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

[patzer]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

[Blair]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

Schiff has £32 million in the bank and very high ID- why drop out when he’s virtually nailed into getting in the final two?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

Schiff has £32 million in the bank and very high ID- why drop out when he’s virtually nailed into getting in the final two?

He won't win, Caruso had that type of money and lost Feinstein Death is a game changer because he was getting sympathy from McCarthy censured, but. now it's sympathy from Feinstein female death

It's a runoff anyways , he may make the runoff like Caruso but fail in GE because minorities and women, Latina women swing towards Bass over Caruso and will do so again

[Pheurton Skeurto]

I honestly don’t think Butler runs for a full term (unless she has already said otherwise and I haven’t seen)—she strikes me more as a caretaker choice who will return to her work after her term with a much higher profile and even greater donor connections. If she does run for a full term, I would understand why but she strikes me more as an advocate than a legislator.

[Unbeatable Titan Susan Collins]

Never thought I'd see an appointed Senator with residency issues. This whole thing was really a mess of Newsome's own making.

[Roronoa D. Law]

Never thought I'd see an appointed Senator with residency issues. This whole thing was really a mess of Newsome's own making.

Can't be any worse than Tubberville or Hawley

[Zedonathin2020]

I honestly don’t think Butler runs for a full term (unless she has already said otherwise and I haven’t seen)—she strikes me more as a caretaker choice who will return to her work after her term with a much higher profile and even greater donor connections. If she does run for a full term, I would understand why but she strikes me more as an advocate than a legislator.

Yeah, this gives me Delaware and Massachusetts vibes

Butler = Kaufman and Cowan

Porter, Schiff and/or Lee = Coons and Markey

[Atlas Force]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

[patzer]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

Schiff has £32 million in the bank and very high ID- why drop out when he’s virtually nailed into getting in the final two?

What's he even going to campaign on? "I'm a mainstream Democrat like the incumbent but I'm also a white man"?
Funding doesn't mean anything if there's no reason for voters to go for you– imo the final two will be Butler and a Republican

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

Schiff has £32 million in the bank and very high ID- why drop out when he’s virtually nailed into getting in the final two?

What's he even going to campaign on? "I'm a mainstream Democrat like the incumbent but I'm also a white man"?
Funding doesn't mean anything if there's no reason for voters to go for you– imo the final two will be Butler and a Republican

Schiff can point to being an anti-Trump attack dog. I’m also doubtful that a Republican will make the top two. Who’s even running on the GOP side?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

The voters used to not be so friendly to appointed Senators. A California Democrat even lost in the 1964 landslide.

[President Johnson]

I honestly don’t think Butler runs for a full term (unless she has already said otherwise and I haven’t seen)—she strikes me more as a caretaker choice who will return to her work after her term with a much higher profile and even greater donor connections. If she does run for a full term, I would understand why but she strikes me more as an advocate than a legislator.

Agreed. What also speaks for a placeholder is - as has been raised by another poster - the narrow majority in the senate should usually require a senator to be present in DC for most of the time. Butler would have to campaign through a large state and probably miss important votes as Feinstein did for other reasons.

[President Johnson]

Might be jumping the gun a bit but I'll say now that the race is probably over. Butler has had several high profile roles, is fairly young but not too young, and has no reason not to run for re-election.

And the campaigns of Schiff, Porter, and Lee are designed as campaigns for an empty senate seat. They're not remotely designed as campaigns for challenging an incumbent senator who's a well-qualified mainstream Democrat with plenty of experience in Californian politics and a lesbian black woman.

They'd all probably be best off dropping out and running for re-election to their House seats– maintaining Senate campaigns just wouldn't look good in the new circumstances

Schiff has £32 million in the bank and very high ID- why drop out when he’s virtually nailed into getting in the final two?

What's he even going to campaign on? "I'm a mainstream Democrat like the incumbent but I'm also a white man"?
Funding doesn't mean anything if there's no reason for voters to go for you– imo the final two will be Butler and a Republican

Schiff can point to being an anti-Trump attack dog. I’m also doubtful that a Republican will make the top two. Who’s even running on the GOP side?

I completely agree. Schiff even holds the distinction of having earned two nicknames from Trump ("Shifty Schiff" and "Pencil Neck"). If I were on his campaign staff, I'd even recommend to use them on bumper stickers.

[Minnesota Mike]

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1708817357198495754

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Caruso raised a lot too, and he lost we will have to wait till the primary it's a Runoff

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/ReshadHudson/status/1708881648786329734https://twitter.com/ayannapressley/status/1708954826259009746

[Mr. Smith]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

The voters used to not be so friendly to appointed Senators. A California Democrat even lost in the 1964 landslide.

That was the first high profile actor to run for office, not a fair example.

Ironically, and more appropriately, the one Feinstein beat was an appointee.

[Del Tachi]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

Interesting.  I never noticed until now that Mississippi is the one state where both of its senators were initially appointed (that is, until Butler is sworn in later this week.) 

This streak is actually longer that you would think, too, as Thad Cochran technically also joined the senate via an appointment (he won an election in 1978, and got to start his term early after James Eastland resigned in December.  Eastland's retirement was to give Cochran a seniority advantage over the large 1978 senate class, which I'm surprised hasn't become a more common gimmick in the years' since.) 

[MichaelRbn]

I think the rules have been changed since then to eliminate just this type of gamesmanship among newly elected senators.

[Greedo punched first]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

The voters used to not be so friendly to appointed Senators. A California Democrat even lost in the 1964 landslide.

That was the first high profile actor to run for office, not a fair example.

Ironically, and more appropriately, the one Feinstein beat was an appointee.

Because the appointee supported Clarence Thomas.

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1708865281110454759

Interesting.  I never noticed until now that Mississippi is the one state where both of its senators were initially appointed (that is, until Butler is sworn in later this week.) 

This streak is actually longer that you would think, too, as Thad Cochran technically also joined the senate via an appointment (he won an election in 1978, and got to start his term early after James Eastland resigned in December.  Eastland's retirement was to give Cochran a seniority advantage over the large 1978 senate class, which I'm surprised hasn't become a more common gimmick in the years' since.) 

I think the rules have been changed since then to eliminate just this type of gamesmanship among newly elected senators.

That would make sense; I saw that a number of the Californian senators did that back in the 60s and 70s.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/meridak/status/1709212656136081841?t=PwsRJFMyNTk1JtupLMhqwg&...

This tells me that she is not running,  and Newsom picked a DC insider to do a DC job for a few months. This is because filing deadlines are fast approaching for the March primary.  She is a hypothetical candidate with no name recognition, already-uncovered potential election weaknesses,  and all opponents have lots of money in a expensive state where millions of voters need to be in your corner to win. If she was running, it would have to start now, and hard. Delay in this situation is the same as no.

[Atlas Force]

https://twitter.com/meridak/status/1709212656136081841?t=PwsRJFMyNTk1JtupLMhqwg&...

This tells me that she is not running,  and Newsom picked a DC insider to do a DC job for a few months. This is because filing deadlines are fast approaching for the March primary.  She is a hypothetical candidate with no name recognition, already-uncovered potential election weaknesses,  and all opponents have lots of money in a expensive state where millions of voters need to be in your corner to win. If she was running, it would have to start now, and hard. Delay in this situation is the same as no.

Also, time spent campaigning (which she would have to do a LOT of to improve her name recognition in such a gigantic state) is time spent not showing up in DC, which is a pretty big deal considering that she is serving in a closely-divided Senate where Dems need every vote they can get.

[patzer]

This tells me that she is not running,  and Newsom picked a DC insider to do a DC job for a few months. This is because filing deadlines are fast approaching for the March primary.  She is a hypothetical candidate with no name recognition, already-uncovered potential election weaknesses, and all opponents have lots of money in a expensive state where millions of voters need to be in your corner to win. If she was running, it would have to start now, and hard. Delay in this situation is the same as no.

I don't think it's surprising that she hasn't decided for certain yet given it's a big decision to have to make within three days of first hearing that you were even considered for the position.

But as for the name recognition and funding points, it would be silly to dismiss the big advantage of being the incumbent Senator, which is instant name recognition even if she didn't have that a week ago. Not to mention that she is quite experienced in fundraising.

[coloradocowboi]

https://twitter.com/meridak/status/1709212656136081841?t=PwsRJFMyNTk1JtupLMhqwg&...

This tells me that she is not running,  and Newsom picked a DC insider to do a DC job for a few months. This is because filing deadlines are fast approaching for the March primary.  She is a hypothetical candidate with no name recognition, already-uncovered potential election weaknesses,  and all opponents have lots of money in a expensive state where millions of voters need to be in your corner to win. If she was running, it would have to start now, and hard. Delay in this situation is the same as no.

The Black community has already lined up behind Barbara Lee. Labor has also already began picking its sides. Progressives will hate her work for Uber and Lyft and establishmentarians are already behind Schiff. She seems like a smart politico and probably sees the tea leaves as plain as day: at best she will just keep another Black woman from a fair shot at the Senate. I don’t see how she breaks out of the top 2 without a massive infusion of cash, which also leaves her vulnerable.

People here seem to forget this is a primary electorate that gave Bernie and Warren a combined 60% of the vote too. I wouldn’t assume voters are interested in a more moderate, corporate friendly Black woman. And those that are will be enamored by MSNBC darling Adam Schiff. Sen. Butler probably doesn’t have many viable paths to get re-elected without veering to the left or going full scorched earth on the other progressives, which carries its own risks.