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

[Left Wing]

Is anyone who doesn't vote for Lee going to be called an "evil fascist DINO" these days? If it's Porter or Schiff vs, a Republican, Democrats should vote GOP out of spite?

Indeed.

[I’m not Stu]

Is anyone who doesn't vote for Lee going to be called an "evil fascist DINO" these days? If it's Porter or Schiff vs, a Republican, Democrats should vote GOP out of spite?

Indeed.

You'd rather vote for Garden Grove mayor Steve Jones (R, Glenn Youngkin type Republican), former Assemblyman Travis Allen (R, far-right pervert), or Young Kim (R, extreme homophobe) (if one of them runs) than for Adam Schiff (D) or Katie Porter (D)?

[PPT Spiral]

It gets worse:

https://twitter.com/michaelarria/status/1633174480141918209

Warrenites, man.

[I’m not Stu]

Is one who votes for Porter or Schiff necessarily a “bad” person, even though both are to the left of Feinstein?

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

It gets worse:

https://twitter.com/michaelarria/status/1633174480141918209
Warrenites, man.

Democrats of the Elizabeth Warren school of thought are the worst. Not only are they pretending to be progressives, they are TERRIBLY politically and come off as extremely unappealing to average voters.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

It gets worse:

https://twitter.com/michaelarria/status/1633174480141918209
Warrenites, man.

Democrats of the Elizabeth Warren school of thought are the worst. Not only are they pretending to be progressives, they are TERRIBLY politically and come off as extremely unappealing to average voters.

Who is an average voter?

[I’m not Stu]

It gets worse:

https://twitter.com/michaelarria/status/1633174480141918209
Warrenites, man.

Democrats of the Elizabeth Warren school of thought are the worst. Not only are they pretending to be progressives, they are TERRIBLY politically and come off as extremely unappealing to average voters.

Who is an average voter?

I think “average voter” is being used as a code for DSA types who frequently vote third party (Green/Peace and Freedom).

[coloradocowboi]

It gets worse:

https://twitter.com/michaelarria/status/1633174480141918209
Warrenites, man.

Democrats of the Elizabeth Warren school of thought are the worst. Not only are they pretending to be progressives, they are TERRIBLY politically and come off as extremely unappealing to average voters.

Who is an average voter?

I think “average voter” is being used as a code for DSA types who frequently vote third party (Green/Peace and Freedom).

It’s actually the opposite. Elizabeth Warren and Katie are appealing to intellectual, high earning democrats, well mostly the white ones. Meanwhile Bernie was cleaning up with union households and lower income people. What I suspect is that is who is being referenced.

Average here means closer to the majority, I presume, so less ideological/intellectual and more poor. And from a data based perspective it’s true. Even this bizarre LGBTQ inclusive Likud stuff is evidence that Katie doesn’t really understand anybody but wealthy, neoliberal woke types who don’t really care about what is happening in Palestine and can easily be convinced to support it as long as it’s LGBTQ troops pulling Palestinian mothers out of their homes. She’s going for the rainbow imperialist vote, which makes sense cuz it’s actually prolly a lot of people in Laguna Beach and Newport in her district who are like that. But literally nowhere else in CA bedsides maybe wealthy parts of SD cares that there are gay people in Likud… except maybe Arab  communities here in LA and the Bay who might honestly think her bizarre association with that is a reason not to vote for Katie Porter lol

[Minnesota Mike]

Democrats of the Elizabeth Warren school of thought are the worst. Not only are they pretending to be progressives, they are TERRIBLY politically and come off as extremely unappealing to average voters.

No offense but how much does a 17 year old from Australia know about what appeals to the average American voter?

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

How is this disqualifying? Most Democrats have supported Israel’s government for decades. Why is suddenly not OK to support Netanyahu now, but it was 10 years ago?

Because he left the realm of regular democratic leaders and entered the realm of Orbans with the new "reform", which she's legitimizing here.

Apparently she still thinks she's dealing with the same old center-right but democratic leader Bibi from when Obama and Trump were president. Schiff, who you'd expect to be to her right on this, criticized him.

Heck, even Bloomberg of all people is starting to come out against him.

I just keep getting amateur hour vibes from Katie Porter. A lot of progressive politicians do this: pivot hard to Zionism as a cheap way to become centrist. The problem is that most Zionist voters aren't die-hard Bibi Netanyahu fans and Adam Schiff has endless cred on this issue and IIRC is also Jewish. The only people I can even imagine this pleasing or placating are hard-right Orthodox and Conservative Jewish people who probably wouldn't vote for any Democrat least of all Katie Porter lol

My prediction is that Katie is gonna spend the most money in the campaign but wildly vacillate on her brand and issue positions in search of an audience. This is exactly how Elizabeth Warren's presidential campaign also went down. It's telling that Katie should be the undisputed frontrunner but has less establishment support than a corporate puppet and former "cop" despised by the left and right and an 80-year-old former Black Panther socialist from Oakland. The opinion polls are meaningless rn, basically barometers of "do you know who this is?" I don't see this getting any better for Katie Porter, and it's kinda a bummer to me now that she won't hold her OC house seat.

Eh Katie has less establishment support not because of ideology but because California state politics is very much its own machine and rewards those who have invested in it. Her opponents both have connections and reputations stretching back decades hitting different levers of power in different parts of the state.

Porter is essentially the outsider in this race in a very practical sense.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

And just like that Porter becomes my least favorite Democratic Senate candidate. This type of dangerous, misinformed rhetoric is the last thing we need from a U.S. Senator. Before commenting on this issue she needs to understand the vast difference between the US and Israel. This is disqualifying imo - she's just casually promoting the end of democracy in another country.

https://twitter.com/Ian_Gay_briel/status/1633228672772591618?s=20

And just like that Porter becomes my least favorite Democratic Senate candidate. This type of dangerous, misinformed rhetoric is the last thing we need from a U.S. Senator. Before commenting on this issue she needs to understand the vast difference between the US and Israel. This is disqualifying imo - she's just casually promoting the end of democracy in another country.

https://twitter.com/Ian_Gay_briel/status/1633228672772591618?s=20

God d*** it!  Well, I can’t in good conscience support Porter anymore; I agree that this should be disqualifying.  Not that the average voter will care, but yikes!

How is this disqualifying? Most Democrats have supported Israel’s government for decades. Why is suddenly not OK to support Netanyahu now, but it was 10 years ago?

A few things:

1) Being pro-Israel =/= being pro-Netanyahu.  In fact, I'm pretty sure most Jewish-Americans don't like him and haven't since at least the 90s (if ever).    

2) Netanyahu has been an unpopular figure among Democrats in general since at least the Obama era.  There has (rightly) been decades of support for Israel's right to defend itself against a brutal campaign of Palestinian terrorism that deliberately targeted innocent Israeli civilians and repeated, unprovoked foreign invasions.  There has also (rightly) been decades of support for Israel over the Palestinians.  Israel has historically been an unambiguously democratic country that, again historically speaking, worked tirelessly to achieve peace to no avail with the Palestinians even rejecting being offered their own country.

3) What has changed is that Netanyahu (always one of the most notable villains on the Israeli side) has in the past ten years or so shifted from being a corrupt racist demagogue who would hopefully prove to be an aberration in the big scheme of things (which was still awful, but could be waited out, especially with the legal net seemingly closing in on him during his previous term) to an aspiring dictator actively working to turn Israel from a democracy into an authoritarian state.  

Folks like Parrotguy and I aren't pissed at Porter b/c she's "pro-Israel" (and again, I'd argue that you can't be both pro-Israel and pro-Netanyahu at once anymore than you can be both pro-Trump and pro-American democracy post-1/6; the two are simply mutually exclusive at this point), we're pissed because of her casual support for turning a democracy into an authoritarian state.  That she singled out his so-called "judicial reform" for praise is especially alarming.  She's supporting turning a country that has always unambiguously been a democracy into a country ruled by an Orban-style right-wing, racist authoritarian regime (except...you know...with nukes).  This is completely disqualifying.

4) That Porter seems to think Likud is pro-LGBT rights just because they have a gay friend demonstrates a truly remarkable level of (willful?) ignorance.  Netanyahu's finance minister is genocidal Jewish supremacist lunatic Bezalel "I'm a proud homophobe" Smotrich of "I’m a fascist homophobe, but I’m a man of my word.  I won’t stone gays" fame for f***'s sake.

[I’m not Stu]

If it's a Katie Porter or Adam Schiff vs some Republican runoff, I'm expecting to see the many "Atlas Democrats endorsing the GOP candidate out of spite" be very vocal.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Schiff has the advantage now

[Holmes]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

[I’m not Stu]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

What are the differences between Porter's base and Lee's base?

[Tekken_Guy]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

Schiff is the candidate of wealthy establishment liberals. He’d crush Lee in SoCal as she’s too economically left for a lot of those voters, and so is Porter in Silicon Valley.

[I’m not Stu]

When will the first Survey USA poll be released?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The reason why Schiff has the advantage we need fighters on the S and I think Kunce will ultimately Defeat Hawley because we are so close to a Filibuster proof Trifecta they don't want Sinemas in the Senate we were close last time a Sinema blew, it may very well go to a Runoff anyways, but Schiff fought so hard against the insurrection on the J6 Committee

Just look what happened in 22 the RS used Kenosha WI against Barnes and smeared Beasley as soft on crime and Rs don't want gun control and no telling what Don Jr smeared Ryan but Brown should win

What did the H tell Sinema when she blocked Voting Rights to be bold and grow a backbone that's why I know it's a 303 map but I am bold in projecting a landslide we need a backbone to break the Filibuster

[Хahar 🤔]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

Schiff is the candidate of wealthy establishment liberals. He’d crush Lee in SoCal as she’s too economically left for a lot of those voters, and so is Porter in Silicon Valley.

In keeping with what I've said in this thread in the past, it's absolutely inscrutable what "establishment" means here. People should stop using "establishment" to mean "economically right-wing" and just say that. Those terms might be synonymous in New York but they're very much not here.

With regard to any actual establishment, at most what you can say is that Schiff is one of two candidates to have gotten significant support from elected officials. As has been brought up repeatedly in this thread, there has been absolutely no indication that the California Democratic Party establishment supports Schiff over Lee. It's annoying to have to keep repeating this.

As for the rest of the post, it's helpful to remember that Bernie Sanders won 47 out of 53 congressional districts in the state of California in the 2020 primary. Although he won nearly everywhere, Sanders's best districts were in the Los Angeles area, where he received at least 49% of the vote in five different districts. There is just no evidence that an "economically left" candidate would get "crushed" by the Democratic primary electorate in California.

If you're referring to the California electorate in a general election, I'll quote what I've already said:

[Feinstein] being "more conservative" has nothing to do with the way that California Republicans vote in elections between two Democrats. There have been two senatorial elections in California between two Democrats, and in both cases Republican areas overwhelmingly voted for the Democrat running the more left-wing campaign. As I've mentioned on this thread previously, Schiff and Porter each could face serious difficulty attracting Republican votes, but that is because they are both cable news personalities. Ideology is not relevant here.

[I’m not Stu]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

Schiff is the candidate of wealthy establishment liberals. He’d crush Lee in SoCal as she’s too economically left for a lot of those voters, and so is Porter in Silicon Valley.

In keeping with what I've said in this thread in the past, it's absolutely inscrutable what "establishment" means here. People should stop using "establishment" to mean "economically right-wing" and just say that. Those terms might be synonymous in New York but they're very much not here.

With regard to any actual establishment, at most what you can say is that Schiff is one of two candidates to have gotten significant support from elected officials. As has been brought up repeatedly in this thread, there has been absolutely no indication that the California Democratic Party establishment supports Schiff over Lee. It's annoying to have to keep repeating this.

As for the rest of the post, it's helpful to remember that Bernie Sanders won 47 out of 53 congressional districts in the state of California in the 2020 primary. Although he won nearly everywhere, Sanders's best districts were in the Los Angeles area, where he received at least 49% of the vote in five different districts. There is just no evidence that an "economically left" candidate would get "crushed" by the Democratic primary electorate in California.

If you're referring to the California electorate in a general election, I'll quote what I've already said:

[Feinstein] being "more conservative" has nothing to do with the way that California Republicans vote in elections between two Democrats. There have been two senatorial elections in California between two Democrats, and in both cases Republican areas overwhelmingly voted for the Democrat running the more left-wing campaign. As I've mentioned on this thread previously, Schiff and Porter each could face serious difficulty attracting Republican votes, but that is because they are both cable news personalities. Ideology is not relevant here.

It's the general election. When it comes to GOP votes, how would Lee do?

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Schiff has the advantage now

No, actually. Assuming he makes it to the general, he has no base. Republicans won't vote for him and Porter and Lee already have the left of center vote locked up.

Schiff is the candidate of wealthy establishment liberals. He’d crush Lee in SoCal as she’s too economically left for a lot of those voters, and so is Porter in Silicon Valley.

In keeping with what I've said in this thread in the past, it's absolutely inscrutable what "establishment" means here. People should stop using "establishment" to mean "economically right-wing" and just say that. Those terms might be synonymous in New York but they're very much not here.

With regard to any actual establishment, at most what you can say is that Schiff is one of two candidates to have gotten significant support from elected officials. As has been brought up repeatedly in this thread, there has been absolutely no indication that the California Democratic Party establishment supports Schiff over Lee. It's annoying to have to keep repeating this.

As for the rest of the post, it's helpful to remember that Bernie Sanders won 47 out of 53 congressional districts in the state of California in the 2020 primary. Although he won nearly everywhere, Sanders's best districts were in the Los Angeles area, where he received at least 49% of the vote in five different districts. There is just no evidence that an "economically left" candidate would get "crushed" by the Democratic primary electorate in California.

If you're referring to the California electorate in a general election, I'll quote what I've already said:

[Feinstein] being "more conservative" has nothing to do with the way that California Republicans vote in elections between two Democrats. There have been two senatorial elections in California between two Democrats, and in both cases Republican areas overwhelmingly voted for the Democrat running the more left-wing campaign. As I've mentioned on this thread previously, Schiff and Porter each could face serious difficulty attracting Republican votes, but that is because they are both cable news personalities. Ideology is not relevant here.

It's the general election. When it comes to GOP votes, how would Lee do?

If against another democrat, Lee gets most the R votes. She isn't often on MSNBC talking trash about Trump like the rest of them, she's more populist and has that Bernie-Trump appeal. R voters aren't ideological, they vote based on vibes.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I won't lie that Porter's comments regarding Netanyahu were extremely tone-deaf; albeit I'm going to wait to see how she responds before I consider dropping my endorsement. It's a big fluke, especially considering how much research she claimed to do beforehand, but not realizing that Netanyahu is a toxic sludge monster as far as politicians go for Progressives and 'democracy lovers' anywhere in the world.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

I won't lie that Porter's comments regarding Netanyahu were extremely tone-deaf; albeit I'm going to wait to see how she responds before I consider dropping my endorsement. It's a big fluke, especially considering how much research she claimed to do beforehand, but not realizing that Netanyahu is a toxic sludge monster as far as politicians go for Progressives and 'democracy lovers' anywhere in the world.

She focused on domestic issues, so it's possible she had the views that make most of America 'Pro-Israel'- that Israel is the most liberal country/democracy in the middle east, and they don't stone gay people, which makes them good.

It's dumb to any of us who have spent time studying the issue, but the average voter doesn't do that.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I won't lie that Porter's comments regarding Netanyahu were extremely tone-deaf; albeit I'm going to wait to see how she responds before I consider dropping my endorsement. It's a big fluke, especially considering how much research she claimed to do beforehand, but not realizing that Netanyahu is a toxic sludge monster as far as politicians go for Progressives and 'democracy lovers' anywhere in the world.

She focused on domestic issues, so it's possible she had the views that make most of America 'Pro-Israel'- that Israel is the most liberal country/democracy in the middle east, and they don't stone gay people, which makes them good.

It's dumb to any of us who have spent time studying the issue, but the average voter doesn't do that.

But Katie Porter obviously isn't and shouldn't be your 'average voter' and while that's true (who knows for how long, with the way things are going) you have to be incredibly tone-deaf to applaud Netanyahu on court reform right now, and I'm ofc assuming ignorance but still...

Any way, just disappointed in a politician whose career I've been following for years and genuinely like... And I still do, this doesn't just wipe away all of that, but it's worth criticizing and I hope she hears her critics out.

[coloradocowboi]

If against another democrat, Lee gets most the R votes. She isn't often on MSNBC talking trash about Trump like the rest of them, she's more populist and has that Bernie-Trump appeal. R voters aren't ideological, they vote based on vibes.

Generally speaking, Democrats' economic agenda is a lot more popular than their social issues, and Lee is a lot more of a socialist than a social justice warrior. I also think that the historicity of her candidacy will speak to some Republicans in CA for sure, especially if it's a convenient excuse not to vote for the loathsome Adam Schiff. I don't know if Lee would be favored against Porter to the same extent as she would against Schiff though. Given Porter's shifting to the right, I actually think she would have an advantage with GOP voters over Lee. On the other hand though, I think Lee performs better with center-left, Dem "establishment" voters against Porter than Schiff, and there are a lot more of those here than Republicans sadly