones calling for Lee to be appointed to the senate. What exactly is the establishment supposed to be if these people aren't part of it?

I’m not supporting Porter, but thanks for playing

That said, Lee is an irrelevant third wheel at this point.  There would be no reason for Porter supporters to punch down by talking about her tbh.  I think your bias in favor of Lee is clouding your analysis of the race a bit.

[Greedo punched first]

What are the odds that Lee will be alive a decade from now? I fear a Willis Smith/W. Kerr Scott scenario.