9 ms·

Is she planning to run for Governor again?

jedberg 9y ago
More likely Senate. Feinstein is up in 2018 and the tides are turning against her. It would be a tough slog but doable. Oh and she'd have to run as a Democrat. I don't think a Republican could get elected in California in 2018.
- briholt 9y ago
  The smart move would be to say she's switching parties because of Trump, run as a conservative Democrat left of Trump but right of the progressive wing.
  - komali2 9y ago
    I feel like 2018 is going to boil down to only whether you have an (R) or (D) next to your name, if the election in Alabama is any indication. When people will vote for a pedophile to avoid putting a checkmark next to a (D), that's when you can give up faith in the average citizen's regard for the details of an election.
    - cat199 9y ago
      Alternately: When people will vote to decriminalize child prostitution and felonious sexual activity to avoid putting a checkmark next to a (R), that's when you can give up faith in the average citizen's regard for the details of an election. http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essentia... https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1322 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... both parties are atrocious, along with anyone who votes along party lines thank you very much... but perhaps that was your point..
      - YurtleTheTurtle 9y ago
        Not sure what your links have to do with voting D or R. Specifically I don't see how either link has anything to do with "avoiding putting a checkmark next to a (R)"
      - 013a 9y ago
        Uh oh, this is HackerNews, you can't be anti-liberal here.
        YurtleTheTurtle 9y ago
        Can you explain how his links in any way support his argument that D's implement policy specifically to avoid voting R? Seems like you just want to perpetuate a victim-hood narrative that doesn't exist.
      - komali2 9y ago
        This type of response is called Ignoratio elenchi[1], and is a classic technique of twitter trolls and t_d reddit trolls. It is typically used to defend the person of interest in a discussion by dredging the entirety of history for an example of an individual even tangentially related to a group that is in opposition to the person of interest, doing something "bad," with the "bad" being inflated using doublespeak or falsehoods if necessary. So in this case, we were discussing how Republican voters are unafraid to vote for a pedophile because of his political affiliation, bearing in mind that this is the topical issue at hand because voters have been quoted saying they'd "rather vote for a pedophile than a democrat" (unprovided but assumed common knowledge in the context). The poster then found a single state law (unrelated to federal election context) regarding disease transmission (unrelated to pedophilia or federal election context) being passed by state legislators of the democratic party (impossible moral comparison - passing a law about disease transmission versus being personally accused of pedophilia). The poster sums it up by declaring because of this one action of a state government thus equalizes all parties and is also applicable in this case merely because of the letter next to their names. The end result is muddied waters, successful redirection, and further division. Are we talking about pedophilia and republican voter stubborness, or are we arguing the pros and cons of changing California state law re: disease control? God only knows. I'm doing my best to define, recognize, and combat these kinds of troll techniques, and am open to feedback and suggestions. I get it, "never argue with a troll, they will drag you to their level and beat you with experience," and also, there are probably better things I can do with my time than argue on the internet, but I usually just do it in 5-10 minutes spurts while coding anyway, not much else I can do as a quick break. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi
    - azernik 9y ago
      This is part of what I really like about California's top-two primary system - in a dominant-party system like we have, we end up in a situation where two candidates of the dominant party have to compete on ideology and policy, and the members of the minority party still get an equal say. With regards to Alabama, the general vibe I've gotten is that the very large evangelical bloc in the state is conflicted - trapped between very strongly held policy preferences (especially on abortion and LGBT rights) and their views on personal morality. Moore has seen a large slide in the polls, including among evangelicals, but there are a lot that are willing to hold their noses and disbelieve for their preferred policies. See this very interesting write-up: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-values-that-values-voters-care-about-most-are-policies-not-character-traits/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-values-that-values-...
    - djrogers 9y ago
      He seems to be a horrible person who’s done heinous things, but he’s not accused of being a pedophile (except on Twitter). Words have actual meanings, and using ones like pedophile outside their proper meaning reduces their value and impact. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-pedophile/2017/11/19/1a9ae238-cb21-11e7-aa96-54417592cf72_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-p...
      - komali2 9y ago
        >Leigh Corfman told the Washington Post that she met Moore in 1979 when she was just 14 years old. The then-district attorney offered to watch Corfman while her mother attended a custody hearing, she said, and he asked for her phone number when he was alone with her. Corfman said that days later, Moore drove her to his house and kissed her. http://time.com/5029172/roy-moore-accusers/ http://time.com/5029172/roy-moore-accusers/ Your (and the author of that op-ed) opinion and my opinion of the definition of "child" differ greatly.
  - fullshark 9y ago
    She fundraised for and endorsed HRC fwiw. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-whitman/hewlett-packards-meg-whitman-joins-ceos-endorsing-clinton-idUSKCN10E08K https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-whit...
- fullshark 9y ago
  A republican wouldn't even make the final ballot.
  - jedberg 9y ago
    Exactly.
- stevenwoo 9y ago
  I don't understand the delusion that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are under to think they can win election to political office without ever having done so before with the charisma of a wet noodle and a mostly standard GOP platform. I hate Donald Trump who also never won political office prior to 2016 but I can comprehend his appeal to racism and promising the moon on healthcare/jobs being a drawing card. The GOP would have a better chance of picking a conservative actress who at least has charisma and can read a speech like the actor Ronald Reagan (who at least was able to win leadership of his state first). Maybe Sarah Shahi, GOP members would be able ignore her Persian heritage because of the R next to her name.
patorjk 9y ago
Some people think she may be thinking about running against Trump in 2020 - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/21/kevin-oleary-thinks-meg-whitman-will-run-for-president-in-2020.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/21/kevin-oleary-thinks-meg-whit...
- junkscience2017 9y ago
  Silicon Valley is trending for like-ability about where Wall Street was in 2008. But of course she should run, as should Zuckerberg, Thiel, Altman etc because it would be a hoot watching them go down in flames.
  - cat199 9y ago
    but just imagine all the jingly-jangly campaign videos featuring $candidate doing yoga in the california sun and doing meet and greats while eating farm-to-table food in faux-rustic casual eateries!
    - rsynnott 9y ago
      She’d presumably be running as a moderate Republican primary challenger, so... probably not that.
  - 013a 9y ago
    If Clinton's 9-figure campaign couldn't get a handle on what the average American voter wants from their government, it would be downright hilarious to watch someone from Silicon Valley try. The region is so far out of touch, they aren't even on the same planet.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      The problem wasn't Clinton's campaign, it was the candidate; it's amazing that a candidate that widely hated and whose negatives were rock solid from decades of political exposure still managed to get more votes than Trump, who came in with slightly higher negatives, but about whom voters had far less firm opinions.

More likely Senate. Feinstein is up in 2018 and the tides are turning against her. It would be a tough slog but doable. Oh and she'd have to run as a Democrat. I don't think a Republican could get elected in California in 2018.

briholt 9y ago
The smart move would be to say she's switching parties because of Trump, run as a conservative Democrat left of Trump but right of the progressive wing.
- komali2 9y ago
  I feel like 2018 is going to boil down to only whether you have an (R) or (D) next to your name, if the election in Alabama is any indication. When people will vote for a pedophile to avoid putting a checkmark next to a (D), that's when you can give up faith in the average citizen's regard for the details of an election.
  - cat199 9y ago
    Alternately: When people will vote to decriminalize child prostitution and felonious sexual activity to avoid putting a checkmark next to a (R), that's when you can give up faith in the average citizen's regard for the details of an election. http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essentia... https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1322 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... both parties are atrocious, along with anyone who votes along party lines thank you very much... but perhaps that was your point..
    - YurtleTheTurtle 9y ago
      Not sure what your links have to do with voting D or R. Specifically I don't see how either link has anything to do with "avoiding putting a checkmark next to a (R)"
    - 013a 9y ago
      Uh oh, this is HackerNews, you can't be anti-liberal here.
      - YurtleTheTurtle 9y ago
        Can you explain how his links in any way support his argument that D's implement policy specifically to avoid voting R? Seems like you just want to perpetuate a victim-hood narrative that doesn't exist.
    - komali2 9y ago
      This type of response is called Ignoratio elenchi[1], and is a classic technique of twitter trolls and t_d reddit trolls. It is typically used to defend the person of interest in a discussion by dredging the entirety of history for an example of an individual even tangentially related to a group that is in opposition to the person of interest, doing something "bad," with the "bad" being inflated using doublespeak or falsehoods if necessary. So in this case, we were discussing how Republican voters are unafraid to vote for a pedophile because of his political affiliation, bearing in mind that this is the topical issue at hand because voters have been quoted saying they'd "rather vote for a pedophile than a democrat" (unprovided but assumed common knowledge in the context). The poster then found a single state law (unrelated to federal election context) regarding disease transmission (unrelated to pedophilia or federal election context) being passed by state legislators of the democratic party (impossible moral comparison - passing a law about disease transmission versus being personally accused of pedophilia). The poster sums it up by declaring because of this one action of a state government thus equalizes all parties and is also applicable in this case merely because of the letter next to their names. The end result is muddied waters, successful redirection, and further division. Are we talking about pedophilia and republican voter stubborness, or are we arguing the pros and cons of changing California state law re: disease control? God only knows. I'm doing my best to define, recognize, and combat these kinds of troll techniques, and am open to feedback and suggestions. I get it, "never argue with a troll, they will drag you to their level and beat you with experience," and also, there are probably better things I can do with my time than argue on the internet, but I usually just do it in 5-10 minutes spurts while coding anyway, not much else I can do as a quick break. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi
  - azernik 9y ago
    This is part of what I really like about California's top-two primary system - in a dominant-party system like we have, we end up in a situation where two candidates of the dominant party have to compete on ideology and policy, and the members of the minority party still get an equal say. With regards to Alabama, the general vibe I've gotten is that the very large evangelical bloc in the state is conflicted - trapped between very strongly held policy preferences (especially on abortion and LGBT rights) and their views on personal morality. Moore has seen a large slide in the polls, including among evangelicals, but there are a lot that are willing to hold their noses and disbelieve for their preferred policies. See this very interesting write-up: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-values-that-values-voters-care-about-most-are-policies-not-character-traits/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-values-that-values-...
  - djrogers 9y ago
    He seems to be a horrible person who’s done heinous things, but he’s not accused of being a pedophile (except on Twitter). Words have actual meanings, and using ones like pedophile outside their proper meaning reduces their value and impact. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-pedophile/2017/11/19/1a9ae238-cb21-11e7-aa96-54417592cf72_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-p...
    - komali2 9y ago
      >Leigh Corfman told the Washington Post that she met Moore in 1979 when she was just 14 years old. The then-district attorney offered to watch Corfman while her mother attended a custody hearing, she said, and he asked for her phone number when he was alone with her. Corfman said that days later, Moore drove her to his house and kissed her. http://time.com/5029172/roy-moore-accusers/ http://time.com/5029172/roy-moore-accusers/ Your (and the author of that op-ed) opinion and my opinion of the definition of "child" differ greatly.
- fullshark 9y ago
  She fundraised for and endorsed HRC fwiw. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-whitman/hewlett-packards-meg-whitman-joins-ceos-endorsing-clinton-idUSKCN10E08K https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-whit...
fullshark 9y ago
A republican wouldn't even make the final ballot.
- jedberg 9y ago
  Exactly.
stevenwoo 9y ago
I don't understand the delusion that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are under to think they can win election to political office without ever having done so before with the charisma of a wet noodle and a mostly standard GOP platform. I hate Donald Trump who also never won political office prior to 2016 but I can comprehend his appeal to racism and promising the moon on healthcare/jobs being a drawing card. The GOP would have a better chance of picking a conservative actress who at least has charisma and can read a speech like the actor Ronald Reagan (who at least was able to win leadership of his state first). Maybe Sarah Shahi, GOP members would be able ignore her Persian heritage because of the R next to her name.

patorjk 9y ago

Some people think she may be thinking about running against Trump in 2020 - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/21/kevin-oleary-thinks-meg-whitman-will-run-for-president-in-2020.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/21/kevin-oleary-thinks-meg-whit...

junkscience2017 9y ago
Silicon Valley is trending for like-ability about where Wall Street was in 2008. But of course she should run, as should Zuckerberg, Thiel, Altman etc because it would be a hoot watching them go down in flames.
- cat199 9y ago
  but just imagine all the jingly-jangly campaign videos featuring $candidate doing yoga in the california sun and doing meet and greats while eating farm-to-table food in faux-rustic casual eateries!
  - rsynnott 9y ago
    She’d presumably be running as a moderate Republican primary challenger, so... probably not that.
- 013a 9y ago
  If Clinton's 9-figure campaign couldn't get a handle on what the average American voter wants from their government, it would be downright hilarious to watch someone from Silicon Valley try. The region is so far out of touch, they aren't even on the same planet.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    The problem wasn't Clinton's campaign, it was the candidate; it's amazing that a candidate that widely hated and whose negatives were rock solid from decades of political exposure still managed to get more votes than Trump, who came in with slightly higher negatives, but about whom voters had far less firm opinions.