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.”

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

    • themadcodger@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Nasty tricks to keep a populist candidate who isn’t a fan of the current capitalist system from winning? Well that certainly sounds familiar.

    • DancingBear@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Those 2 parties are the only ones that can possibly win in a first past the post vote with 2 major parties. Third parties by definition tank the side they are most like when they start to get real traction long before they can actually win elections. If you don’t like it voting third party isn’t a fix you actually have to fix how the electoral system works.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Sure, just keep voting for the guy shitting on your table and arguing about his opponent because his steaming log of shit stank a little bit more. You’re definitely making the right call and it should only take 50 or 60 more elections before things start turning around for us.

            • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Trump doesn’t suck a bit more than Biden. He’s a monster whose plans for this country and the world will lead to millions of deaths and the damage he will do will last for generations. Understand what your actual options are. Nothing you can do will logically reform the electoral system in 6 months but we can stop our country from going entirely to crap.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The only reason why Trump is even a contender is because of these two shitty parties and the Democratic leadership backing some of the worst candidates in existence. Every election is going to have people claiming the opponent “will lead to millions of deaths and destruction” because nothing is going to change which is why we had to vote against him in 2016, again in 2020, and now again in 2024. Even after he dies there will be another Trump popping out of the woodwork.

                By continuing to support these two parties, you’re just ensuring this will continue until the sun burns out. Neither party has any reason to improve things because they’ll get your vote regardless of how awful they become. Even aiding in genocide isn’t enough to alter your decision.

                • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Trump is a threat because an overwhelming majority of Republicans are willing to vote for a monster. Assigning blame for a full 45% of the population for the Democrats not running someone more to your liking is completely crazy. You call Biden one of the worst candidates in existence but the American people voted for him for Vice President of the United States twice and for President once already.

                  The states had the ability to elect someone else for this round if they were really so against him. Spoiler alert they aren’t going to. In fact of the states and territories that have held a primary the only one which awarded votes to anyone other than Biden was American Samoa which… doesn’t actually get to vote in the presidential election. The truth is anyone on team blue would by now be hated by our divided country. Trump and co have done NOTHING but lie since they lost. A Democrat moderate enough to win by definition will be disliked by nearly 100% of the right leaning folks and at least 10–20% of the most progressive if he hews close enough to the middle to actually have a chance to win. 37% is the new normal.

  • snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    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!

    • TommySalami@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        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.

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          In a normal primary Schiff would be running against Porter straight up, but California has a top two system. It was always obvious that a Democrat was going to win the seat so he had to beat her now to seal the win. I don’t fault him for his tactics, he didn’t do anything to harm Porter’s future electability but her comments made her sound entitled, which might actually hurt them. The amount of money spent is a real problem but so is the low voter turnout, around 30%. Republicans did a better job getting to the polls and Porter didn’t run a strong race.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      “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.

    • S_204@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      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…

  • harderian729@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

    • Savaran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          If they did, the rich would be running influence campaigns on it rather than making up other bullshit to distract people.

        • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Most people think the game can’t change or shouldn’t be changed. They’re a much bigger issue than the people trying to get by who think the game can be changed.

          • harderian729@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Nah. We can pick the game, but we cannot change the rules.

            I’d rather play a different game than the one I’ve been playing for the past 10+ years with no satisfactory results.

            Can’t keep doing the same thing expecting different results.

            • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              No, the rules are (mostly) open to change, but you don’t get to pick a new game. Physics is what it is, the immutable ground rules of the game, and it’s the only game in town. Everything above that, the social reality that is most of what people think about and engage with, can be changed, but you do have to invest a lot of energy to shift the inertia of the existing system.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Of course you can change the rules. Or even better you can change the game.

              Rule 1 of life … never play a game by somebody else’s rules 'cause you’ll lose every time.

        • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          How history continues to repeat itself? Really? Guess I’ll just put my magic glowey rock that speaks messages in an as of yet to be invented script that will never exist and ride off into the sun set on my bronze age chariot to defend my home from the sea peoples!

          This is such a myopic view of history it borders on “measels aren’t so bad! There hasn’t been a major death from it in decades! That’s why I don’t vax!”

  • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    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!

  • RagingHungryPanda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    How did that quote go? Something like “never believe that the rich will allow you to vote away their wealth.”

  • TotalSonic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m sorry she lost. People like her, Rachel Bitecofer, AOC must be the future of the party.

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      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…

      :/

  • RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    It was only a matter of time after she embarrassed the banks.

    Progressive candidates do not thrive in an open democracy.

      • Mike D.@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        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

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s not what it should be, but in the standard single party primaries it would still be Schiff winning vs. Republican guy whose name isn’t worth learning. It should just be ranked choice, but them doing an unusual thing didn’t lead to a worse result than the other bad system most states use.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s a really good primary system imo. It’s a good way for us to break out of party focused politics. Unpopular parties won’t automatically get a place on the ballot.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            They’ll just be promoted by their opponents to avoid having to compete against someone who could win.

          • olympicyes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Ranked choice would have Schiff vs Porter in the fall. Lot of people complaining about billionaires but the biggest and most concerning factor is this election was the worst voter turnout in California history.

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Move to WI Run for Senate.

    Her kind of no nonsense politics really sells in the Midwest.