Current Events > California Democratic Party Snubs Dianne Feinstein backs progressive challenger.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dianne-feinstein-reelection-de-leon_us_5b4b3bf6e4b0e7c958fc0c4a

RIP. Her career is done.
---

Well tbf her great great grandfather was like sewn together by a mad scientist in like bavaria or something
---

Finally. People should listen to the dollop episode about her

*whistles*

This is the second big name in almost as many weeks?
---

This is the second time they've made this decision.

The first time (aka a month ago) she quadrupled his votes.
---

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.
---

Good. She was trying to ban violent video games when there were mass shooting. She needs to call it a career.
---

SodomInsane posted...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dianne-feinstein-reelection-de-leon_us_5b4b3bf6e4b0e7c958fc0c4a

RIP. Her career is done.

Yeah, I doubt that. De Len is a nutjob and she blew him the fuck out in the primary even after the California Democrats backed him in that race as well.
---

In the primary, Feinstein got 44% to De Leon's 12%. In the general, she'll likely have support from the state's Republicans.

Like, I'm no fan of Feinstein, but I don't think this intra-party posturing is really reflective of her chances in November.
---

Good. We need to purify the party and elect actual progressives, actual leftists. F*** her, shes never done anything good for anybody.
---

chrono625 posted...

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.

GTFO with this undemocratic bullshit.
---

Oh I misread.
---

I'm leaving the senator part blank in Nov. These liberal fucks out here rigged the system so they'll only be two Dems on the ballot for senator anyway. I'd rather walk on glass barefoot than vote for a Dem for senate. And they like to whine about the GOP ballot shenanigans.

I'll sure as hell be voting to repeal the gas tax though. It'll put a stop to Sacramento from ever being able to raise new gas and car taxes without a public vote ever again too. So good, fuck those pos liberals who think everyone in the state has a disposable income to pay for all their bs like they do.
---

Going_Deep_08 posted...

Good. She was trying to ban violent video games when there were mass shooting. She needs to call it a career.

De Leon is actually worse though.
---

EternalDivide posted...

I'm leaving the senator part blank in Nov. These liberal fucks out here rigged the system so they'll only be two Dems on the ballot for senator anyway. I'd rather walk on glass barefoot than vote for a Dem for senate. And they like to whine about the GOP ballot shenanigans.

I'll sure as hell be voting to repeal the gas tax though. It'll put a stop to Sacramento from ever being able to raise new gas and car taxes without a public vote ever again too. So good, fuck those pos liberals who think everyone in the state has a disposable income to pay for all their bs like they do.

You know this jungle primay happened with a republican governor wanting it right?

EternalDivide posted...

These liberal f***s out here rigged the system so they'll only be two Dems on the ballot for senator anyway.

I don't think you understand why the system was put in place.
---

Good. The more progressives the democrats elect, the easier it will be for Republicans to win in the long run.

Moderate democrats are going to go Republican to get away from the progressives in droves.
---

EternalDivide posted...

I'm leaving the senator part blank in Nov. These liberal fucks out here rigged the system so they'll only be two Dems on the ballot for senator anyway

By "rigged the system" you mean "two Democrats received the most votes in the primaries."
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0" data-time="
---

De Len is going to get washed in the general so this really doesn't matter.
---

0TiamaT0 posted...

Good. The more progressives the democrats elect, the easier it will be for Republicans to win in the long run.

Moderate democrats are going to go Republican to get away from the progressives in droves.

You could POSSIBLY have a point, if Republicans in California had a brain.

Instead Republicans in California have doubled down on far right candidates that are unelectable Statewide. They are even losing their base in Orange County and San Diego which had some affluent Republicans so all you have now are the white Republicans in the Central Valley

Hinakuluiau posted...

chrono625 posted...

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.

GTFO with this undemocratic bullshit.

So you think congressional and Senate seats should have people sitting in them for 20+ years?

Public political positions were never supposed to be careers. It's why NOTHING ever changes.
---

AlephZero posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0" data-time="

Why does the video label him a senator...he's not a senator...he's a state senator

CruelBuffalo posted...

AlephZero posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0" data-time="

Why does the video label him a senator...he's not a senator...he's a state senator

The thumbnail literally says 'CA State Senator,' bruh.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

chrono625 posted...

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.

GTFO with this undemocratic bullshit.

Yes unlimited terms should gtfo
---

darkjedilink posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

AlephZero posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0" data-time="

Why does the video label him a senator...he's not a senator...he's a state senator

The thumbnail literally says 'CA State Senator,' bruh.

Title doesnt. Watching on mobile

chrono625 posted...

So you think congressional and Senate seats should have people sitting in them for 20+ years?

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

chrono625 posted...

Public political positions were never supposed to be careers. It's why NOTHING ever changes.

They might not have been 250 years ago, but they're a thing today. That's not inherently good or bad, it just is.

hockeybub89 posted...

Yes unlimited terms should gtfo

They're not bad and no alternative addresses the problems we have in congress, it's a feel good measure propagated by the politically naive.
---

chrono625 posted...

It's why NOTHING ever changes.

Firstly, "change" isn't inherently good.

Secondly, I don't think unlimited terms is even in the top 5 reasons for congressional gridlock (except for an inability to come up with more than 5 off the top of my head).
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.

So the electorate gets what they want

CruelBuffalo posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.

So the electorate gets what they want

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

We need to kick old as fuck career politicians out.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.

So the electorate gets what they want

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

We need to kick old as fuck career politicians out.

Then get off your ass make a petition and find other people who want that

hockeybub89 posted...

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

If the elections are still run fairly, what's the problem with it if the country keeps picking the same person?

Was it bad that FDR kept winning from anything beyond "I disagreed with his popular policies"?
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.

So the electorate gets what they want

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

We need to kick old as fuck career politicians out.

Then get off your ass make a petition and find other people who want that

So is that yes or no that Presidential term limits are anti-democratic?
---

Anteaterking posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

If the elections are still run fairly, what's the problem with it if the country keeps picking the same person?

Was it bad that FDR kept winning from anything beyond "I disagreed with his popular policies"?

It's not like the people get to choose from literally every person in the country when they vote. Not everyone can run for office, so it makes no sense to limit it even more by stacking it in the favor of incumbents. I'm sorry you're okay with the President theoretically becoming a benevolent dictator. There need to be some limits on democracy and freedom to actually keep us that way.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

If people continue to vote them in, yes.

People only vote to keep them in because they don't think a new guy can do the job so they continue to reelect the same assholes.

So the electorate gets what they want

I guess we should abolish term limits for Presidents too then. If the country wants the same President for 30 years, then we should allow it.

We need to kick old as fuck career politicians out.

Then get off your ass make a petition and find other people who want that

So is that yes or no that Presidential term limits are anti-democratic?

Nope, we are able as a people to encourage our lawmakers to remove it.

The executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch can and should have different methods of election because of the different roles they play in democracy.
The president having term limits is not a good argument for congressional ones for the same reason why US Representatives serve for two years, Presidents for four, and Senators for six.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

It's not like the people get to choose from literally every person in the country when they vote. Not everyone can run for office, so it makes no sense to limit it even more by stacking it in the favor of incumbents

In all but a handful of states you can choose from literally any person in the country (who's 35, etc.) to vote for president. Nothing in Democracy guarantees you the right to have the candidate you like be viable.

The incumbency bonus for presidents is also influenced by factors that term limits create. In recent times, presidents have gotten ho-hum opponents for their second terms because "real" candidates wait for the president to be term limited. In a system without term limits, there's no "waiting out" the opposition.

hockeybub89 posted...

I'm sorry you're okay with the President theoretically becoming a benevolent dictator.

Not having term limits doesn't suddenly make the power of the executive branch skyrocket. I also don't see much difference between e.g. Obama being president for three terms vs Reagan and Bush being president for three straight terms. All of the problems of "What if someone kept winning because they were popular?" are really "What if the same party kept winning because they were popular?".

hockeybub89 posted...

There need to be some limits on democracy and freedom to actually keep us that way.

A more effective way of stopping dictators is not centralizing too much power in the executive branch, not putting them on the clock.
---

0TiamaT0 posted...

Good. The more progressives the democrats elect, the easier it will be for Republicans to win in the long run.

Moderate democrats are going to go Republican to get away from the progressives in droves.

#walkaway
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

chrono625 posted...

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.

GTFO with this undemocratic bullshit.

I mean... there should be term limits to our legislators.
---

Anteaterking posted...

A more effective way of stopping dictators is not centralizing too much power in the executive branch, not putting them on the clock.

I like assurances. I don't care how great you are or how much I agree with you. No one should even have the possibility of holding a political position for life. We do need more changes than just term limits, but it's the cherry on top.
---

So why is she hated? I don't follow CA's senators.
---

Going_Deep_08 posted...

Good. She was trying to ban violent video games when there were mass shooting. She needs to call it a career.

She also almost fucked up the Richard Ramirez investigation back before they caught him, by talking in a press conference about the specific brand of sneakers he wore leaving behind a unique tread pattern. The detectives on the case almost lost their minds when they saw that.
---

She could win on name recognition alone.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

chrono625 posted...

Feinstein, first elected to her Senate seat in 1992

And right here, is why we need term limits across the board.

GTFO with this undemocratic bullshit.

Lol no
---

Sayoria posted...

So why is she hated? I don't follow CA's senators.

She's really friendly with the intelligence community and generally horrible on stuff like privacy rights and is also super-hamfisted in promoting gun regulations. She's otherwise a fairly milquetoast centrist. She's also in her 80s.
In other words, California could do better. A lot better, and De Leon is better. She'll probably still win.

Also, term-limits are gross and undemocratic. It just also happens that the current primary systems are also bad like that.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Sayoria posted...

So why is she hated? I don't follow CA's senators.

She's really friendly with the intelligence community and generally horrible on stuff like privacy rights and is also super-hamfisted in promoting gun regulations. She's otherwise a fairly milquetoast centrist. She's also in her 80s.
In other words, California could do better. A lot better, and De Leon is better. She'll probably still win.

Also, term-limits are gross and undemocratic. It just also happens that the current primary systems are also bad like that.

If term limits are undemocratic, why do we limit POTUS to 2 terms?
---

DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC posted...

If term limits are undemocratic, why do we limit POTUS to 2 terms?

there are people who support removing that as well
there's also an argument to be made that legislators and the executive branch can and should have different requirements
---