Newsom faces political minefield with calls for Feinstein to resign

[RandySF]

As California Democrats dispute whether Sen. Diane Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) extended absence from the Senate warrants her resignation, political observers expect that Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) will keep his distance from what could be a sticky situation politically.

Further complicating these circumstances is that three rival candidates are already competing to take her seat in 2024, and a show of support for any of them from the governor could have significant impacts on his own future prospects.

“I don’t think Newsom will get anywhere near this and will not weigh in at all,” Daniel Schnur, who teaches political communications at several California universities, told The Hill.

The debate stems from Feinstein’s months-long absence from the Senate Judiciary Committee as she recuperates from shingles, which has delayed the confirmation of President Biden’s judicial appointments.



https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3951131-newsom-faces-political-minefield-with-calls-for-feinstein-to-resign/

[LetMyPeopleVote]

1. If Senator Feinstein retires, Gov. Newsome should pick someone who agrees to not to run in 2024

[DURHAM D]

3. Agree. Also someone already living in DC.

I pick Doug Emhoff.

[MichMan]

19. They don't need to be California residents?

[DURHAM D]

22. He is still a California resident.

As is his wife.

[David__77]

23. No they don't.

…

[LetMyPeopleVote]

32. That is an interesting and compelling choice

[Irish_Dem]

4. What is the benefit to this strategy?

A serious question.

Wouldn't it be better to pick winning candidate not just a place holder?

[Renew Deal]

5. The pressure to resign is coming from a losing candidates camp.

Last edited Sun Apr 16, 2023, 06:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Barbara Lee is unlikely to win the election so her camp is pushing hard for her to be nominated.

[Irish_Dem]

7. Why?

I guess I must be having a slow brain day.

Why push someone who cannot win an election?

[ITAL]

16. They meant the nomination election

Lee is very unlikely to win the nomination. HOWEVER, if she is already Senator because Newsom selected her, she'd almost certainly win the nomination, which is why her folks want Newsom to decide (because he pledged to pick an African American woman if he had to replace Feinstein).

[Haggard Celine]

18. They are thinking that because it would

be a way for them to get someone who is competent, but it must not be someone who will be more competition against Porter and Schiff. If somebody takes that job temporarily, there's no stopping an incumbent from deciding to run. I really wish Feinstein would go ahead and resign.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

30. A little background in CA politics.

When Newsom replaced Kamala Harris with Alex Padilla, a fine Democrat and the first Latino Senator from California, there was some backlash about not having named a Black woman instead.

Then Newsom pledged if there was another vacancy that he'd name a Black woman. I'm certain he had then House Rep. Karen Bass in mind. But Bass has now been elected LA Mayor.

Bass is in the same liberal-pragmatic-progress lane as Newsom.

But Karen Bass is out of the picture.

Barbara Lee (unless Newsom went with an outlier) is the next most obvious choice. Lee is beloved in her Berkeley/Oakland/Alameda Co. district, but is left of the Democratic Party generally speaking.

I don't think Lee could defeat wither Porter or Schiff in an open election. Those two will be in a heck of a race.

Pressure on Feinstein by people such as Lee's co-chairman Ro Khanna, could--if Newsom held to the previous pledge--elevate Lee to the Senate.

Were Feinstein to resign, I am among those who believe the people should select our next Senator. We have one "appointee" (who was elected in his own right, but with the advantage of incumbency) already.

So I'd prefer a caretaker if such things came to pass. Perhaps, if she were willing, Barbara Boxer?

My greatest preference if for Dianne Feinstein to recover quickly and fill out her term.

Newsome will have political hot potatoes if Feinstein resigns. The party could be riven.

[Autumn]

15. Isn't she in her late 70's?

It would be stupid to appoint someone who is unlikely to win an election.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

31. There are several strong candidates from divergent wings of the party

I have my favorite and other wings of the party have their favorites. I would prefer to let the primary process work itself out. Given the weaknesses of the California GOP and the California top two primary system, I expect that the 2024 senate race to be between two Democrats.

Newsome should let the primary system do its job and put a place holder in this seat

[Nixie]

28. This is the only way. It was a mistake for Newsom to ruminate on who he would select.

But seriously, does anyone think Feinstein would kowtow to a newbie congressman who has his baggage and history?? Unbelievable. She does not owe him squat. It's just creating its own set of problems that might not have arisen if he hadn't started publicly exaggerating.

[Sympthsical]

2. If there's a vacancy, he can't choose someone running

Otherwise it will be an intraparty shitshow and it will damage his very clear aspirations for a presidential run.

[Irish_Dem]

8. Why will choosing someone who can win an election be a shit show?

Isn't that how we choose candidates?
Electiblity?

[ITAL]

10. It would basically

Be handing the election next year to whomever he picks. And he would have thus decided both Senators from California.

[Irish_Dem]

11. No, the voters next year will decide who holds the seat.

The seat is owned by the American people, not the governor.

Are we getting punked by the GOP with this stuff?

[ITAL]

14. That's the point

Whoever Newsom picks will almost certainly win re-election if they are a current candidate. So he would be deciding.

Padilla more than likely would not have been the elected Senator if not for Newsom's selection of him when Harris stepped down to take the VP. Then he cruised easily to re-election in 2022 because incumbency takes all the oxygen. When you have the position already a lot of people just automatically check your name.

[Irish_Dem]

24. No, an appointed candidate is NOT a certainty at all.

I have been a political junkie since JFK ran against Nixon.

Nothing is certain at all in love, war and politics.

[ITAL]

25. Do you live in California?

I do. An appointee would be a prohibitive favorite.

[Irish_Dem]

26. California is not exempt from the rules of human nature and 200 years of US political history.

And a person doesn't have to be from California to understand those facts.

[ITAL]

27. Human nature and political history says the incumbent would win

An appointee would almost certainly win election. No, it's not 100% certain, because basically nothing is. I'd put the odds at the appointed senator winning re-election (if they were a candidate) at somewhere around 95%.

All one has to do is look at the 2022 election. Alex Padilla likely would not have won the position on his own, but after his appointment he was a shoe-in.

[Zeitghost]

34. And as an astute student of American political history

You are surly aware of the power of incumbency, especially in a State like California where the Democratic primary is the real race you need to win for state wide offices.

An incumbent in a primary is almost unbeatable barring some out of the norm circumstance.

[Sympthsical]

17. If he appoints Candidate X

And you support Candidate Y, how will you feel?

Does that sound healthy for our party? I don't think it does.

It's going to remain a Democratic seat. We're going to hold it no matter what. So I think it's in our party's interest to make it as seamless and with as little rancor as possible.

Being appointed gives an enormous leg up in the process. Incumbents and people with institutional support almost always prevail.

People still aren't over 2016, working through various nightly performances of the best Miss Havisham they can muster.

I don't want that shit in California. I like my party fairly boring.

[Mr.Bill]

6. I'm confident that whatever circumstances

come up, he will do the right thing.

The headline sort of makes it sound like he has no good choices and doesn't know which way to go. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It's not a minefield, it's a chess board, and he knows how to play very well.

[dem4decades]

9. Isn't he elected by Californians to make decisions for them? Let him.

[Irish_Dem]

13. Yes Dems following the simple law and procedure is a "minefield."

The GOP destroys the country with blatant crimes and it is perfectly fine, no problems.

[Bucky]

38. Not every decision. He's elected to manage state business

From what I can tell, he's doing a decent enough job with the biggest and most complex state in the country. But one critical aspect of a limited, Jeffersonian government is that one state officer is not supposed to weigh in on every single controversy.

[Irish_Dem]

12. Is the GOP trying to punk us with a fake minefield?

None of the arguments I am reading make any sense whatsoever.

Has GOP fingerprints on it.

[Zeitghost]

35. The GOP is powerless in CA

This is Democratic intra-party politics which can get pretty nasty. Look at the recent scandals in LA for a prime example.


With no real Republicans to defeat, there are strong willed factions of the party that butt heads.

[MichMan]

20. Can he pick himself ?

[Bucky]

39. That would be a dumb choice

Why would he want to leave the job he's been elected to?

Presumably he's running for president in 2028. The job he's done as a governor is the centerpiece of his resume. It would be pretty foolish for him to use his position for self-agrandizement

[MichMan]

40. That way he could guarantee that the person wouldn't run as a incumbent.

Otherwise their is always a substantial risk that the "placeholder" decides they like the job too much

[Bucky]

42. But for him to leave the governorship in the middle of his term would be flaky

There's dozens of people who could do the job without Gavin coming to such an unhinged choice--and I'm certain anyone qualified for the gig would be savvy enough to know the unspoken understanding is they just serve out the remainder of Feinstein's term.

Anyway, there's precious little reason to believe that the incumbent senator is going to step aside.

[PortTack]

21. Newsom is wise to avoid the subject. He really has no say in it, and probably not a lot of influence

With the senator.

[GuppyGal]

33. +1000

[Hortensis]

29. :) Not exactly one of his more difficult situations.

He's already stated his course.

We need to remember, also, that most California are paying little to no attention. Those who are aware, even opinionated on the subject, know this has an end and that end will be their next Democratic senator. Ta-da!

[iemanja]

36. What's the argument for her to stay?

If she can't do her job, voters deserve someone who will represent them.

[Bucky]

41. True. But democracy is often messy

There are probably Republicans who used those very words to try to get rid of John Fetterman in Pennsylvania. When a politician gets removed from their elected term of office is one of those inevitable messes in government

[Bucky]

37. It'd be worse if he *didn't* stay out of the two messes

The criticism of Feinstein's performance is democracy at work. The people are supposed to complain about politicians. That's called accountability.

And the people of California are lucky to have a contentious Senate primary with three eminently qualified candidates trying to move up to the Senate. Newsom absolutely should not weigh into that.

The only real problem I see is how ridiculous it is for California to only have two senators.