This message was self-deleted by its author

[bigtree]

This message was self-deleted by its author (bigtree) on Wed Oct 4, 2023, 07:28 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[T_A]

1. I Wonder

if he only had to say that for legal reasons?

[nocoincidences]

2. As opposed to other/illegal reasons?

What's your point?

[T_A]

7. That

perhaps there's a legal hiccup as far as appointing someone temporarily.

There's something about that "free to run for a full term in 2024" that sounds like he's checking off a box.

[ZonkerHarris]

67. Blagojevich

[Sympthsical]

3. If you want to create a giant shitstorm in the California Democratic Party, sure

Appointing a current candidate would be a fantastic idea.

I was just thinking the other day. "You know what we need? A huge internecine party battle. And if it can end in everyone calling each other racist and sexist, that would just be bonus."

He's not going to appoint Lee. If anything, by pushing so hard out of self-interest before Feinstein's even buried, she's making things worse.

It isn't a good look for her at all. And I say that as someone who lives in the Bay Area and likes Lee a great deal. She's coming off very poorly in this.

[skylucy]

11. I agree!

[bigtree]

15. unlike Schiff and Porter? Ro Khanna?

...who all have announced their intention to run for the seat?

What makes them any different from Barbara Lee?

[Retrograde]

50. They, like Lee, announced their intentions to run in 2024

while Feinstein was still alive and active (although I think Khanna decided to drop out for the time being). The others are not badgering the governor to appoint them to the vacancy - although they may all secretly hope he does.

Newsom's a decent governor for the most part, but he does sometimes act without thinking: his dining out during Covid, for example. IMHO, his pledge to name a Black woman if a vacancy occurred was not well thought out. If he want's a placeholder, I suggest he go traditional and appoint Feinstein's daughter.

[bigtree]

61. she isn't 'badgering' the governor by asking

...and it's just offensive to suggest asking is something untoward.

I like her drive. It bodes well for the general election.

All of this complaint because Lee is ambitious. Hell, wasn't it Schiff who 'explored' running in the primary Biden won?

Fine for the man to be ambitious, but not this black woman.

[Sympthsical]

52. None of them are asking to be appointed

Lee is the one who is vigorously pressuring Newsom about it in public and dragging political allies into it on her behalf.

[bigtree]

59. ffs

...no one is making that distinction.

Just an absolute canard. Done here. Wasting my night.

[Sympthsical]

76. You apparently haven't been following the dialogue on all of this

This has been discussed for months in California politics, including on this board in many, many threads.

The overriding feeling on the matter, both here and with voters, was to not advantage any candidate that already declared. Putting a thumb on the scale in such a way would create a lot of bad feeling within the party, which is something Newsom does not want before building up his own presidential campaign.

It would have been the last headache he needs. It has largely been the understanding until Lee started pushing.

It's a moot point. Laphonza Butler is an excellent choice. If she runs, she runs. No one can stop her. However, she would be facing strong, strong headwinds from the already declared candidates.

I think Newsom threaded the needle he needed to very well. I still think it's was unwise of him to put himself in the situation to begin with, tho.

[bigtree]

80. he just put his thumb on the scale

...silly to think any choice he made under his new terms wouldn't be considered his own personal choice in the next election, give the advantage they'll have.

Maybe she'll decide not to run, meaning that this move only disadvantages the announced ones.

[Recycle_Guru]

120. I decided I will still vote for her in the primary

[Sympthsical]

121. For Butler?

For me, Lee and Schiff are non-starters, and a lot of my rationale for supporting Porter has been both generational and political situating - she's not in the calcified power structure that is long overdue for reform and turnover.

However, let's see who ultimately goes into the primary. If Butler does, I'm certainly prepared to give her a fair and earnest look.

[Recycle_Guru]

122. Barbara Lee

[Rebl2]

4. Thought

he said he wouldn’t pick someone already running for the seat, which she is the last I knew.

[bigtree]

20. makes no sense to not advantage that candidate

...by seating them now.

Newsome needs to man up and put his choice in the seat. That's not unheard of and certainly not unfair. It's a political choice that's made all of the time.

Why should Newsom be allowed to dodge that choice?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

24. He shouldn't be

Advantaging anyone who is running now. If he appoints someone and then they choose to run for the seat, fine. But IMO, he should t be giving anyone who is currently running an advantage.

[bigtree]

29. it's something done all the time

...you don't disadvantage them by making them a lame duck on arrival.

It's just stupid politics.

He's not precluding them from running, so what the heck would be the point in refusing to give that person a head start?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

30. He said he isn't making

anyone a lame duck - anyone he appoints is free to run for the seat if they want to.

[bigtree]

37. listen to your own words

...he can't help but 'advantage someone running,' without keeping to his preconditions.

Whoever he chooses is going to run, so making them the replacement is setting them up to be a future candidate, just like Dianne Feinstein was when she was appointed mayor after Milk was murdered.

In 1979, Feinstein ran for and was elected to the position of Mayor of San Francisco, becoming the city’s first woman to serve as mayor.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

39. Like I said

We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I don’t think he should pick Lee or Schiff or Porter. You obviously disagree.

[niyad]

41. could we PLEASE STOP using male terms as the default synonyms for courage?

[bigtree]

54. it's not just about virility

...it's also about being resilient in the face of adversity.

Not really an issue when appealing to a man. It's basically saying be an adult, and don't behave immaturely.

You can't credibly project anyone elses slurs onto my use of the phrase.

[niyad]

57. sighhhh.

[bigtree]

62. don't insult me with your projections

...I wasn't using the term generally or to the diminution of anyone.

There's really zero reason to divert this thread for this. Just stop.

[niyad]

63. . . .

[redqueen]

111. Thanks for trying.

Maybe a few saw it and will think twice next time.

[bigtree]

113. There are some genuinely offensive phrases, but this is a canard

Last edited Tue Oct 3, 2023, 10:39 AM - Edit history (2)

...I used in the context of his maturity, gender-specific because he is in fact a man.

It would be a slur IF it was used generally, to describe a woman, or some representation of courage or fortitude, or something similar - suggesting, I'd think, that fortitude can only be attributed to men.

My use isn't a slur. I have enough understanding to know the difference.

The poster took my inoccuous usage and projected a false interpretation, suggesting it would be harmful to say this to a man in this context.

I obviously disagree, and my hope is that people would be allowed to say what they mean without it being taken out of context, for any reason.

[redqueen]

114. It reinforces sexist views of women.

If you don't see that I can't help you.

Had this same battle with someone else here years ago who said it wasn't sexist to say someone "throws like a girl".

Some things never change. Patriarchy doesn't have to be one of those things.

[bigtree]

117. telling a man to essentially grow up isn't the same thng

...I didn't make ANY of the inferences you cited.

You can't get there by citing what I said, You just can't, no matter how much you project the worst onto what I wrote.

I don't need help. There's nothing in the world wrong with telling that man to man-up, or as I inferred, grow up. Not a word about his virility.

You don't do your cause any favors by misrepresenting what I said.

[redqueen]

118. "grow up"

"man up"

[pwb]

5. I agree.

Unless Barack and Michelle move to California? Michelle would be a good Senator. Doubt President Obama would want her too.

[niyad]

8. Doubt President Obama would LET her? LET her?? Do you seriously think these

two amazing, incredible people have THAT kind of marriage?

And how many times does it need to be pointed out that Michelle has said she is nnot interested?

[pwb]

14. Wrong word

Want her too is what I meant. He knows about the shit that gets thrown.

[niyad]

16. Do you think that she does not? And, again, this is pointless, as she has said

she is not interested multiple times.

[pwb]

17. My thought was Lee is not the only qualified Woman.

I have not read that Michelle is not interested. Lighten up a bit eh?

[niyad]

23. Michelle has stated any number of times that she is not interested in

political office. And, minor but important point, she and Barack DO NOT LIVE in CA. The ingrained sexism of "let" was distressing as well. Thank you for changing it.

[pwb]

93. You missed the word Unless?.

Last edited Mon Oct 2, 2023, 07:32 AM - Edit history (1)

About the California move? And I don't give a fuck about anybody's sex, or isms. Choose a man then if this is all about sexism to you. Maybe read your own words before you demand others change what they say. Male terms for courage? Come on man.

[Tree Lady]

34. Lol she used to be his boss when they met. nt

[niyad]

44. I had forgotten about that.

[snowybirdie]

13. Would let her????????

Come on! Haven't heard that regarding a marriage since ought 4 of the twentieth century! LOL!

[MistakenLamb]

98. Michelle has made it known she has no desire for office

None, this is getting ridiculous. Let the Obamas move on in peace already and enjoy their roles now.

[republianmushroom]

6. Or better yet, Adam Schiff to replace Feinstein, a better choice.

[roamer65]

12. I suspect it's going to be Adam Schiff.

[ZonkerHarris]

21. And then we will go from having 2 women senators to 2 male senators who were first appointed

To the job by Gavin
Gavin will be freezing all the women out of the US senate from California
Alienating the women vote in California is not the way to become president.
He does this and his presidential aspirations are dead.

[roamer65]

25. Good point.

Will be interesting to see what he decides.

I am really surprised he’s not getting Senator Boxer to temporarily fill it.

[Deuxcents]

9. There must be some very strong and young Dems

For him to choose from. Some new people would keep who we have and introduce some new blood, as they say. Red, yellow, black or white but out of respect, let’s wait a respectable few days in honor of the Senator who lived her life for service to our country.

[brush]

18. I'll take an experience veteran legislater over "new blood" any day.

It's the US senate, not the state assembly, or even the US House we're talking about.

Gov. Newsom and we Dems are blessed in that we have a deep bench of qualified and experience people to choose form...Adam Schiff, Katie Porter and Barbara Lee.

It a tough decision as to who to pick among those three.

[MichMan]

10. Why a complete reversal ?

Does that also mean that it won't be a Black woman?

[FreeState]

60. What's the reversal?

I’m not selecting anyone who is currently running is not the same as whomever I select may run if they want to.

[bigtree]

66. it's not only different, it's stupid political strategy

...if whoever he picks to replace Feinstein can run (will run), then THAT'S his choice in the upcoming election.

Why would anyone pretend he hadn't then advantaged that person with a head start on the seat?

If he ignores them, then that's basically a deliberate decision to disadvantage them in the upcoming election.It's one thing to say you're going to appoint a temporary replacement as a place holder, and that the upcoming election will be a level playing field.

Not so if he chooses someone who is free to run, will run. THAT would be Newsom's candidate of choice because he advantaged them.

[JI7]

19. What exactly did he say ?

[bigtree]

26. Newsom's office said

Newsom's office confirmed to the Washington Examiner that there will not be a "precondition" that this replacement is in the Senate only temporarily.

[JI7]

31. It could just mean he won't have them promise not to seek full term

but that he still won't appoint someone that is already running.

My guess is it might be someone that isn't well known and at this point would have little support in an election.

But after serving as appointee they may want to try to continue serving and decide to run for the office so Newsom isn't going to have them say they won't do this.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

33. Exactly

And I think that would be the best route.

[bigtree]

42. why would the person he seated be any different from a declared candidate?

...whoever he appoints will have an advantage in that seat, so it's bunk if he decides he's doing that to avoid making a choice between declared candidates.

All that does is diasable the people who've alread expressed interest in running. I can't think of a more backward suggestion than to disadvantage ANY of the three declared candidates with this flimsy excuse that he doesn't want to pick among them.

Whoever he picks is a potential candidate.

[JI7]

49. No , an unknown isn't going to have same advantage as those already running

California elections are expensive. Becsuse it's such a huge state they need lots of money for media.

That's why they all started announcing early . They need to raise money for all those ads.

[Autumn]

22. I would prefer Adam Schiff.

[bigtree]

27. I'm just patiently waiting for Newsom to keep his word

...and appoint a 'black woman.'

Barbara Lee is the only black woman currently in the running and has the backing of the Congressional Black Caucus.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

28. There are plenty of

qualified black women he could choose that wouldn’t result in him providing an advantage to an already declared candidate.

[bigtree]

32. there isn't one other prominent black woman who's expressed interest in the seat.

...it would be really stupid to run all over the place looking for someone else when Rep. Lee is right there, experienced and well known.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

36. We'll have

To agree to disagree on this - Rep. Lee is running against other candidates for the seat already; I don’t think it would be right of the Gov to give her an advantage over her competitors.

[ripcord]

77. He appointed Laphonza Butler

Happy now?

[bigtree]

81. what do you mean, happy now?

...did you even read the op?

The thread?

[FloridaBlues]

47. Anyone of the 3 current candidates would be fine but it does give that person

More power to win the actual race. Leave off all 3 candidates and let voters decide shortly.

[Recycle_Guru]

35. he doesn't need this headache--How about LA mayor Katherine Bass?

if he appointsBass, she could step away from LA city council drama and get an appointment elsewhere by him after she serves only remainder of Feinstein's term.

[JI7]

38. She just got into office and Mayor of LA is a huge job

therr are many black women that are not in such important positions already that he can appoint.

[Recycle_Guru]

40. fair enough . LA Mayor doesn't go anywhere politically in recent decades

[JI7]

45. Karen Bass is 70 years old

My guess is she plans to retire from public office after serving 1 or 2 terms as mayor.

[Recycle_Guru]

55. even better to go out on top. then maybe ambassador somewhere?

[msongs]

43. we may not be able to think of a candidate but newsom might nt

[bigtree]

46. but why?

...what does he oppose about the declared candidates?

[msongs]

48. because they are running for the seat in a primary and appointing lee is favoritism? nt

[bigtree]

51. anyone he appoints is 'favoritism'

...given that they're free to run.

Just choosing someone other than the declared candidates doesn't render his choice an impartial one.

Unless they agree not to run, which would make them a lame duck and simply a bad political decision.


He should put the candidate he thinks will go all of the way and advantage them by putting them to work right now, not squander this time before the election with a faint of impartiality.

[msongs]

53. so you think newsom should become Lee's campaign manager then? nt

[bigtree]

58. is that what other governors who appointed people who later ran for office became?

...or would this be a first?

[Recycle_Guru]

56. I feel him keeping his promise is way more important for his future

than some one time transactional deal appointing Barbara Lee or others currently running which would prove he is not to be trusted.

[bigtree]

64. he just made his promise moot

...whoever he chooses is to be considered a candidate.

What is he actually doing if he disadvantages the ones already declared? That's also a choice. Why should he step on them?

Picking someone who isn't even considering running is no way to fill a seat. Pick the person you think will go all the way to give them an advantage, not some surprise candidate who's going to be looked at as a place holder.

Anyone he picks now is Newsom making HIS choice for that seat. There is no way to maintain whatever distinction he's making now. It will be meaningless when the election rolls around, unless he has some lame duck or someone who didn't express any desire to run, hasn't already generated a buzz, taking up space.

[Recycle_Guru]

65. hahaha. ok. well choice is made

and it is president of EMILYS list who focuses on fundraising for women to get into office--women who support right to choose.

The three candidates already have massive amount of notoriety and this person is relatively unknown statewide.

She has little advantage to build up by primary time.

[bigtree]

68. that's his choice, then

...I guess he'll pretend now that he didn't actually make a choice for the next election, pretending that he didn't disadvantage the other candidates.

Pretty, fricked up.

Really indecisive, and a slap in the face to those who've been in the trenches for the state and the Democratic party.

[Recycle_Guru]

69. it's his oerogative as governor. picking one of them would have disadvantaged others

he had promised to pick a black woman if Feinstein's seat became open.

Once everyone started throwing their hat in the ring, he further promised not to pick someone running.

Promises made--promises kept.

[bigtree]

71. saying it's his preogative doesn't make it correct

...it's foolishness, trying to please everyone and avoid making a choice between the announced candidates.

Unless, of course, this woman is his actual choice for the general election, over the others, making a joke out of his attempt to appear impartial.

I wonder if she'll express any intention to run?

[Recycle_Guru]

72. this is politics, my friend

[bigtree]

73. exactly

...hence my arguments.

Don't think I'm the only one who will question this.

[DFW]

70. He «needs to» pick a crosseyed gay native American

But in case he doesn’t, I think this « he needs to pick a (fill in the blank) » routine is ridiculous. Newsom is a politician. He has to know that picking one of the three main declared Democratic candidates for the seat will piss off the constituencies of the other two.

His pick doesn’t have to DECLARE an intention not to run. Being obviously the case is sufficient (Boxer, Pelosi, e.g.).

[bigtree]

74. he just picked a candidate

...why pretend she isn't one, unless she says she's not running?

If she runs, he's just made his political choice in that election, to the disadvantage of the other three.

How does he hide that from their supporters?

By the way, diversity isn't some cynical game.

[DFW]

75. Diversity shouldn't be a consideration at all when it comes to picking a US Senator

The only consideration should be who would be the best person for the job. Period.

[bigtree]

78. diversity is absolutely a consideration

...and can make for the 'best' candidate.

When did diversity cease to be a concern in elections?

Records were smashed in 2018 and then broken again in 2020, and diverse candidates made further progress in 2022.

More women than ever have been nominated for governorships and state legislatures. More Senate nominees are Black. More House nominees are openly L.G.B.T.Q., and more are also Hispanic women.

Democrats more likely than Republicans to nominate people who differ from the historical norm of straight, white men. And while both parties’ candidate fields are more diverse than before 2018, they are still far from accurate reflections of the American population.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/05/us/politics/midterms-diversity.html

[obamanut2012]

95. "Diversity shouldn't be a consideration at all when it comes to picking a US Senator"

Oh, this makes me so sad you said that. I am so disappointed and shocked you think diversity doesn't matter.

[DFW]

96. I absolutely do not. The question is too important. This is not the Harvard admissions committee

The office of a US Senator should be fulfilled by someone of the highest knowledge, integrity and ability, especially when picked to fill an interim vacancy. Gender, race, shape of eyes, etc., should not be the deciding factor. If Tuberville should drop dead tomorrow, the governor of Alabama will not pick a replacement based on knowledge, integrity and ability, but rather a person dsplaying dumb adherence to a right wing ideology, not ability to govern, or knowledge of how our government works.

Nikki Hayley appointed Tom Scott to replace retiring Senator Jim DeMint. She chose to display her choice for "diversity" instead of who would be best for the people of South Carolina. How did that work out? How did Clarence Thomas work out as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall? Diversity is absolutely NOT what should be the deciding factor in replacing people in positions of ntional importance.

Competence and integrity need to go first.

**By the way, having known both the fournder and the second president of Emily's List, even though I never met Butler, I know the organization somewhat. My daughter interned for them while she was at college, and Ellen Malcolm told me she was the best intern they ever had. To get picked to the top position of Emily's List is not something you get picked for, for your image, but rather for your ability and your dedication. I think Newsom did his homework here before making his choice.

[Ace Rothstein]

79. Sounds like he made a great choice.

[bigtree]

82. she's unknown

...a legislative novice.

Not very encouraging choice when thinking about the upcoming election. Really amatuerish to appoint a national legislative newcomer to a seasoned pols' Senate seat.

Just a meaningless snub of seasoned, experienced candidates.

[Ace Rothstein]

85. She has great credentials and Newsome stuck to his promises.

Putting his thumb on the scale for someone already running would have been a bad look. I'm also a fan of anything to end the gerontocracy in D.C.

[DFW]

101. I agree. He didn't give an edge up to any of the three candidates, and still went for competency

Who cares if she is a headline maker or not? What matters is not her national fame or her ethnic background, but rather whether or not she is credible for the post. It appears that she is, and that is what matters most.

[Hekate]

90. Well I am sorry if I overreacted to the wrong person

[Deuxcents]

83. I posted earlier on this thread that I hoped for someone younger

Than the hopefuls already mentioned. Laphonza Butler is a Democratic strategist and adviser to Kamala Harris. She will be the only Black woman serving in the Senate and the first openly LGBTQ person to represent California. She’s a former labor leader with SEIU and very active in California politics. Sounds like she’s got some fire to her so let’s see what else is in her bio that made the governor choose her. So far, I’m pretty good with it.

[Hekate]

84. Well, this is 15 minutes of my life I'll never get back & I didn't even read the whole thread

What the hell do you guys think goes on here? Does Gov. Newsom look like Rod Blagoevich to you?

Newsom SAID he wasn’t going to appoint someone who is already running for Senator. That cuts out Schiff. That cuts out Porter. And that cuts out 77 year old Barbara Lee.

[bigtree]

86. it's not a law

...it's not even typical of governors to avoid putting someone they want to win in the seat.

It has nothing to do with Blago.

When he decided the candidate he chose could run for office, he made a choice between the four. He can't pretend he didn't put his thumb on the scale for the woman he chose.

Appearing impartial was believable when he said he would just appoint a temporary placeholder. Having removed those restrictions, he's made a choice between the four candidates (Emily's list and the three others) by advantaging the one he chose with a head start on the next election.

Really weird ridiculing me, and outright insulting me suggesting I was advocating something illegal or improper, all for your lack of understanding my own points. That's the fashion, I guess.

I've never seen tha determined campaign like we have today to denigrate our aged legislators before, like they're lessers because of their advanced years. Completely opposite of how I was raised to value experience and knowledge.

You raise her age like it's some cw slam. I guess that's the fashion these days, as well.

[Retrograde]

92. Primary for senator is March 5, 2004

which means that early voting starts on February 6. Which means that ballots have to be printed and ready to send out to all voters in January. Which means candidates have to file early enough to not just be on the ballot but to have their statements in the general election guide. Which means any candidates who haven't already done so have to file PDQ.

Ms Butler has a rather short window in which to file her candidacy if she wants to be on the March ballot. Whether she chooses to do so is her call.

BTW, what's a cw slam?

[tritsofme]

97. Newson has no power to "restrict" anyone he appoints from running.

Despite whatever his preference may be, it is simply an acknowledgment of reality.

So this framing is rather odd. It seems quite obvious that he intends Butler to be a placeholder, as it rather unlikely she will run herself, as he originally intended.

Lee is running in a competitive primary, if she can’t win without Newson putting his thumb on the scale, she really doesn’t deserve to. That’s democracy for you.

[Recycle_Guru]

88. lol. I know, right? It is all good.

I live in California and am proud that we have so many strong people in office. I, personally, am looking forward to the big Senate race. The beauty is even it ot got so crazy and splintered that a GOP got into the top 2 in November (highly doubtful), it is going to be a Dem seat.

[jmowreader]

91. There are a couple of advantages to Laphonza Butler over Barbara Lee

First, Barbara Lee is 32 years older than Laphonza Butler. If Senator Butler does a good job and gets reelected in 2024, she's got several terms in her. The 77-year-old Lee might be good for one full term before she retires.

Butler has serious pro-choice bona fides, something we definitely need in this climate.

And if Gov. Newsom pulls someone out of the House, it will make it harder to hold back the Boebert-MTG Wing of the House until a special election can be held.

[bigtree]

99. she also has serious anti-union bonafides

...represented Uber and Airbnb against gig workers.

On the other hand, my state of Md. will get a third senator.

Link to tweet

[SickOfTheOnePct]

103. Anti-union?

She was president of an SEIU local for God's sake...

I don't get why you're so intent on this seat somehow being owed to Barbara Lee. I think Gov. Newsom did exactly the right thing - he kept to his promise of appointing a black woman to the seat, and he didn't give his tacit endorsement to any of the declared candidates.

[bigtree]

104. before she went to represent Uber against workers

...keep up.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[SickOfTheOnePct]

106. I'd still take her

over Barbara Lee any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[bigtree]

108. okay.

...one possible plus for me is that my state of Md. will temporarily gain a new senator.

Link to tweet

...head still spinning after being told yesterday there are plenty of qualified black women in California that can fill the position.

Did Newsom actually want a black woman from California?

[inthewind21]

115. Your state of MD

So what happens in CA is really of no concern to you.

[Zeitghost]

94. i don't think

There was or could be any legally binding clause that the appointee could not run for election.

It was always about not appointing a declared candidate.

[pinkstarburst]

100. Schiff or Porter are better choices than Lee due to age

Schiff and Porter are better choices than Lee due to age. This should not be about race and Barbara Lee should not get something as important as a California senate appointment simply because she happens to be a black woman. That's not the right way to do this.

Let's look at their ages:

Schiff 63
Porter 49
Lee 77

Lee's age is an issue. With a senator, we want someone who can get into that position and stay there for hopefully several decades, moving up in seniority on committees. At Lee's age, she may only be able to serve a single term as senator. She would be 84 at the end of her first term, if she were elected. With all respect to Lee, she can better serve where she is.

Edit: Butler was just appointed to finish Feinstein's term. Schiff, Porter and Lee will continue running in their primary. I disagree with the OP's premise that Lee deserved a free boost over the others.

[bigtree]

102. that's not the way diversity works

...white men have been getting a hand up in politics for centuries.

It's only when minorities or women make a concerted effort to achieve representation in our legislatures do we hear this nonsense that qualified, progressive black women shouldn't be provided with a hand up.

Funny how many people are declaring color-blindness with regard to Rep. Lee, but cynically celebrating the appointment of a black woman other than Lee who is, essentially, Newsom's actual choice in this race - not just as a placeholder, given his assurances his chioce would be free to run in '24.

No one EVER made these arguments AGAINST aged candidates before the demagoguery republicans started about Pres. Biden, and all of the upstart Dem supporters who want to edge him out of the presidency in favor of a younger candidate.

The ageism is really demagoguic politics which represents older candidates and elected officials as less capable than the younger ones.

In this case, Newsom made a choice which invites opposition from Progressives in his state. He's chose this fight, so it's going to be interesting watching so called moderates defend this corporate Dem. against the decidedly more progressive candidates at election time.

It's going to be interesting to see how she votes, what she advocates.

[temporary311]

105. Lee is definitely way too old.

Even under normal circumstances, her age would be an issue. But when the major complaint against Feinstein was that she was older than dirt, merely being as old as dirt isn't good enough.

[bigtree]

107. I've been observing politics since '72

...this unbridled ageism is a new fad which began with ageist attacks on Pres. Biden.

I think it's insulting to suggest Rep. Lee is less capable because of her age.

[pinkstarburst]

109. You're being deliberately obtuse

At best, Lee would be able to serve a single term in the senate. She would be 84 at the end of it. Schiff could serve for 2 decades. Porter could serve for 3 decades. They have much longer to move up in committees and gain power. That matters, even if you refuse to admit it.

California voters should choose their next representative. PERIOD. I applaud Newsom for not tipping the scales and interfering in the ongoing primary. If Barbara Lee is the person the voters want, they will elect her. If she is not the person they want, they will elect someone else. She will win or lose on her own merits, as will Schiff or Porter.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

112. That's been my point all along

If the voters of California want Barbara Lee, then they’ll elect her. But she, like any of the other candidates, needs to get there on her merits, not because Gov. Newsom offers a tacit endorsement.

[temporary311]

110. The average age of the Senate in '72

was nearly a decade younger than now, so it makes sense it wouldn't have been a common complaint. Doesn't seem like it really became a complaint until the last few years when that age started climbing into the mid-60s. Lee is over a full decade older than the average at 77, and she'll be 84 at the end of her first term. Will she accept being a one term Senator, or run again and be in office into her 90s, and be Feinstein part two? I'd rather not risk it if there are other just as good options, which there fortunately are in Porter and Schiff.

[BannonsLiver]

116. After reading through the thread

It's clear he made an excellent choice. Well done, Governor!