Katie Porter’s viral interview video

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why the Dems are a mess. You dislike Trump (as I do) because he's such a monster, but it's OK if your Dem candidate is another kind of monster cause...well Trump is one? That kind of logic is not logic. It's desperation and lack of imagination.

Who we need is someone good. Good as in talented politician without being a terror. Of course nobody is perfect and most politicians esp. great ones are no saints. But you know how they are good and great? Because they aren't complete morons who look like blatant __. To be someone nobody wants to work for - that's not being good at anything. If you can't figure out how to get people to do stuff without them hating you - you must suck as a politician. I don't know much about her but I know I wouldn't want her running my state.

Trump needs to be defeated by someone not like him. He needs to be defeated by someone better. Katie is not any better, maybe different but not better. Trump is on the wrong side of pushing hate and fear but nevertheless, he's clear about his messages and so he does it very well. Dems suck. They suck at just about everything having to do with marketing/comms. They cannot sell ice in the desert. And someone like Katie isn't even someone who should be selling because whatever she's selling, people will come to hate it. People like her aren't good in anything because they are mean spirited folks who are all about themselves. Sooner or later, Trump and her will both find their way to the same place.

I worked with a lot of right wing crazies in my day and while I disagreed completely with their politics, like wanted to barf anytime I heard them talk, they were however personally down to earth no joke shockingly remarkably decent folks. You cannot imagine how well they treated people by way of manners and ethically doing right by their staffs and those who they mingled in the work place. The fact that they believed in horrible ideas was ugh, but they always had support in part because as a human being, you didn't mind they were around. I sure as hell don't want to be around Katie! That is a huge difference.

Kamala Harris was good. Almost the total opposite of Trump, in fact. But she lost. Not that Katie Porter would do any better, but it's been proven that taking the virtuous route is not a winning plan.

Biden lost the 2024 election for Dems the day he announced he was running for a second term. Harris never had a chance even against an opponent as weak and awful as Trump. Similarly, Trump lost the 2020 election for the GOP the day he announced he was running for a second term even with an opponent as weak as Biden.

When sitting presidents have a job approval rating of 40% or below in an election year, the incumbent party has zero chance of retaining The White House. The only reason the 2020 and 2024 elections weren't landslide defeats for the incumbent party was the historic weaknesses of the candidates who won those elections. These facts give us the sad proof of this age of political dysfunction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Okay. Can you cite the specific policies that are disliked? I'm open to reading.

She is very weak on homelessness, which is probably one of the biggest electoral issues in the state. She won’t take a clear position on encampment management, which is a very hot button issue. She just talks in generalities about needing more housing but is vague about what that means. She wants to fully fund Section 8 but everyone knows that even if the federal government is okay with that, which it won’t be under Trump, there are very few landlords who want to be Section 8 landlords so it’s an empty promise. It comes across as an issue she is avoiding. I completely do not trust her to manage homelessness as an issue whatsoever as a governor as she has shown literally no thoughtfulness on the issue at all in her career.

On crime, also a hot-button issue, she’s been far-left. Combined with her policy positions (or rather lack thereof) on homelessness, she comes across as out of touch. Crime is an increasingly important issue here because the perception (and likely the reality) is that it is rising, in part because of the excesses of some of the 2020 era progressive policing laws she supported.

What I feel, and what I hear a lot of people say about her, is that she is too focused on showboating in hearings and building her personal brand. She’s invested in building her image nationally, probably why all these folks here are defending her so much, but not in actually helping her constituents. I think that’s why she lost against Schiff, who has a reputation of steadily working for Californians. (And the temper tantrum she threw when she came in a distant third was disgraceful — like Trump, she claimed the election was rigged, insulting longtime dedicated public servants, didn’t call Schiff to congratulate him and concede. Just terrible sulking and tantruming, very Trumpish.)

It is really annoying to hear all these outsiders demanding we ignore yet more bad behavior from her, without understanding how weak her history actually is. She isn’t someone who gets much of anything done other than being loud in hearings, which might be fine for people aren’t her constituents but is hard on those of us who would be if she wins for governor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This reminds me a bit of when Al Franken was essentially forced to resign by Schumer and Gillibrand. Be smarter about this, CA dems.

That's a huge leap in logic there.

Here’s where I see the similarities - the behavior at issue is not great but really isn’t terrible. The right whips everyone into a frenzy. Fellow democrats turn on a smart, talented and imperfect politician.

Right.

Is she soft and cozy? No. Is she advocating for policies that a) aid her constituents as they need it most, and b) not trying to overthrow the country and/or dismantle our democracy?

We're good. I don't want to be like her, but I would appreciate her voice in making policy. Sure. Let's do it.

Extremely debatable.

Katie Porter is one of those candidates that Democrats outside of California have latched onto for some reason, and I genuinely do not get it. This thread is full of people who have no connections to California telling us what to do, with apparently no understanding of her existing popularity. She has been propped up here for a long time. People don’t like her policies. She is not seen as effective. This video is the icing on the cake.

- Californian

you can remove references to "Katie Porter" and "California" from the above comment and replace them with "Stacy Abrams" and "Georgia" and it would still ring true. People in the DC area get worked into a froth over politicians in other states who really aren't that appealing

If a politician is far left, is sassy, and has intersectional identities, she will receive national attention. People love the girl boss vibes.

some girl boss! Abrams got a ton of money from outside of Georgia but lost two major elections. She is out of touch with the people who actually could vote for her

You forgot about her opponent cheating. I remember the long lines in black districts because they intentionally under supplied machines to dem districts. And the next election where they made it illegal to give people waiting in line for hours food or water.

It's okay. People can plan ahead and bring food and water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why the Dems are a mess. You dislike Trump (as I do) because he's such a monster, but it's OK if your Dem candidate is another kind of monster cause...well Trump is one? That kind of logic is not logic. It's desperation and lack of imagination.

Who we need is someone good. Good as in talented politician without being a terror. Of course nobody is perfect and most politicians esp. great ones are no saints. But you know how they are good and great? Because they aren't complete morons who look like blatant __. To be someone nobody wants to work for - that's not being good at anything. If you can't figure out how to get people to do stuff without them hating you - you must suck as a politician. I don't know much about her but I know I wouldn't want her running my state.

Trump needs to be defeated by someone not like him. He needs to be defeated by someone better. Katie is not any better, maybe different but not better. Trump is on the wrong side of pushing hate and fear but nevertheless, he's clear about his messages and so he does it very well. Dems suck. They suck at just about everything having to do with marketing/comms. They cannot sell ice in the desert. And someone like Katie isn't even someone who should be selling because whatever she's selling, people will come to hate it. People like her aren't good in anything because they are mean spirited folks who are all about themselves. Sooner or later, Trump and her will both find their way to the same place.

I worked with a lot of right wing crazies in my day and while I disagreed completely with their politics, like wanted to barf anytime I heard them talk, they were however personally down to earth no joke shockingly remarkably decent folks. You cannot imagine how well they treated people by way of manners and ethically doing right by their staffs and those who they mingled in the work place. The fact that they believed in horrible ideas was ugh, but they always had support in part because as a human being, you didn't mind they were around. I sure as hell don't want to be around Katie! That is a huge difference.

Great post.

[Anonymous]

Fox News so who knows but more is coming out:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/katie-porters-third-controversial-video-one-week-shows-tense-exchange-staff-over-studio-lighting

[Anonymous]

I think she has mental health issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think she has mental health issues.

Most politicians do now. That is how they appeal to radicalized bases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think she has mental health issues.

I think she has a personality disorder. She is as ugly and nasty on the inside as she is on the outside. You can tell a lot about a person based on how they treat others, especially when no one is looking.

[Anonymous]

Wow, she is truly awful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she has mental health issues.

I think she has a personality disorder. She is as ugly and nasty on the inside as she is on the outside. You can tell a lot about a person based on how they treat others, especially when no one is looking.

Dude, you can't accuse her of behaving "this way" (however you want to characterize it) when nobody is looking. She literally knew she was on camera.

She's not soft or simpering. For heaven's sake, she's a politician. You knew that. It doesn't come with a retiring or kittenish personality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, she is truly awful.

^^Republican talking point

They want to cut the gas lines before she hits speed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, she is truly awful.

^^Republican talking point

They want to cut the gas lines before she hits speed.

Californian here. Nobody thinks she is going to hit speed. She doesn’t do anything for her constituents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, she is truly awful.

^^Republican talking point

They want to cut the gas lines before she hits speed.

Californian here. Nobody thinks she is going to hit speed. She doesn’t do anything for her constituents.

Then there would be no point in trashing her. She would just be voted out next election without comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, she is truly awful.

^^Republican talking point

They want to cut the gas lines before she hits speed.

Californian here. Nobody thinks she is going to hit speed. She doesn’t do anything for her constituents.

If you're a Democrat, which Democrats are doing really well by their constituents, and why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, she is truly awful.

^^Republican talking point

They want to cut the gas lines before she hits speed.

Californian here. Nobody thinks she is going to hit speed. She doesn’t do anything for her constituents.

If you're a Democrat, which Democrats are doing really well by their constituents, and why?

PS: To be clear, I mean to ask "and specifically why do you think they are doing well in their political offices?"