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.”

  • snooggums
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 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
      61
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 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
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 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
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 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.

          • tb_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            It was always obvious that a Democrat was going to win the seat

            Just like how it was obvious Trump wasn’t gonna win in 2016?

            Making the voice of an opponent louder just because you don’t want to go up against one of your own team is very disappointing. Sure, maybe it worked out this time, but it also means the republicans will have a larger base next election. How often can this game be played?

            • olympicyes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Not really the same thing. Biden beat Trump in California by 30 points in 2020. Hilary did the same in 2016. Not a chance Garvey wins in a national election. He only did as well as he did in the primary because we had something like 25% voter turnout.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 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.