Butler will be the only Black woman serving in the U.S. Senate, and the first openly LGBTQ person to represent California in the chamber.
The long-serving Democratic senator died last Thursday after a series of illnesses. Butler leads Emily’s List, a political organization that supports Democratic women candidates who favor abortion rights. She also is a former labor leader with SEIU 2015, a powerful force in California politics.
She seems like a good appointee, but honestly I’m just glad to have two functioning senators in my state now.
Yeah, let's get back to appointing judges ASAP.
She seems like a good appointee
Hard to tell, but she does meet the only two qualifications that Newsom thought were important enough to mention.
She led the largest unions in California and ran Kamala Harris' campaign. Those aren't nothing.
Depends which campaign, if she ran Kamala's presidential campaign then that isn't a glowing statement.
She works for a PAC, it would be nice if she would say that she will not use her position as "incumbent" to gain an unfair advantage by deciding to run when the term is up.
She should stay out of the race and let it be between the currently announced candidates. Barbara Lee, Katie Porter and Pelosi's pick, Adam Schiff as well as any others running currently.
They are definitely something, but they were not the main qualities that Newsom repeatedly stated that he was searching for.
Be explicit. What are you trying to say.
It should be very obvious what I am saying.
In choosing Butler on Sunday, Newsom fulfilled his pledge to appoint a Black woman if Feinstein’s seat became open.
I am saying that it is morally wrong to choose a someone primarily based on their skin color and genitals.
I am further saying that if you are going to do it anyways, then you denigrate the person you are choosing by announcing it publicly.
Additionally, I will point out that, Asian, Hispanic, White, and mixed race peoples all significantly out number black people in California. It is bad enough to choose a Senator based on race and sex, but it is even worse to eliminate 97% of his state's population before even considering their qualifications for the job.
Is it not conceivable that there are a number of well qualified black women?
If a race and gender is underrepresented in the Senate, then why wouldn't it be a good thing to push a well qualified candidate that also represents underrepresented demographics?
The issue I take with this meritocracy take is it assumes that the best candidate wouldn't be a black woman.
The issue I take with this meritocracy take is it assumes that the best candidate wouldn’t be a black woman.
That is odd. I see this exactly the opposite. To me it looks like Newsom assumed that the best candidate wouldn't be a black woman so he had to eliminate 97% of the field before choosing.
The best candidate very well could have been Butler, but unfortunately we do not know that because Newsom discounted all of her skills and experience and chose race and sex as the most important qualifiers for the position.
Even if he planned to choose based off of race and sex, all he had to do to not undermine his future pick was keep his mouth closed about it.
You are just playing a racist game. The same one that got played with KBJ and Barrack Obama.
Reverse racism is a troupe started by an avowed white nationalists/Nazis. The very same people that started the anti-crt BS that ended up lumping all discussion of civil rights into a "actually, this is racist because it makes white people feel bad".
It is not racist to prioritize well qualified underrepresented minorities over overrepresented majorities. It's not racist to do that explicitly. The undertone of your comment is she must not be well qualified, yet all you want to do is talk about her race and not the qualifications I listed.
She is well qualified. So the only reason you are objecting is because she's black. That is racist.
If you are really concerned about racism, perhaps focus on Tommy tuberville's defense of white nationalists and fight to make the military whiter. Not the appointment of a well qualified black senator.
You're game is transparent fascist.
You are putting words in my mouth and then knocking your own words down like it means something.
Why not try actually arguing against what I said, instead setting up strawmen and then engaging in name-calling?
I could not care less what skin color she has.
I care that for political gain Newsom singled out her sex and skin color like they were the most defining factors about her.
I care because some people buy into it so thoroughly that they think someone pointing it out makes them a fascist.
I could not care less what skin color she has.
Yet that's the only issue you've commented on.
You think it's racist to prioritize minority appointments, only racists think that.
It's only a problem if she's unqualified. Yet you want to only focus on white victimhood narratives put up by avowed white nationalists.
You're a racist.
More strawmen, more name-calling.
Just find a mirror, then the conversation will be the same as the one in your head.
I understand why Lee is so incensed that Newsom isn't putting her in the seat (which would basically guarantee her winning in 2024), but honestly why is she running for a six year Senate term in her late seventies?
She wants to be the next Diane Feinstein.
Nancy’s running for re-election as well. These old fogies just won’t step down.
Major props to Mitt for enjoying the later years of his life.
It's American brain rot. We devote our lives to our jobs to the exclusion of everything else; family, friends, hobbies, personal projects, etc. If other jobs were as easy and fulfilling as being a Senator no one would retire.
No. They’re just selfish boomers who won’t let other generations have a seat at the table. Judy like housing.
lol you think younger people will be any different?
This is American, not generational.
I think young conservatives are more likely to believe in climate change. Fox brought it up during the first debate. They may be nuts, but they are more realistic than many of those who have no skin in the game.
I think they're going to turn into ecofascists. Solar panels, electric cars, border walls, eugenics, and genocide.
I'm more willing to forgive members of the house running despite their old age than I am senators.
Representatives only serve two years, so they're making a shorter commitment. It's substantially easier for someone to think they can keep doing something for another two years than it is for them to think they can do it for another six years. Especially on health matters. But also, individual representatives are simply just less important. In our current political environment, an individual senator leaving office is going to be a huge disruption for any balance of power that's less than 54-46, with another critical point reached at the 60-40 balance. In the house it won't matter for any caucus that's ahead by ~5+ seats. Even in today's razor close house, it was elected as 222-213 seats — a nine seat gap.
There's a decent number of older representatives out there. I wouldn't have minded Lee sticking around there for a bit longer. The only real issue with older representatives is that by staying in office they block the pipeline for new blood and building a bench for future offices. Running for senate in her late 70s is ridiculous though, especially for a first term.
For Pelosi specifically, I'd put it at 50-50 odds that she retires shortly after the 2024 election. If it wasn't for her personal feud with Hoyer I'd put it at near-certain. When she decides to retire, I expect she'll stick around for one last campaign solely because it will improve her ability to fundraise for the DCCC. She's a team player through and through.
While I agree in the lesser of two evils kind of way, meaning its better than they are in the House rather than Senate or President, I still think it is pretty shameful. If they just can't let go of politics it is time to go back home to city and state legislative bodies.
Still, it is wonderful to read an actually well-stated view point in this post. Seems that most of the thread has devolved to name calling and verbal diarrhea.
Have an upvote for some quality content!
Because these people are addicted to power
It can also be simple egotistical narcissism, not that that's any better.
I did not know she was in her 70s 😳
Yeah see that's why I think ages of candidates should be listed on the ballot.
The irony is that it very well could have been a disadvantage for her to get picked. The incumbent advantage isn't really a thing for people appointed to the seat, and she'd be stuck doing Senate things for the next year instead of campaigning.
You "understand" why Barbara Lee is incensed the Governor of California isn't picking one of three candidates running for a Senate seat in 2024 to assume that seat immediately, and then run as an incumbent? hahahahahaha what
I understand but don't agree with it.
She wants the seat without having to win an actual election. What power hungry person wouldn't?
But TMZ said it would be Meghan Markle!
😂
I legit saw UK folks losing their damn minds on Mastodon at the very idea, which spawned out of nowhere on the Daily Mail because they heard Newsom wanted to appoint a Black woman, and she’s apparently the only one they could think of 🤣
It's insane that a terrible candidate had to literally die of age for this to happen.
I'm not voting for anyone over 50 at this point
I tend to agree. But I will absolutely vote for Joe Biden if he's the Democratic candidate for President. Not voting will just help Trump and the Republicans.
If you don't vote for Biden, you are straight fucking trash, man
Oof, yes. I really don't like Biden, but yes. You aren't wrong.
If you live in a deep red state, all the electoral votes are going to Trump anyway. Vote for who you want as long as it’s not Trump.
I disagree. I think it sends a strong and important message to the world to vote against him, even in these states.
You should still vote, it just doesn’t matter who for. The number of ‘Not Trump’ votes still counts the same.
So you vote for the party that almost never runs down-ticket ballots because they think losing the presidency is the only thing that matters?
When Greens start running for school board, city council and the state legislatures, I'll consider them. Believe it or not, those matter even more than who is president.
Since 1985, Greens have won at least 1414 races, including at least 164 partisan races.
At least 132 Greens currently in office have been directly elected.
1414 races is nothing. There are thousands upon thousands of state congressional districts and counties in this country. They are not serious.
It won't be much longer if Trump and the Republicans win in 2024.
Better replace Biden then. His current polling is horrible.
Still polling better than the Green Party rofl what a joke
Smuggest asshole in the concentration camp.
I love this and I'm stealing it
All you're doing with a vote for the Green Party is helping Republicans who stand for the exact opposite of the Green Party. That's how it is in an Electoral College system where the winner takes all.
Gavin Newsom will name Laphonza Butler, a Democratic strategist and adviser to Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, to fill the vacant U.S. Senate seat held by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a spokesman in his office said Sunday.
Butler leads Emily’s List, a political organization that supports Democratic women candidates who favor abortion rights.
A quick appointment by Newsom will give the Democratic caucus more wiggle room on close votes, including nominations that Republicans uniformly oppose.
Emily’s List, the group Butler leads, focuses on electing Democratic women who support abortion rights.
It was one of a string of appointments Newsom made in late 2020 and early 2021, a power that gave him kingmaker status among the state’s ambitious Democrats.
Democrats in the liberal-leaning state have not lost a statewide election since 2006, and the party holds a nearly 2-to-1 voter registration advantage over Republicans.
The original article contains 576 words, the summary contains 143 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Count on Newsom to appoint the "former" labor leader - i.e. union-busting consultant over long-serving, popular Barbara Lee.
She seems like a good appointee, but honestly I’m just glad to have two functioning senators in my state now.
Yeah, let's get back to appointing judges ASAP.
Hard to tell, but she does meet the only two qualifications that Newsom thought were important enough to mention.
She led the largest unions in California and ran Kamala Harris' campaign. Those aren't nothing.
Depends which campaign, if she ran Kamala's presidential campaign then that isn't a glowing statement.
She works for a PAC, it would be nice if she would say that she will not use her position as "incumbent" to gain an unfair advantage by deciding to run when the term is up.
She should stay out of the race and let it be between the currently announced candidates. Barbara Lee, Katie Porter and Pelosi's pick, Adam Schiff as well as any others running currently.
They are definitely something, but they were not the main qualities that Newsom repeatedly stated that he was searching for.
Be explicit. What are you trying to say.
It should be very obvious what I am saying.
I am saying that it is morally wrong to choose a someone primarily based on their skin color and genitals.
I am further saying that if you are going to do it anyways, then you denigrate the person you are choosing by announcing it publicly.
Additionally, I will point out that, Asian, Hispanic, White, and mixed race peoples all significantly out number black people in California. It is bad enough to choose a Senator based on race and sex, but it is even worse to eliminate 97% of his state's population before even considering their qualifications for the job.
Is it not conceivable that there are a number of well qualified black women?
If a race and gender is underrepresented in the Senate, then why wouldn't it be a good thing to push a well qualified candidate that also represents underrepresented demographics?
The issue I take with this meritocracy take is it assumes that the best candidate wouldn't be a black woman.
That is odd. I see this exactly the opposite. To me it looks like Newsom assumed that the best candidate wouldn't be a black woman so he had to eliminate 97% of the field before choosing.
The best candidate very well could have been Butler, but unfortunately we do not know that because Newsom discounted all of her skills and experience and chose race and sex as the most important qualifiers for the position.
Even if he planned to choose based off of race and sex, all he had to do to not undermine his future pick was keep his mouth closed about it.
You are just playing a racist game. The same one that got played with KBJ and Barrack Obama.
Reverse racism is a troupe started by an avowed white nationalists/Nazis. The very same people that started the anti-crt BS that ended up lumping all discussion of civil rights into a "actually, this is racist because it makes white people feel bad".
It is not racist to prioritize well qualified underrepresented minorities over overrepresented majorities. It's not racist to do that explicitly. The undertone of your comment is she must not be well qualified, yet all you want to do is talk about her race and not the qualifications I listed.
She is well qualified. So the only reason you are objecting is because she's black. That is racist.
If you are really concerned about racism, perhaps focus on Tommy tuberville's defense of white nationalists and fight to make the military whiter. Not the appointment of a well qualified black senator.
You're game is transparent fascist.
You are putting words in my mouth and then knocking your own words down like it means something.
Why not try actually arguing against what I said, instead setting up strawmen and then engaging in name-calling?
I could not care less what skin color she has.
I care that for political gain Newsom singled out her sex and skin color like they were the most defining factors about her.
I care because some people buy into it so thoroughly that they think someone pointing it out makes them a fascist.
Yet that's the only issue you've commented on.
You think it's racist to prioritize minority appointments, only racists think that.
It's only a problem if she's unqualified. Yet you want to only focus on white victimhood narratives put up by avowed white nationalists.
You're a racist.
More strawmen, more name-calling.
Just find a mirror, then the conversation will be the same as the one in your head.
I understand why Lee is so incensed that Newsom isn't putting her in the seat (which would basically guarantee her winning in 2024), but honestly why is she running for a six year Senate term in her late seventies?
She wants to be the next Diane Feinstein.
Nancy’s running for re-election as well. These old fogies just won’t step down.
Major props to Mitt for enjoying the later years of his life.
It's American brain rot. We devote our lives to our jobs to the exclusion of everything else; family, friends, hobbies, personal projects, etc. If other jobs were as easy and fulfilling as being a Senator no one would retire.
No. They’re just selfish boomers who won’t let other generations have a seat at the table. Judy like housing.
lol you think younger people will be any different?
This is American, not generational.
I think young conservatives are more likely to believe in climate change. Fox brought it up during the first debate. They may be nuts, but they are more realistic than many of those who have no skin in the game.
I think they're going to turn into ecofascists. Solar panels, electric cars, border walls, eugenics, and genocide.
I'm more willing to forgive members of the house running despite their old age than I am senators.
Representatives only serve two years, so they're making a shorter commitment. It's substantially easier for someone to think they can keep doing something for another two years than it is for them to think they can do it for another six years. Especially on health matters. But also, individual representatives are simply just less important. In our current political environment, an individual senator leaving office is going to be a huge disruption for any balance of power that's less than 54-46, with another critical point reached at the 60-40 balance. In the house it won't matter for any caucus that's ahead by ~5+ seats. Even in today's razor close house, it was elected as 222-213 seats — a nine seat gap.
There's a decent number of older representatives out there. I wouldn't have minded Lee sticking around there for a bit longer. The only real issue with older representatives is that by staying in office they block the pipeline for new blood and building a bench for future offices. Running for senate in her late 70s is ridiculous though, especially for a first term.
For Pelosi specifically, I'd put it at 50-50 odds that she retires shortly after the 2024 election. If it wasn't for her personal feud with Hoyer I'd put it at near-certain. When she decides to retire, I expect she'll stick around for one last campaign solely because it will improve her ability to fundraise for the DCCC. She's a team player through and through.
While I agree in the lesser of two evils kind of way, meaning its better than they are in the House rather than Senate or President, I still think it is pretty shameful. If they just can't let go of politics it is time to go back home to city and state legislative bodies.
Still, it is wonderful to read an actually well-stated view point in this post. Seems that most of the thread has devolved to name calling and verbal diarrhea.
Have an upvote for some quality content!
Because these people are addicted to power
It can also be simple egotistical narcissism, not that that's any better.
I did not know she was in her 70s 😳
Yeah see that's why I think ages of candidates should be listed on the ballot.
The irony is that it very well could have been a disadvantage for her to get picked. The incumbent advantage isn't really a thing for people appointed to the seat, and she'd be stuck doing Senate things for the next year instead of campaigning.
You "understand" why Barbara Lee is incensed the Governor of California isn't picking one of three candidates running for a Senate seat in 2024 to assume that seat immediately, and then run as an incumbent? hahahahahaha what
I understand but don't agree with it.
She wants the seat without having to win an actual election. What power hungry person wouldn't?
But TMZ said it would be Meghan Markle!
😂
I legit saw UK folks losing their damn minds on Mastodon at the very idea, which spawned out of nowhere on the Daily Mail because they heard Newsom wanted to appoint a Black woman, and she’s apparently the only one they could think of 🤣
It's insane that a terrible candidate had to literally die of age for this to happen.
I'm not voting for anyone over 50 at this point
I tend to agree. But I will absolutely vote for Joe Biden if he's the Democratic candidate for President. Not voting will just help Trump and the Republicans.
If you don't vote for Biden, you are straight fucking trash, man
Oof, yes. I really don't like Biden, but yes. You aren't wrong.
If you live in a deep red state, all the electoral votes are going to Trump anyway. Vote for who you want as long as it’s not Trump.
I disagree. I think it sends a strong and important message to the world to vote against him, even in these states.
You should still vote, it just doesn’t matter who for. The number of ‘Not Trump’ votes still counts the same.
Voter shaming isn't it chief. There's 100 million that didn't vote last time. Voter apathy is off the charts.
If you don't vote for Joe Biden for President in 2024, fuck you forever, you are straight fucking trash, chief
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm not a Democrat. I vote Green party. This is a democracy right?
You have the right to be a fucking dumbass, and we have the right to call you out for it
So we're not a democracy and votes are no longer earned? SMH
Sure, throw your vote away and help fascism overthrow America. Good choice champ.
I guess Biden better start doing more to earn votes then.
So you vote for the party that almost never runs down-ticket ballots because they think losing the presidency is the only thing that matters?
When Greens start running for school board, city council and the state legislatures, I'll consider them. Believe it or not, those matter even more than who is president.
https://www.gpelections.org/greens-in-office/
1414 races is nothing. There are thousands upon thousands of state congressional districts and counties in this country. They are not serious.
It won't be much longer if Trump and the Republicans win in 2024.
Better replace Biden then. His current polling is horrible.
Still polling better than the Green Party rofl what a joke
Smuggest asshole in the concentration camp.
I love this and I'm stealing it
All you're doing with a vote for the Green Party is helping Republicans who stand for the exact opposite of the Green Party. That's how it is in an Electoral College system where the winner takes all.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Gavin Newsom will name Laphonza Butler, a Democratic strategist and adviser to Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, to fill the vacant U.S. Senate seat held by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a spokesman in his office said Sunday.
Butler leads Emily’s List, a political organization that supports Democratic women candidates who favor abortion rights.
A quick appointment by Newsom will give the Democratic caucus more wiggle room on close votes, including nominations that Republicans uniformly oppose.
Emily’s List, the group Butler leads, focuses on electing Democratic women who support abortion rights.
It was one of a string of appointments Newsom made in late 2020 and early 2021, a power that gave him kingmaker status among the state’s ambitious Democrats.
Democrats in the liberal-leaning state have not lost a statewide election since 2006, and the party holds a nearly 2-to-1 voter registration advantage over Republicans.
The original article contains 576 words, the summary contains 143 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Count on Newsom to appoint the "former" labor leader - i.e. union-busting consultant over long-serving, popular Barbara Lee.
Ayyyyy