As the dust is starting to settle on the CA senate primary, how do you feel about Adam Schiff?

[Stinky The Clown]

Was his tactic vis a vis Garvey smart or do you see it as underhanded?

While result will be him winning the open seat walking away, do you see it as harmful to the Democrats?

I am asking this with zero agenda. I am really interested in the opinions of others.

[CousinIT]

1. Happy to have him in the Senate. Sad to lose him in the House along with...

...Katie Porter and Barbara Lee

[brush]

2. Not underhanded, smart. Instead of attacking Reps. Porter and Lee, his ads attacked repug Garvey.

Some accused him of elevation Garvey by attacking him in ads...HUH?

It's smarter than Schiff, Lee and Porter all attacking each other, and Garvey too.

Please. He made the best/smart choice, and since he did, he deserved to win.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

29. I find it hard to believe no one knew who he was until Schiff attacked him

It may have been an act and he may be scum, but he was the face of the Dodgers when I was a kid in the 70s and wasn’t he big w the Padres in the 80s?
I find it hard to believe Republicans needed to see him in Schiff ads to raise his profile.
And what Garvey voter would’ve voted for Porter?

[brush]

45. So true. IMO a no-brainer.

[Silver Gaia]

78. AGREED.

[Renew Deal]

3. It was a brilliant tactic as long as Schiff is clean and wins.

If he's got a live boy/dead girl situation, we will regret it.

[rubbersole]

4. Garvey maybe.

Seems all contemporary repubs are morally flawed. Otherwise they wouldn't get any support from the gop. Kool-aid drinkers.

[Sibelius Fan]

9. Why would you even imagine such a thing?

[Renew Deal]

16. I don't imagine it.

An advantage of having both candidates be Democrats is that we win either way. It eliminates risk from unexpected events with one candidate. That said, I think it was the right move in this case to have the race between both parties. If something goes wrong with Schiff, people can still vote for him and let him be replaced by the Democratic governor. Eliminating the need to spend millions of dollars for a safe seat outweighed the need to protect the seat from risk.

These are lots of hypotheticals.

[brush]

36. As long as Rep. Schiff has been in the national spotlight, not to mention huge California's...

wouldn't that have come out by now...I mean being a Congress person having to run for re-election every two years, some opponent's oppo researchers would've come up with that live boy or dead girl info by now don't you think(nice phrasing by the way, rolls right off the tongue).

[Renew Deal]

50. I don't want to go down a negative rabbit hole.

But let’s not forget Eliot Spitzer.

That phrasing is an old political saying.

[brush]

60. I got you. Schill is a known quantity. No one is in the spotlight that long without their skeletons, if any...

Last edited Thu Mar 7, 2024, 12:20 AM - Edit history (1)

being revealed, as were Spitzer's (see also George Santos).

[Demsrule86]

89. What are you talking about?

[Renew Deal]

91. What are you talking about?

https://www.npr.org/2008/03/12/88134976/spitzer-resigns-after-sex-scandal-pressure

[2naSalit]

5. Left me...

With a not so great feeling about him, hopefully it will pass.

What I think sucked about it was that he could have run a sound campaign against Porter and Lee without being nasty and attacking. It's about who has the better idea not who can manipulate the game to win regardless of their argument for doing so.

I understand that the stakes are astronomical but at the same time, this was an opportunity to show how campaigning should be done without the vitriol and threats of terrorism. We would have had a perfectly appropriate winner in the end, it was a win-win with no animosity opportunity and he chose to buy his way to the seat. That part bothers me.

[Mz Pip]

18. My feelings, too

I’ll vote for him but I doubt Ill send him any money.

Will probably send some to whoever is running for Katie Porter’s seat.

[onecaliberal]

32. I didn't see any ads with him attacking anyone but Garvey.

[JoseBalow]

34. I missed him being "nasty and attacking"

What did he do or say that was "nasty and attacking"?

[2naSalit]

38. Where did I say that he was?

What I think sucked about it was that he could have run a sound campaign against Porter and Lee without being nasty and attacking. It's about who has the better idea not who can manipulate the game to win regardless of their argument for doing so.

[JoseBalow]

44. Oh, do you mean he could have theoretically in the future?

I read that "could have" as past tense.

I didn't think that he was nasty and attacking, I did not notice that from him.

[2naSalit]

47. Neither did I...

And yes, that is what I meant, he could, well now past tense but, have had meaningful debates that were not nasty with the other two Dems and we still would have had one of them elected in the general. Now it's a possible putinist instead. He took away the surety of a Dem no matter what.



I'm not happy with that.

What LA Times had to say...

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-03-06/california-senate-primary-schiff-help-garvey-column

[JoseBalow]

49. I'm sure he's banking on the fact

that a Democrat hasn't lost a state-wide election in California in a long time. Running against a repug is basically a sure win for him. Running against another Dem would have carried more risk. It was a smart calculation on his part.

[2naSalit]

68. I think...

It tarnishes him a bit. I can't explain how I felt when I heard what happened, I just lost a lot of admiration for him at that moment.

[karynnj]

82. Blame the fact that there were 3 serious Democrats and 2 less so compared to 2 Republicans

AND the fact that Schiff got half of the Democrats. Looking at the results Republicans are about 40 percent to Democrats 60 percent.

Consider that even if the Republicans split 50/50, which was not the case even before the ads, the higher Republican vote getter would have got at least 20 - half of the 40. Porter, Lee and the other two had to split the remaining 30 from the Democratic 60. She got 16, Lee 10, the others the remainder.

Given the way the Democrats split, from the above it is clear that no matter how the Republicans split, a Republican would be number 2. In fact, had the Republicans split 50/50, a Republican would be 3 too. (SCHIFF 30 percent, R1 20, R2 20, Porter 16.)

Early on there were Porter supporters suggesting that Lee should drop out blaming her as a spoiler. In reality, Porter had a very narrow path to winning the seat and even being in the general. If she garnered more support than Schiff in the jungle primary, she would likely have become Senator. That was not close and the second path was that she would get the second slot. As I showed, even if the Republicans did not split very unevenly, that would not happen with her share of the vote.

There is NO likelihood that the ads saying Garvey was too conservative caused anyone planning to vote for Porter to change. 16 percent was not enough.

[onecaliberal]

64. Me too. So sorry.

[NanaCat]

97. It says 'nasty and attacking' right there in your OP

And in this reply.

My vision isn't as good as it could be, but even I can see those words in both posts, clear as day. Maybe you could clarify what you mean by that, since you did say the 'nasty' and attacking' part.

I didn't see him being 'nasty and attacking' to the other Democrats—unlike how Porter was with him. (and still is). He was focused on the real enemy: the GQP and its candidate, not on other Democrats. That makes him a smart Democrat, a good Democrat.

In fact, CA voters probably chose him because he understood who the real enemy is, and didn’t step on his fellow party opponents in his quest for the nomination.

Porter could learn something from that example.

[2naSalit]

100. Make of it what you will...

Enjoy your stay.

[betsuni]

37. How was he "nasty and attacking"? The ads didn't attack any Democrats.

He never accused other Democrats of being corrupt and beholden to corporate interests and other character attacks. What attacks?

You said he could have run a sound campaign without being nasty and attacking.

[2naSalit]

40. Where did I state that he was?

What I think sucked about it was that he could have run a sound campaign against Porter and Lee without being nasty and attacking. It's about who has the better idea not who can manipulate the game to win regardless of their argument for doing so.

[betsuni]

42. "he could have run a sound campaign ... without being nasty and attacking."

That's what those words mean, that Schiff's campaign was nasty and attacking. Schiff's campaign means Schiff.

[2naSalit]

46. I was comparing the options...

Of his trajectory, seems he chose to avoid the attack mode for the two Dems and bought the opponent he wanted to attack.

He could have had some significant and serious debates with the other Dems without being nasty. It's been done before, it should have happened here..


FYI: From La Times https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-03-06/california-senate-primary-schiff-help-garvey-column

[Oopsie Daisy]

80. Perhaps he "could have" (future tense) but it seems unlikely that Porter "would have" (future tense).

[brush]

41. Didn't he focus his attack ads on Garvey and not fellow Dems Porter and Lee?

That seems smart to me. Calling attack ads "elevating of Garvey" seem like an oxymoron to me.

Underhanded? Ok. Bet Reps Porter and Lee would've done the same thing if they had thought of it.

I want the smart guy/gal in office to fight against these wannabe fascist republicans.

Nice guys finish last, a famous baseball manager once said.

[karynnj]

84. Neither Porter or Lee could have used that tactic. It works only if you are

the top Democrat.

[brush]

92. What do you mean, all 3 are US House Representatives. Schiff is not...

over them. They could've went after Garvey with their ads but chose to go a different way.

Pls explain what you mean.

[karynnj]

102. Schiff started out as the most popular and neither ever got close

What I meant was had either Porter or Lee put out the same ads as Schiff and the PAC, the result would have been the same. Garvey in the number one or two position and one Democrat in the other. However, that Democrat would be the highest polling one - Schiff. So, such ads would be counterproductive.

Porter's only path was to get to the general election with Schiff and hope the Independents and the Republicans ( in their case voting against Schiff for her to try to stop him) would disproportionately vote for her.

[brush]

104. Porter and Lee did what they thought was best and so did Schiff.

The fact that he was polling better than either of them turned out to be accurate.

Politics is about drawing comparisons between you and your opponent. Schiff chose Garvey, probably because his oppo researchers found out about Garvey's outside kids and wife beating incidents in case he'd have to use that info in negative campaign ads in the general election. As far as I know he hasn't had to do that as it'll leak out somehow.

His strategy really can't be faulted as he won the primary as a Democrat, and in deep blue California, that means he, the Democrat, is the next US Senator for California.

[karynnj]

105. I agree

Was just explaining, as you asked, what I meant in my earlier post. I agree that each team tried to find the way that worked best for them.

I do agree that while the math made Schiff/Garvey likely before the ads, the motivation was to ensure that match-up. Porter accused him of doing it for precisely that reason. It does however, in blue CA, work for him in the general election.

I suspect that ALL the opponents found the baggage he has. Porter was the one best positioned to use it if she thought it would tear Garvey down.

[brush]

106. Rep. Porter probably should've used the oppo info. She made a decision not to.

I hate that both her and Rep. Lee will be leaving the House.

I would be happy with any of the 3 in the Senate. And I get why they ran as California Senate seats only come vacant every 20 or 30 years.

[brooklynite]

110. In what way was he nasty and attacking?

What I think sucked about it was that he could have run a sound campaign against Porter and Lee without being nasty and attacking

[JustAnotherGen]

6. Campaigned in Poetry

As a Senator - he will legislate in prose.

[maxsolomon]

7. I feel great and he'll be CA Senator for as long as he likes.

Porter will land on her feet - probably in the 2nd Biden Admin.

[whathehell]

31. Did Porter have to leave the House to run for Senator?

I love her, and would hate to see her leave public life

[Captain Zero]

62. I think Porter in a cabinet post is perfect

She can call out the GOP from there.

[Fla Dem]

8. He'll make a good Senator, just sorry Katie Porter lost her position.

[Sibelius Fan]

10. I can understand Porter and Lee going for it. CA Senator seats open up every 20-30 years.

[elocs]

11. I have no opinion about Adam Schiff. n/t

[pfitz59]

12. I hope Porter is offered a Cabinet post

or some such elevated position. She is too good to leave behind.

[2naSalit]

19. I've been wondering about her next...

Gig too. I hope she stays with government, I suspect that's her plan.

[SoFlaBro]

79. She should have lost with dignity. No fucking need to complain and bellyache about "rigged" elections.

[Happy Hoosier]

108. She's burning a lot of bridges...

… so we’ll see. I can’t see a lot of incentive to reward her given her temper tantrum here.

[Happy Hoosier]

13. Schiff is an American Hero as far as I'm concerned.

He'll be a great U.S. Senator.

I have no issue at all with him attacking the republican candidate and NOT attacking his Democratic rivals and am amused by those who somehow see it as "underhanded."

[DFW]

14. Schiff made a tactical decision early on, as did Porter even earlier

Schiff’s decision was to run a campaign whose central theme did NOT consist of attacking Porter or Lee directly. I’m glad he did. It means there any future politicians looking for negative things to say about either one will have to look elsewhere than negative quotes taken from a sitting California Senator.

Porter, for all her great political moves, shot herself in the foot with an assault rifle when she endorsed Nina Turner in Ohio over Rep. Brown, who is now D-Ohio. That was an ultimate “what was she thinking?” moment that I still don’t get. Since I don’t vote in California, it won’t matter that I am disturbed that Katie Porter has never addressed her action and said she regrets it. That was her call, of course, and I “voted” with my contribution, which went to Schiff.

[brooklynite]

15. What's underhanded about framing the arguments against your Fall opponent?

[former9thward]

17. It was politically smart for him and I am sure Porter saw it as underhanded.

It will help him in November but hurt other Democrats. More Rs will turn out this November to vote for Garvey and while they are at it they will be voting for Rs down ballot. In many districts that will not matter but it will matter in swing districts.

[whathehell]

33. Why are you "sure" Porter viewed it as underhanded?

[former9thward]

48. Did you miss all her comments about it?

I don't how you could since they were in the news and posted on this site also.

[whathehell]

59. Yes, I did miss them.

Not everyone can hang out all day looking for news items on DU.

[former9thward]

65. I said in the news, I said posts on DU.

Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff is making crystal clear who he would rather run against in November, releasing a new TV ad Thursday that contrasts himself with Republican former Major League ballplayer Steve Garvey.

“Adam Schiff knows he will lose to me in November. That's what this brazenly cynical ad is about," said California Rep. Katie Porter.

Porter blasted Schiff out of the gate, calling the tactic “cynical” and saying the Congress member acted out of fear he would fall to Porter in a November matchup.

“Adam Schiff knows he will lose to me in November. That’s what this brazenly cynical ad is about — furthering his own political career, boxing out qualified Democratic women candidates, and boosting a Republican candidate to do it. We need honest leadership, not political games,” Porter wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/01/ca-senate-porter-schiff-garvey-ad-00139094

[whathehell]

70. I know what you said

and I was going to include "the news" as another thing I don't always have time for, but I thought you'd assume as much. Clearly I was wrong. Thanks for the links.

[karynnj]

39. Why will Republicans turn out Garvey, but not Trump

In CA both will lose. If this were not a presidential election year, then what you said could be true.

[former9thward]

52. There will not be any increased turnout for Trump.

They know he will not win the state and he has been on the CA ballot in the general election two times already. Garvey is a fresh face and a celebrity and he will get an increase because of that.

[karynnj]

53. He will be also seen as very likely to lose

Not to mention he is NOT a fresh face and he has baggage.

[former9thward]

54. You have your opinion and I have mine.

[DemocratInPa]

66. Nobody is debating if Garvey will lose, he will..

But he will outperform Trump in California.. I think Garvey being the big game athlete in California and former Dodger, will get him votes sadly.

[NanaCat]

96. I wouldn't count on that 'higher' Garvey turnout

If I were you.

It seems that you’re not aware that literally millions of Californians, including GQP members, are hardwired to vote against him because he was a Dodger. The Giants v. Dodgers is scary high when it comes to acrimony.

Don't laugh. The hate is that strong--and that enduring.

He can’t afford to lose one R vote in CA, but he will. Because he was a Dodger.

[former9thward]

99. Hmmm

Some one who joined DU today is suddenly challenging my posts in totally unrelated threads in unrelated subjects. Interesting.

[Hekate]

20. Love the guy. I was incredibly impressed with his performance regarding investigations & impeachments

As far as running a campaign, that is not my area of expertise.

[TexasBushwhacker]

21. I prefer Porter, but I'm fine with him

[Trueblue1968]

22. He is GREAT !!!!!!

[Cha]

23. Was Porter's tactic Wise of So Gratuitously Attacking Schiff

that Barbara Boxer Stepped in to Endorse Adam Schiff?

https://thehill.com/homenews/4443492-former-sen-barbara-boxer-endorses-adam-schiff-in-senate-race/

“There’s been more than one attack by Katie Porter on Adam Schiff,” Boxer said. “The first one was during the debate, she accused him of taking dirty money. Adam is playing by the rules of the game. Katie Porter, if she doesn’t take PAC money, that’s fine. But don’t go after a fellow Democrat after you’ve taken his money in the past for your House race and say he’s taking dirty money.”

Another event that the former Senator said irked her occurred this week.

continued: more from Barbara Boxer

“And now saying that he’s against women when Adam Schiff has been, what we call as women in politics, Sir Galahad. He’s a Sir Galahad. That’s why Nancy Pelosi endorsed him. He’s a great guy and he’s been side by side with us every step of the way. So yes, this has pushed me over the line.”

Apparently Sen Boxer was going to stay out of until she saw all the Attacks on Schiff from Porter.

to Nixie in California who linked this post from Feb 19

https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=18700215

Good Luck to Adm Schiff!
and

Link to tweet

[W_HAMILTON]

24. I'm glad he attacked his Republican opponent rather than fellow Democrats.

Too bad Porter didn't do the same.

Between the negative anti-Schiff campaign she ran and her concession speech -- do you even call it that? -- I really lost a lot of respect for her.

[Cha]

56. No kidding. I hope she had the grace to Concede?

[mvd]

25. I will really miss Porter

Big money badly wanted her out of the race. Schiff will be a very good Senator and besides on Israel has gone to the left somewhat. But I hope Katie can find her way back so Congress - she is still young.

[MistakenLamb]

26. Politics is a game and Schiff knows how to play it to win

[tritsofme]

27. It is an ideal outcome. Porter/Schiff will not have to raise and waste a ton of money sniping at eachother.

It’ll be a lot cheaper for Schiff to defeat an incredibly weak Garvey than it would have been to defeat Porter, and now the huge amount of money that would have been wasted in a Schiff/Porter race can be diverted to actually competitive races in California and across the country that will actually determine control of the chambers.

Even better if Republican donors throw money into a fire pit for Garvey, that won’t get spent on their competitive races, only to end up running behind Trump on election night.

Only good things from this outcome.

[Camaromjr]

28. I Am a Porter Fan But....

I am a huge fan of Porter. I love her whiteboards and the way she brings the receipts. However, Schiff is a good choice. It is politics and he didn't get down in the mud with his fellow Democrats. Promoting Garvey is just part of the game. Schiff will make a great senator. I actually wish he was 5-10 years younger. He will age out in 2 terms (I get 3 or 4 terms but that needs to change).

[Demsrule86]

30. I like Adam Schiff. I am glad he won. He is a great Democrat. I will say Katie Porter could

have been more gracious yesterday. And I am sorry we lost her seat. We may not get it back.

[Bmoboy]

35. Numbers don't lie

Porter's district was re-apportioned to make it a toss-up. She squeaked by last time. It was a calculated move to leave a purple district and run for the open Senate seat.
But she didn't have the money and recognition of Schiff.
Barbara Lee never had the money or the poll numbers.
Schiff didn't attack Porter or Lee.
And he was more well funded and popular than either of the other two major Democratic candidates.

[Xavier Breath]

43. I have no issue with what he did to secure the nomination

and I'm sure he'll be an asset to both the party and country in the Senate for decades to come.

As a side note, even though I grew up relatively near to Cincinnati during the years of the Big Red Machine, I was a Dodgers fan and Steve Garvey was my favorite player. In competition I even wore his uniform number six. What a creep he turned out to be.

[Basic LA]

51. Dangerous question here

Rules preclude all but glowing love for this sainted individual from heaven who I personally worship. Golly he's great. And the way he won was so supremely glorious. God bless him. Yes sir, what a guy. A magnificent human being.

[Mike Nelson]

55. I live in CA...

... and don't feel anything sneaky was done. I thought Adam's ads were on target. Katie's "shake things up" ad wasn't appealing, to me; it was what I heard Trump supporters wanted... to "shake things up." However, I do like Katie and Barbara very much and hope they will be back on the political stage, somewhere!

[dlk]

57. I would prefer Katie Porter

I believe she would do more for the middle class and the poor.

[mcar]

58. He'll be a great Senator

As he’s been a great congressman.

[Duncan Grant]

61. Preferred Porter for Senate and I can live with the outcome.

I think Porter is tremendously competent and that she understands how the American people are exploited by unregulated capitalism.

Schiff has integrity and intellect, but I don’t think his priorities include a critical analysis/action of an insatiable billionaire class. Something I believe is long overdue.

That’s my 2 cents, don’t spend it all in one place.

[diva77]

72. I think Porter has a remarkable talent for messaging coupled with intense expertise of one of the most troubling

destructive forces -- corporate crime. I would love to have seen her in the senate. I'm ok with Schiff - he's excellent as well but not at cutting through the noise to get an effective message out the way Porter does.

What position should be given to Porter in the Biden Admin. if they recruit her?

[Duncan Grant]

73. She's too progressive for any appointment.

I don’t think the establishment will want her near any levers of power. She makes them all look like fools. So, I expect them to marginalize her as much as possible. Unless, she made a deal with whoever talked her into running for Senate in the first place. Alas, I’m not hopeful. I think her political career is over.

I’d be happy to be wrong about that. I admire her very much.

[baklava]

74. Not that she'd make them all look like fools . . .

but rather she's too much of a non-team player and too much of a show-boater. Katie is a better activist than a member of any administration.

[Duncan Grant]

77. Different strokes for different boats.

Katie is a professor of law, lawyer, congresswoman and mother. I think she’s affiliated with Senator Elizabeth Warren (another politically marginalized progressive woman).

Despite being a graduate of Yale and Harvard Law, evidence suggests she’s a pretty decent human being. After all, who needs a “lobbyist approved” team player when we’re (I’m) starving for a corporate-free politician, like her.

She is effective at teaching people the difference between sh*t and ice-cream. Therefore, the showboat.

(Sentimentally, California had women Senators for 30 years, I’m reluctant to give that up, but everything changes.)

[ananda]

63. Schiff is great!

While I like Katie Porter also, I would have
voted for Schiff in the primary.

[Initech]

67. As long as he annihilates fascist Steve Garvey I'm OK with it!

[betsuni]

69. What's harmful are baseless attacks that campaign contributions corrupt and beholden Democrats

to corporate interests, billionaires, lobbyists, etc. without any proof and attack character instead of policy while denying doing it. Insinuating elections are somehow rigged and bought and big money interests won't allow this or that candidate to win because they're afraid or whatever is really insulting to voters. What happened to all that whining about having to earn votes?

What's the goal here? I'm sick of it.

[Oopsie Daisy]

81. No goal that I can discern. It's simply bitterness, regret, jealousy, revenge and gin *

* that causes many politicians who "come up short" in the vote-count (or who see the irrefutable and reliable and consistently negative poll-numbers) to behave this way.

It's one thing to be "in it to win it" but it's quite another (and totally unacceptable) for Democrats to go all scorched-earth on the likely winner in a hail-mary attempt to kneecap the leader and/or to exact some sort of revenge because of their own disappointment.

Did Porter ever come out and concede properly (either spoken or written?) Did she ever congratulate Schiff? Did she pledge support to him?

[JustAnotherGen]

86. Seeing it here in NJ

And I'm not happy about it.

[Nixie]

98. The accusations are mindless drivel at this point. Hard to believe a law professor making over $250,000/yr

would be so careless about flinging accusations of corruption. Accusations require proof, not just sour grapes because you got outsmarted by a political opponent who basically knew enough about your poor campaign to ignore you.

There were plenty of questionable things about Porter that Schiff could have attacked.

--She made over $250,000 / yr teaching law. That's a pretty hefty salary. Is it corrupt? Let's all just call it corrupt since that's good enough for Katie.

--Katie Porter required her law students to purchase her book -- so she benefitted from royalties from those purchases. Is that corrupt? Let's just call it that since that's good enough for Katie.

--She had staff problems

--She had leaked texts that show her poor skills working with other elected officials.

--Her boyfriend punched someone at one of her townhalls.

ETC.

She had a cakewalk during this primary. I'm thinking Schiff saw her internal polling and knew it was a waste of time to pay for ads against her. She wasn't even competitive.

[Wounded Bear]

71. I think he's gonna kick ass on the Senate Judiciary committee...nt

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

75. I want him to win, will vote for him.

[Drum]

76. I'm pro-Schiff

[Emile]

83. The party has their candidate. It's time to move on

in unison and put the primary behind us.

[FelineOverlord]

85. Unfortunately

Katie doesn’t seem to be handling it well.

I know she’s disappointed but . . .

Anyway, “rigged” is now trending on X.

[Cha]

87. And, Just how was it "rigged"? TY

Last edited Thu Mar 7, 2024, 04:18 PM - Edit history (1)

[FelineOverlord]

88. She's upset at "billionaires" and "attack ads"

Mueller, She Wrote
@MuellerSheWrote
You know what you said, and that loaded words have power. I never thought I’d see a democrat cry about rigged elections. This is shameful, and it’s manipulative.

Katie Porter
@katieporteroc
Please find a statement from me below.

Link to tweet

Mark Jacob
@MarkJacob16
The loud rebuke of Katie Porter’s “rigged” claim shows that the pro-democracy crowd isn’t putting up with that crap no matter which party it comes from. And that’s a good sign for our country.

Link to tweet

Kaye
@KayeSteinsapir
⁦@RepKatiePorter
⁩, when you call our election “rigged,” you sound like Trump. Our democracy is on the line. Your words will increase distrust of our political process.

You lost. Best to concede gracefully and find another way to serve the public.

Link to tweet

[Cha]

90. Thank You So Much, FelineOverlord!

I saw that Tweet from Mueller She Wrote.. Exactly True!

[NanaCat]

93. I'm afraid I don't understand what your concern is.

When is it ever underhanded for a campaigning Democrat to focus his strategy on the flaws of a GQP candidate?

How can it be harmful to Democrats for a strong Democrat to win a Senate seat?

I realise you’re upset about Porter losing, but Schiff's win is about as far from a bad thing for Democrats as one can get, especially in California.

[Stinky The Clown]

95. I've not replied yet to this thread, but I want to challenge you. Where did I say I was concerned?

Please be specific in your reply.

[republianmushroom]

94. I like it.

He is the one I voted for.

He will be a great US Senator.

[shanti]

101. We happy n/t

[oasis]

103. +1

[niyad]

109. Happy 22nd DUnniversary!

[WarGamer]

107. He'll be an excellent Senator.

#2, So would have Katie Porter.

#3, pity that California won't have any female US Senators for the next 20 years.