1y ago

Katie Porter's star dims in failed US Senate bid, leaving the Californian facing an uncertain future

U.S. Rep. Katie Porter became a social media celebrity by brandishing a white board at congressional hearings to dissect CEOs and break down complex figures into assaults on corporate greed, a signature image that propelled the Democrat’s U.S. Senate candidacy in California.

The progressive favorite known for spotlighting her soccer mom, minivan-driving home life was trounced in Tuesday’s primary election to fill the seat once held by the late Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, finishing far behind Republican Steve Garvey and fellow Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff.

Porter didn’t go down quietly. She immediately pointed a finger at “billionaires spending millions to rig this election.” That claim resulted in a brutal social media backlash from many who were happy to depict the congresswoman as a graceless loser.

Perhaps chastened by the criticism, Porter later clarified her initial statement to say she didn’t believe the California vote count or election process had been compromised, but she didn’t recant her earlier remarks. Rigged, she said in a follow-up, “means manipulated by dishonest means.”

104 comments

She immediately pointed a finger at “billionaires spending millions to rig this election.” That claim resulted in a brutal social media backlash from many who were happy to depict the congresswoman as a graceless loser.
Stop booing her, she's right!
- It's the use of "rigged" that throws me. I agree money in politics is bad, and adds improper influence and incentive into the whole thing. That is not the same context that we have widely seen "rigged" used in the last 8 years. The term brings to mind GOP lies about election integrity, and bogus claims of fraud.
  If this was just someone I was talking to I would brush the statement off as bad word choice, and move on if there was nothing else. With it being a statement after an election loss from someone with political experience I struggle to let it slide. Word choice and presenting ideas/policy is a major part of the job she is running for, and I think such poor word choice in a statement she had every opportunity to proofread and consider is worthy of some criticism. Doesn't make her an election denier, or anything of the sort, but it does warrant a little slap on the wrist from the public.
  Overall she's right, but there were many better ways to say it.
  
  The fuck else do you call it?
  Her Democratic opponent spent millions in Democratuc donations on the Republican opponent to stop her.
  Fuck him, fuck California and fuck the Democrats.
  Fuck the Democrats entirely.
  I'm not paying Democrats to pay for Republicans to be competitive.
- “Rigged” is a loaded word these days and it was careless of her to use it. She could’ve just said billionaires are gaming the system or some other term that gets her point across. She won twice in Orange County of all places even with district moved, but she ran a poor race. I saw no Porter signs and no one stopped by campaign for her, unlike her house campaigns.
- No! How dare she accurately describe the problem with American democracy!!
- Okay, I'm not arguing that either of you are wrong but if we're going to start claiming that money influencing elections makes them rigged then doesn't that apply to elections where Dems out spend the opponents too?
  Obviously money plays a huge role, IIRC the bigger spenders have won the presidency 8/10 times recently and Biden apparently has a huge lead in the bank right now which gives hope despite the polls...
  
  doesn't that apply to elections where Dems out spend the opponents too
  Yes. Yes it does. The idea that just because a democrat is doing the spending means it can’t be wrong is pretty silly.
  Dems have a pretty lousy track record here, I’m still pretty salty about the DNC doing Bernie Sanders so dirty.

She was done dirty. Her own party played nasty tricks to keep her from winning.
- Nasty tricks to keep a populist candidate who isn't a fan of the current capitalist system from winning? Well that certainly sounds familiar.
- DNC is gonna keep doing the same thing they always have. They don’t represent democrat voters nor do they have any accountability to anyone.
  
  This is true for both parties. They could come in to everyone's home and shit on our kitchen tables and they'd still get elected because everyone is too afraid to vote for anything else but these two shitty parties.
- Reminds me of 2016 and we're all aware of how that turned out.
- What tricks? I genuinely haven't heard.
  
  Schiff spent money on ads on Fox News to boost the Republican in the race so he'd be #2 instead of Porter. He spent more money boosting him than the Republican himself did.

Adam Schiff is so fucking slimey. I do not want that man to represent me. He spent millions to boost a republican so that he would not have to run against Katie Porter. It reminds me of Hillary's superdelegates. The party is broken, the mega rich are pretending to let us have a say and then pretending to fight against the Republicans instead of solving problems.
- I like what Adam Schiff did previously for the country, but I did not like the tactics he did for this election against Porter. Yah, I get that it's politics. But if he needed to boost a Republican in order to not go against another Democrat in the fall, then maybe he's not the best person to represent California.
  Now, there's a chance Steve Garvey could win the Senate seat in November. It's a very, very small chance, but it's not zero. Why take that chance when it's so important?
  I hope Katie Porter does not go away. She's exactly what this country needs. The only thing I didn't like is that her campaign pretty much copied Schiff's after he did this. She's must've known it was hurting her too much.
  
  Well said. It was very selfish of Schiff. Schiff vs Porter in November would've been a win win. Boosting a crazy Republican is an awful decision and is a tactic that's already come back to bite us.
  
  Porter responding to blunt dirty tactics is very different from her opponent initiating dirty tactics. Progressives don't benefit from unilaterally disarming. The motivation and cause is very different.
- I’m a California constituent, and the idea of Adam Schiff representing me over Katie Porter makes me physically ill.
  
  And thousands of others prefer it, apparently.
- I liked both of them for different reasons. Yes I wanted Porter to win because I believed in her convictions to progressive policy, but if you watched the January 6th hearings, Schiff was fucking amazing.
  
  I was a huge fan before and after the hearings. He was great. I am far, far, less of a fan after seeing this cynical and slimy campaign.
  
  Just because a broken clock is right twice a day doesn't mean it's a good reliable clock.
- I don't understand how this is allowed. Why are they being allowed to manipulate ballots to push someone out? Paying to prop up a dummy candidate to manipulate ballots is extremely corrupt to me, unless I'm missing something.
  
  Schiff’s ads were attack ads on Garvey. Calling Garvey the MAGA conservative who votes for Trump and is dangerous for California. The ads implied that Garvey was a serious threat in the race. Garvey is famous in California for playing first base for the LA Dodgers and San Diego Padres in the 80s and 90s, but his campaign was bootstrapped so the schiff attack ads helped.

- If Voting worked. It would be illegal.
  
  Just ignore all the active measures across red country trying to effectively make it illegal for anyone who doesn't vote red.

I love Katie, but she fights the power and the power controls everything

Katie, I'm going to give you the same advice that Jen Barkley gave to Leslie.
Get a better job! Don't be the kid that graduates high school and hangs out in the school parking lot. Be the woman who moves away, climbs the ladder, and confidently comes back, and has sex with their hot old English teacher just for kicks.
We need people like you. Do not give up. If you run for President in 2028, I will volunteer!

I'm sorry she lost. People like her, Rachel Bitecofer, AOC must be the future of the party.
- I'm not even from there, and I'd want to vote for this woman and for AOC.
  I feel like it would be good to have more women in power in general, like Jacinda Arden, Yulia Tymoshenko, Sanna Marin. I was super hoping for Magdalena Andersson for prime minister, but we got Ulf Kristersson as CEO instead...
  :/

It was only a matter of time after she embarrassed the banks.
Progressive candidates do not thrive in an open democracy.
- Did you just accidentally misspell 'oligarchy'?
- Wait, what? Yes they do? What "open democracy" are you referring to?
  
  It sounds edgy enough and it's defeatist, so it's going to be upvoted.

My 2¢ - she just didn’t do a good job of getting her name out there with many Californians. Her name recognition is big with the wonks and the people in her district, but the people that bested her were doing a better job of getting their names out there. She’s a better candidate, but she didn’t run as good of a campaign.
- Ads cost big money, and if your opponent is well-funded by super-rich pacs ... well, you lose.
  The money is the issue, and the powerful have most of it.
  
  Fair point.
  The lack of press is what stood out to me the most. But if I think about it for a sec, Schiff managed Trump’s impeachment, he was on the Jan 6 committee, etc. So when the press wants to talk to a democrat about Trump’s crimes, they often knock on his door. He is a talking head that people pulled anytime Trump’s name came up - which happens all the damn time.
  Porter not only had to run the ads and buy the mailers, but she needed a way to compete with the organic press that Schiff was going to get. And she wasn’t able to pull that off.

Move to WI Run for Senate.
Her kind of no nonsense politics really sells in the Midwest.

Damn. I loved her white board slapdowns.

She was AWESOME.

She had my vote mar 5th

We don't want to solve these problems.
Most people think the disparity in wealth should grow, so that's what it does.
I have no hope for civilization and just look out for myself and those close to me, now.
- As I tell my kids. There’s no reason to like the game, and spend your entire lives doing what you can to change it for the better, but while you’re doing that, and to change the game, you’re going to have to play it as best you can.
  We’re not going to change to a utopia overnight, it has to be one little change at a time and people have to work to get to the place to make those changes first.
- I'm not sure most people think that. But the ones with money and power do.
  
  Most people definitely think that.
  It's how history continues to repeat itself.

All I know is I received so many daily texts and emails from her campaign begging for money that it seriously turned me off, and I don't even live in CA.

Being rich must feel good.

We don't want facts, we want the TRUTH damnit!

I will never forgive California for this. Your whole state sucks.
- ?? Why?
  
  CA's goofy primary system lumps GOP and Dem candidates all together. Top two go to November ballet. Adam Schiff focused his advertising on the GOP guy, totally ignoring Katie Porter and Barbara Lee. Since Adam Schiff had a huge budget this meant LOTS of advertising for the GOP guy. Schiff and GOP guy were top two. GOP has no chance to win in November

104 comments