• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Split Laphonsa Butler chosen to replace Feinstein

To notify a split thread.
P

Patooka

Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
6,738
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
www.politico.com

Newsom picks Laphonza Butler as Feinstein replacement

California’s governor chose a labor leader turned power player to serve in the Senate, and an adviser told POLITICO there were no preconditions about whether she could run in 2024.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

California Gov. Gavin Newsom will appoint EMILY’s List President Laphonza Butler to fill the seat of the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, elevating the head of a fundraising juggernaut that works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights, according to a person familiar with the decision.
Click to expand...

I look forward to Derec's explanation as to why this is bad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Patooka said:
I look forward to Derec's explanation as to why this is bad.
Click to expand...

I think it is wrong to a priori exclude 97.5% of California citizens from appointment based on their skin color and genitals. That used to be a liberal value. Now I am being accused of being a conservative for holding it.

And while he did not pledge to appoint a lesbian, I strongly suspect he appointed her to fit another plank on the progressive stack and not because Laphonza Butler, as an individual (and not a series of check boxes) was the best choice for the appointment.

Let me turn this question around: why do you think she was so great for this appointment?
 
Derec said:
Patooka said:
I look forward to Derec's explanation as to why this is bad.
Click to expand...

Let me turn this question around: why do you think she was so great for this appointment?
Click to expand...
Firstly, I don't know much about her one way or the other. The big plus I would say is she isn't one the people running for it for 2024. So she's a "neutral" person as caretaker instead of incumbent. She's also worked in Government before specifically in California and I suspect her values aren't to different from the typical Californian but I'm certain TSwizzle will post a Daily Mail article explaining why I'm wrong about that.
 
Well, according to her wiki, she is from Mississippi and currently lives in Maryland. Weird choice just in that regard. Also, there seems to be some mystery about when she was actually born. 1978 or 1979?
 
Patooka said:
Derec said:
Patooka said:
I look forward to Derec's explanation as to why this is bad.
Click to expand...

Let me turn this question around: why do you think she was so great for this appointment?
Click to expand...
Firstly, I don't know much about her one way or the other. The big plus I would say is she isn't one the people running for it for 2024. So she's a "neutral" person as caretaker instead of incumbent. She's also worked in Government before specifically in California and I suspect her values aren't to different from the typical Californian but I'm certain TSwizzle will post a Daily Mail article explaining why I'm wrong about that.
Click to expand...
So one does not have to be a Black female lesbian to feel properly represented by one? Interesting.

One point, she is not excluded from running in 2024. My understanding is there is no promise in these regards.
 
Derec said:
Well, according to her wiki, she is from Mississippi and currently lives in Maryland. Weird choice just in that regard. Also, there seems to be some mystery about when she was actually born. 1978 or 1979?
Click to expand...
She clearly has significant professional roots in California, but it is peculiar that she wasn't living in California when selected. Granted, it has only been a couple years, but still, if one were to put a caretaker in place, you'd think a local local would have been selected. I'm not losing sleep over it, but it does feel like Newsom is staying within the California sphere he is familiar/comfortable with.

But as Patooka notes, this isn't a kingmaker decision, which IS a good thing. Let's the people select Feinstein true successor.
 
Derec said:
Well, according to her wiki, she is from Mississippi and currently lives in Maryland. Weird choice just in that regard. Also, there seems to be some mystery about when she was actually born. 1978 or 1979?
Click to expand...

She was born in May 1979. Her family has established some roots in Maryland. She has had a residence in California since 2009.
 
44 years old. If she runs, and gets elected in 2024, she will be in the Senate a long, long time. She has a long history as a labor activist and organizer. Not a bad choice.
 
Well, at least he didn't pick Meghan Markle. But this originates from the Daily Mail, so take it for what its worth:

MEGHAN MARKLE U.S. SENATE SPECULATION ... Lines Up w/ Gov.'s Pledge

Meghan Markle's name has reportedly been getting kicked around to fill Dianne Feinstein's Senate seat -- which makes sense ... based on what the governor has said about who's next.

This speculation comes courtesy of the Daily Mail, so take it with a grain of salt ... albeit, admittedly, an intriguing one. The UK outlet reports that "phones lit up" this weekend with chatter over the possibility of the Duchess being tapped to fill the now-vacant seat
Click to expand...

More interesting though, is Barbara Lee is not too crazy about Greasy Gavin's idea on appointing a black woman to be nominated for the caretaker position:

 
It'd be helpful, if they just appointed people at points, without using the racial identification up front, as it suffocates any other discussion. She almost certainly isn't running in 2024, California is a terribly expensive state to run for office and the ground work for the money needs to be put in place.
 
Derec said:
AP News (via Toni) said:
adviser to Kamala Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign
Click to expand...
I wonder which of the boneheaded decisions of the Kamala Harris' Hindenburgesque campaign were her idea.
Click to expand...
Do you have a rational basis for assuming that her ideas are necessarily boneheaded, or is that just something an "I'm not a trumpsucker" automatically does because she's a black woman?
 
Checking Wikipedia, Butler has an impressive record as a labor activist. Hardly boneheaded. And yes, Kamala Harris did win election as VP. There is that for Derec. As leader of Emily's List, she will work well with the new army of Swifty voters now being registered thanks to Taylor Swift.
 
Derec said:
Patooka said:
I look forward to Derec's explanation as to why this is bad.
Click to expand...

I think it is wrong to a priori exclude 97.5% of California citizens from appointment based on their skin color and genitals. That used to be a liberal value. Now I am being accused of being a conservative for holding it.

And while he did not pledge to appoint a lesbian, I strongly suspect he appointed her to fit another plank on the progressive stack and not because Laphonza Butler, as an individual (and not a series of check boxes) was the best choice for the appointment.
Click to expand...
If the Governor Newsom chose Ms. Butler without making his pledge, I suspect your reaction would be the same.

All the kibitizers about such appointments make waves about qualifications without ever specifying what they think those qualifications and abilities are. Seems pretty much like sour grapes about a preferred someone (or some representative of group) not getting the appointment,
 
Derec said:
Let me turn this question around: why do you think she was so great for this appointment?
Click to expand...

Newsom made his selection based on the desires of his constituents and her established track record in California politics. It's more important to me that she serves all Californians (not just democrats) effectively in her role rather than challenging the reasons for her selection. This may be different if I were a California resident but I'm not. Many politicians don't have impeccable credentials, some exceed expectations, while others fall short regardless. The true measure of her fit and efficacy will be seen in the work she does as a Senator for every Calafornian.

I personally believe that a background in law or legal practice is essential for Senate members. However, many senators have proven effective without this experience.
 
Gospel said:
It's more important to me that she serves all Californians (not just democrats) effectively in her role rather than challenging the reasons for her selection. This may be different if I were a California resident but I'm not.
Click to expand...
Neither is Derec. He’s allegedly from the State of Margie Greene. Maybe that explains some things. You see a woman with a considerable record. A person in Georgia might just see a gay black female and write her off.
 
If she tries running next year against Adam Schiff and/or Katie Porter it will be interesting. Either of those two would be a great choice for California. I would certainly vote for one of those two first.

Given that she’s not currently living in California nor currently representing anyone living here it feels like more of a politically motivated appointment; however appointing either Katie or Adam would have given them a big advantage in 2024 so I guess it’s good that they can run against each other in an even playing field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom