I am sick and tired of seeing women like Feinstein and Pelosi attacked as "too establishment"

[EffieBlack]

when the ONLY way a woman can be successful in politics is to prove herself over a number of years.

Women have not had the luxury that men have always had - to appear out of nowhere and rise to the top quickly and/or reach the top with little or no experience. Instead, women have constantly had to prove that they have what it takes to be leaders and the only way they could do that was forcing themselves into the arena, keeping their heads down, working their asses off for years.

But what happens when they finally manage to do it? They get criticized and mocked - by Republicans AND Democrats - as "too establishment," as "tools," as "past their shelf life,"etc. - and then they're told to get out of the way and make room for "new faces" (which, big surprise, are usually whiskered).

Meanwhile, men stroll (and are often carried) into the ring in and stay there for as long as they want without anyone telling them they need to get out of the way. In fact, people like McConnell and Biden and Sanders and Hatch and McCain (I'll stop here, but could list names forever) are fawned over as elder statesmen who have the experience and chops to be effective in their jobs.

I call bullshit on this.

In other words, leave Dianne Feinstein the hell alone. She has earned her place. And while I don't agree with her on everything, I respect the hell out of her for what she has accomplished at a time when women weren't even supposed to be in the room and so appreciate her now that she has the stripes she busted her ass for.

She EARNED her place. And she needs to stay right where she is.

[LisaM]

1. THIS.

I heartily second these comments.

[Sophia4]

112. Do you know how old Feinstein is?

She's 84.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein

I'm 74. She is too old and should not run.

[C Moon]

115. There have been others who have stayed in the senate when older than Feinstein.

She's still sharp; She's still vigilant; She's still popular with voters. Why push her out?
Feinstein is hell of a lot more stable than Reagan and Trump ever were at their younger age.
The GOP has been dying to get Feinstein out of office for a long, long, long time.
This is just another one of their power grabs. I'm seeing it in the news on several fronts of California lately.

[True Blue American]

128. Strom Thurmond?

http://www.oldest.org/politics/senators-us/

I do think older members should retire,or better yet, serve a couple of terms the way Bob Vorker is doing.

Orrin Hatch has been there much too long.so has McConnell and several others.

None are serving us well. Too busy trying to raise money and get re-elected.

[Baconator]

179. She was born before Social Security was a thing...

It's so much harder for someone who grew up that long ago to understand the challenges we face today.

Cyber, instant connectivity, hybrid warfare etc.. etc..

It'll be the same in the 2060s for me. I won't have a true understanding of what people are facing either.

Even if it's possible, it's harder than it should be.

[samnsara]

130. the hell she is! shes in better shape than i am mentally... and im 10 yrs younger....

...sure she may not be able to sprint up stairs but dont for a second think shes UNFIT to do her job because of he age.

[George II]

140. Check out some of the things that Betty White has done and said recently. She's 95.

[onetexan]

160. Betty White's an anomaly. Plus she's not in politics, which may contribute to her longevity

[Sophia4]

161. Betty White can pick and choose what she wants to do.

A senator has huge responsibility. And who knows what will happen in Dianne Feinstein's life over the next six years.

I have always voted for Dianne Feinstein.

And I know I will be proved right about this, but a lot of people here disagree with me, many of them not from California.

Dianne Feinstein has been a hero, but it is time to give the opportunity to represent us in the Senate to someone new.

I know De Leon, but I don't know that I will really want to vote for him. But Feinstein???? Her age will be an issue even if unmentioned.

[R B Garr]

190. Isn't 80 too old to be President, then? Why no spammed posts about

your favored male politician's advanced age?

And not being from California doesn't mean people can't comment on the arbitrary nature and double standards of your age concerns.

Feinstein has committee seniority and is valuable. Her age is only an issue to those who want to use that against her.

[stevenleser]

202. Oops! nt

[Sophia4]

209. I think so. Male or female.

At least the presidency is only a four-year term, and the vice president is elected with the president.

But I would want a full physical assessment of anyone running for public office over 80.

I really don't think it is wise to run for president if you are over 80 or over. Not a good idea no matter who you are.

People in my family live very long, and I know what an old body can and cannot do.

[R B Garr]

211. She's a politician, not a gardener or carpenter or any

other physically taxing job. She was just on TV today sitting next to the President sounding as sharp as anyone talking about her assault weapon ban. That's what politicians do. And she was doing it as well as everyone sitting around her.

So it really doesn't matter who you or I have in our families. We can see her on TV and we see that she is not disabled from age, not mentally diminished from age. What a nasty bias to have simply because of the revolution tactics to oust good Democrats.

[George II]

198. Dianne Feinstein "can pick and choose what she wants to do." She chooses to continue to do....

....her great work in the Senate.

Her age will only be an issue to those who choose to make it an issue.

[Sophia4]

208. When she is in the Congress, she cannot pick and choose, not if she wants to do

the job that we citizens legitimately expect her to do.

My husband thinks I am being ageist, but people in my family live a long time, and I know what life over 80 is like.

She really should not be running.

[onetexan]

159. agree. There comes a time when it's important for the candidate to quit on their own to make room

for younger candidates. Feinstein has been in office since 1970 -- that's 48 years!!
We should not have career politicians, and given her age, she does need to call it quits and enjoy the remainder of her life.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

201. government is complex

We should have career politicians; novices get eaten alive. Our government is as complex as our society. It takes specialization to deal with it effectively.

[R B Garr]

188. You sound like you are projecting age issues onto Feinstein

that she does not have. This is a contrived issue. Isn’t 80 too old to be President, then?

[Hortensis]

189. Of course you shouldn't run. 74 with 0 experience,

0 training, and probably about as much talent? Same for me. I don't insult her and my own intellect by comparing someone who has all those qualifications in outstanding degrees to me, though.

Reality is that Senator Feinstein has the training, proven talent and decades of experience we need in this job. Age on its own is irrelevant for this job. If she dropped dead tomorrow, her colleagues would immediately take over her duties and a special election would be held to fill her seat.

[annabanana]

195. So's the Notorious RBG.. 84, Long May She Wave!. . . . .n/t

[DarleenMB]

196. And who are you to decide when she should retire?

For the record I'm 71 and if she wants to run again then she should. Stop being agist.

[onit2day]

213. Your bias is obvious. You attack male statesmen

like Sanders because they have not suffered (according to you) like female counterparts. Republicans would attack any democrat but dems being critical of dems, male and female should not be taken as discrimination in general. Each should be taken individually and judged according to merit. I would hate to meet a female duplicate of McConnell but do you think the reason there is not one with his job is due to discrimination? You seem to be casting a wide net but I would hate to think I got elected because I was female. Or male when it comes to politics. It's the issues not personalities that count. But I resent how you throw Sander's name in with republican's we all disapprove of. I have a friend who hates all males who dared to run against Hillary. I try to get her to look at them as people first, and then the issues they ran on. It's not black and white, male and female etc. It's humanity and democrats encourage development while republicans stifle humanity through greed and selfishness. Overall I fail to see how Pelosi etc have been attacked in general more than they have been praised and reelected. I refuse to jump to that conclusion myself but nobody's perfect.

[Me.]

2. I'll Join You IN That

Yet we keep hearing BS and Biden for Pres. THese women can run circles around those two but are being hammered as 'having lost their grip'...'too old'. But then, they're just women.

[Magoo48]

125. Old men, old women...perhaps its time to empower younger candidates.

My preference would be younger folks more firmly committed to a more progressive agenda, but regardless of their place along the political continuum, it is a time for the young and energetic. I’m nearing 70.

[samnsara]

129. I kinda agree but not many 'youngers' have the political savvy thats been cultivated thru years..

..of experience. Those 'established' have an entire repertoire of moves, knowledge, tricks that only came from battle scars.

[Me.]

146. Qualified, Experienced

whatever the age is my preference...I don't care the age if they can get the job done..well. Young as a basic prerequisite alone doesn't do it for me. DiFi is the one who released the Fusion GPS testimony and is now the one pushing to restore net neutrality. She does/did it because she can. Not to mention the way she's taken on the stupidity of Grassley.

[Baconator]

180. The democratic party is 2 generations behind where it should be...

... for leadership.

[TheSmarterDog]

3. Can't rec this enough.

[Kirk Lover]

4. And also that they are too old....time to move along because they are not fresh faced.

I believe people are severely underestimating the importance of experience....ESPECIALLY in politics.

[samnsara]

131. yes i agree... experience is EVERYTHING is politics...if ya wanna win.

[tonyt53]

137. Ain't that the truth!!!!!

[Plucketeer]

149. ELECTRIC CARS? HIGH SPEED RAIL?

Now listen here! The fossils we, er fossil FUELS we're all familiar with - they've proven themselves over centuries! We KNOW what they will and won't do. The "machinery" that relies on fossil fuel's providers hums right along until the fuel tank and/or the coal bin empties. And NOW you're suggesting we dump them for new and more efficient technologies? Whatte'r ya, NUTS? I'll be driving my old Studebaker as long as it can limp up to a gas pump. Then I might THINK about a vehicle that runs on sun!

[EffieBlack]

153. People not being cars or fuel, your post is ridiculous

[pnwmom]

5. The same people hate them that hate Hillary. Yes -- those achieving women are mocked for not being

exciting enough -- for being overly "prepared" and too ambitious.

But ANY women has to work very hard and very long to break into that men's club.

[EffieBlack]

10. Exactly

Remember when Hillary first expressed an interest in entering politics and people said, "Who do you think you are? You have no experience. You've only been a first lady."

So, she got experience. She ran for and won a Senate seat, twice. Then, just in case, she doubled down and became Secretary of State, a position she excelled at.

"She's too ESTABLISHMENT! She's been around too long. We need someone who's not part of the club!"

[uponit7771]

31. +1

[politicaljunkie41910]

47. Exactly. And most of these women have more experience by the time they get to Congress than

most men do including executive experience. Look at Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, both first time Senators who ran for President with the only thing that they could claim credit for is obstructing President Obama at every turn. A man only has to put on a suit to look presidential. Women have to graduate at the top of their class, have executive experience in the private or public sector while successfully raising a family, and fighting off sexual harrassment and than being called a bitch when she tells her harrasser to 'F' off.

[OhNo-Really]

70. BOTS pushing Sexist, Anti-Senior Women Politicians, divide conquer

[OhNo-Really]

72. 2018 is NOT THE TIME TO SPLIT THE DEM PARTY, GET A FREAKIN BRAIN

Speaking to those trashing Nancy and. Dianne. Those who aee are anti-dem this year.

The country is at risk of going down in flames and we aregue

Makes my blood boil.

[sheshe2]

6. Hell yes.

Thank you Effie.

[justhanginon]

7. Well said. There is a whole lot of stupid out there and it

is not all confined to Republicans.

[Squinch]

8. Here is my dream: Mueller takes 9 more months. Democrats demolish

republicans in November. Mueller's findings oust Trump and Pence.

PRESIDENT PELOSI!!!!!

[democratisphere]

49. Sweet revenge!

[dottie66]

51. I would love that

[Baconator]

184. That is a dream...

[NurseJackie]

9. It's a LAME "catch-all" attack from the lunatics...

... who have NOTHING of substance to complain about other than the fact that they want "change-for-its-own-sake" and who can't admit to themselves that having experienced public servants and maintaining the status quo isn't always a bad thing.

[EffieBlack]

11. And they don't seem to have learned from the Trump nightmare that experience DOES make a difference

In fact, it's absolutely essential.

[R B Garr]

71. This is exactly the crux of it all now. It's like a blind stubborness that is

ALL about personality and forcing their will. Those two words "Trump nightmare" should mean people are on the same page, but they obviously have the luxury of not caring about the consequences of Trump.

[ehrnst]

36. Change seems to always, always be automatically "better"

for many, especially if there is a woman currently doing the job.

No matter how well, especially too well.

[Me.]

147. But Catch How Often

the same people appear to say how decrepit and useless she is because she's OLD, VERY OLD. I just hope the poor thing doesn't drool at the next Senate Judiciary hearing. And BTW GRassley is 84...but we don't see calls for him to quit.

[NurseJackie]

172. True. This hasn't gone unnoticed. They're not as clever as they believe.

[hueymahl]

207. She has been a great leader of our party

I just wish she was not as conservative, or at least showed a willingness to change. Because I don't see that as a possibility, all things considered, I would prefer she step aside and let someone better representative of California Democrats take her place.

[mcar]

12. I love your OPs, Effie!

So well said!

[Cracklin Charlie]

13. Who has done more?

These women have spent the better part of their lives working to make other folks life better.

That’s good by me.

[GaryCnf]

14. I work in matters where my performance

is a matter of life and death for another person. If someone told me that I didn't have to hold to my positions as zealously as a white man because of the color of my skin, I would not receive it well. My colleagues are some of the most brilliant women in this country and their reaction would be the same. The respective oppression we suffer explains, but it does not excuse, anything less than principle when other's wellbeing is in your hands.

That being said, Feinstein and Pelosi have careers which they can well defend based solely on principle. They don't need these excuses and I can pretty well guess that they don't want them either.

[EffieBlack]

17. You've completely missed the point of my OP

Please read it again.

[GaryCnf]

22. Amid a bunch of excellent points

It looks like you suggested that they were forced into adopting centrist positions and compromises to succeed in an oppressive environment.

[EffieBlack]

24. I didn't say that at all

[GaryCnf]

27. Argh

I am very sorry. I read that so wrong.

[brer cat]

15. Exactly!

You stated that so well. Thank you.

[Scurrilous]

16. K&R

[EffieBlack]

21. Unlike Biden

Gotcha

[uponit7771]

28. Said the Russian bots, fuck that I don't have to make the same mistake twice !!!

[ehrnst]

38. ...

[ehrnst]

42. Yeah. I heard that about Planned Parenthood too.

[pnwmom]

44. Can you be more specific? n/t

[GaryCnf]

19. BUT

As to the rest of it . . . the "past their time" . . . the "move aside" . . . the "who do you think you are" . . . that stuff? That is all sexist bullshit and F that shit.

[NBachers]

20. Thank you. I'm glad to see this post from you, EffieBlack.

[marieo1]

23. minngal

Oh, my, do I agree with you!! Thanks for sharing. I have said over and over to leave Diane Feinstein alone and I appreciate others feel the same way. She is a fighter and doesn't give up.

[RandomAccess]

25. You're confusing policy with place.

I too respect all that Feinstein has done and accomplished. Yes, she has earned her place.

But again and again and again she has let us down on key issues. The people of California want a more progressive Senator. and they have every right to that.

Two different things.

[EffieBlack]

35. Pelosi and Clinton are more progressive than Feinstein but get the same treatment

In fact, Pelosi is criticized because she's supposedly TOO progressive. Go figure.

This has little to do with their policy positions.

[RandomAccess]

43. Notice I didn't address Pelosi

She's a little more progressive than Feinstein, but she's not (to my knowledge) being primaried.

Notice I just addressed Feinstein. Having said that, yes, there's sexism involved, but IMO -- as a feminist myself for right at 40 years now -- there are also legitimate issues as well.

I personally think Pelosi's a fabulous Leader / Speaker and hope she gets another crack at the gavel. But I also understand that others want a chance at leadership as well.

As for Clinton, for whatever reasons -- MANY of them unfair and also a good many of them (but not all) sexist -- she is just toxic now. IMO she shouldn't have been our nominee the last time around for that very reason (too many Democrats too soured on her, including me). Fortunately she says she's not running again. Having said THAT -- it was STOLEN from her, and it shows what a formidable candidate she really was despite everything (and what a genuine national emergency and existential threat Trump was, and still is) that she won.

Not every criticism of a woman is sexism. Not every dislike or disdain for a woman is sexism. Some of it gets mixed with or even fueled by sexism, but we have to try to sort it out.

I'll end with this, which I like to post whenever it's appropriate:

Hillary didn't lose because she was less POPULAR. She lost because of James Comey's letters and because of some even more important factors -- more important because they're not going away. They will be used against us in every election going forward, unless we can stop them.

The big problems are voter suppression, Russian meddling, and targeted voter propaganda through Twitter, Google, Facebook, and other forms of social media. There is no question that the Trump campaign, through Cambridge Analytica, did this -- and that the Russians did this. The only question is how much they conspired together in the propaganda campaign.

We need to figure out how to defend the democratic process from fake news and micro-targeted AI propaganda -- or lose our democracy. https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029576691

[LiberalLovinLug]

59. +1000

[R B Garr]

73. Your comments about Clinton are somewhat contradictory. The "toxic" part was

also planned -- planned by many who worked overtime to brand her that way. Who would do that??

[RandomAccess]

78. Uh, no.

Or, perhaps more accurately, only half true that all the negative attitudes about Clinton were due to planned campaigns.

I can assure you, my own unfavorable attitude about Clinton happened before there were any planned campaigns and stemmed from my own personal observations starting before she was ever First Lady. Many other people also had their own negative opinions as well, cleanly and purely acquired.

Now, were these exacerbated by the various campaigns? In some cases, yes. Not in all.

[StevieM]

217. She was polling in the high 60s when she was Secretary of State.

Then the GOP started lying about Benghazi and the fake email scandal.

[RandomAccess]

222. Yes, as has been pointed out many, many times --

The American public seems to like her a lot, EXCEPT when she's a candidate. She had a similar polling situation the first time around.

[StevieM]

226. Nope. HRC never had the kind of poll numbers she enjoyed while Secretary of State before that time.

And she never led the polls in 2008 the way she did in the years leading up to 2016.

[RandomAccess]

230. That's not what I said

I said she had better poll numbers as a non-candidate than as a candidate.

[hueymahl]

178. Well put

No matter how many disclaimers you give, however, you are going to be attacked for being sexist or not a real democrat or fill-in-the-blank because you don't support one of our leaders.

I may have to incorporate that last part any time in the future that I DARE to point out one of our leaders could be doing a better job.

[RandomAccess]

194. And isn't it always just a bit discouraging

to learn just how MANY authoritarians there are on our side??

[hueymahl]

205. Yes, but that is nothing new

Our party has always had its share of corporatists and other elitists. We do a LOT better with civil right, than the alternative, but when push comes to shove, party leaders, and many on this board, would like for us commoners to sit down, STFU and tow the party line. How has that been working lately?

[RandomAccess]

214. Sigh.Too true.

And my worry is -- it's going to work even LESS well this year.

There's a woman running for Congress in TX that our own DCCC released negative information on outright, to discourage her and try to defeat her in the primary. Didn't even share it as a leak, just released it outright. The upshot: she says it's HELPING her that they did this, rather than hurting her.

Methinks the natives are restless indeed.

[SunSeeker]

26. K & R

[lkinwi]

29. Agree agree agree agree

[uponit7771]

30. *** K&R!!!! DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE TWICE !!! ***

[Eliot Rosewater]

32. Please say this more often, all of us need to.

Well meaning left leaning Americans are going to fall for this nonsense of kicking out our powerful and effective legislators.

We have to show them why it is stupid to do.

Even in the best of times it is dangerous to do, but now?

NOW?

[True Blue American]

187. Look what Gillibrand and her co-horts did to Franken!

You want stupid? They were all ignorant as heck! And I cleaned that up!

[panader0]

33. Didn't Pelosi sponsor the first semi-automatic ban back under Clinton?

She's always been on the good side of things. She may be up there in years,
but she is still sharp enough to cut through the BS.

[EffieBlack]

39. Nancy Pelosi is THE most effective Speaker and Minority Leader in decades

Yet people want her out because they claim she's not progressive enough or is too much of a "lightning rod" for Republicans (duh - she's a lightning rod because she kicks their asses over and over).

Stupid stupid stupid.

[ehrnst]

34. Gloria Steinem nailed it when she said

that many men, on both the Right and Left, remember the last female in charge when they entered their teens, Mom, when they see a woman in authority, and they react emotionally like they did when Mom was telling them to pick up their clothes.

It's an emotional response desperately groping around for a logical justification.

Calling these pioneers "status quo" reeks of that.

[brer cat]

135. I agree.

It's an emotional response desperately groping around for a logical justification.

[mchill]

37. Me Too, to borrow a phrase

Pelosi holds the Dem caucus together and got us Obamacare.
Feinstein is well-respected by both sides and the works for certain tasks.

[EffieBlack]

40. Exactly.

And Nancy never lost a vote she put on the floor - because she knows how to whip her Caucus and can count votes to the hair on Members' heads. Unfortunately, too many people think that the Speaker's job is to rally the troops out in the districts and blame her whenever voters don't come through. That's not her responsibility or her fault.

For example, Tim Ryan from Ohio challenged her as leader, claiming that she was a lightning rod, she was driving away voters because she was TOO progressive and, as an example, he pointed to the fact that his district went for Donald Trump.

Excuse me? Rep. Ryan, that's YOUR district and you're blaming Nancy Pelosi because YOUR voters voted for Trump? What in the HELL were YOU doing?

[ehrnst]

150. This (nt)

[ismnotwasm]

41. K&R

[Yupster]

45. Like em or not, they are establishment

They've each been in their current jobs, senate and house for over 25 years. There aren't many more establishment than them.

[ehrnst]

50. I WISH that politicians like Feinstein & Pelosi were the "establishment."

Last edited Wed Feb 28, 2018, 09:09 AM - Edit history (2)

Give me a country where a woman has been in a position to fight for Gay rights, women's issues and rest of the Democratic Platform as long as they have.

It's like calling Planned Parenthood "establishment" when it's under attack every day from the actual white, straight, married, middle-aged male establishment.

It's been around a lot longer than Pelosi and Fienstein have been on Capitol Hill, too.

If years of experience = establishment, there won't be any effective, experienced progressives, because they transform into "establishment" as they gain experience. That's the logic here...

[BlueMTexpat]

123. +1! eom

[EffieBlack]

54. I didn't say they aren't "establishment"

My point is that women in politics aren't taken seriously until they build up a store of experience on the inside. But then, once they have developed a depth of experience that allows them to be effective, that very experience is turned against them and they're told that their experience makes them too "establishment" and, therefore, unqualified to serve further.

[ehrnst]

120. This!!!!

[Egnever]

163. Oh good lord

are you even from California?

Feinstein has been a mismatch for california for decades. I no longer live there but when I did she was a constant disappointment. She didn't just become a powerful senator she has been one for a long time. That power is what has kept her in office despite a less than enthusiastic constituency.

She should have been replaced a long time ago but the incumbency is powerful.

She will likely retain her seat but that does not mean she should not be challenged.

[murielm99]

107. Then Bernie Sanders is establishment.

Of course, I have always thought so anyway. He has been in politics for more than thirty-five years. He is establishment.

[ehrnst]

121. But that's different.

Last edited Wed Feb 28, 2018, 09:07 AM - Edit history (1)

Because reasons.

[murielm99]

185. Yeah, I know.

He isn't "too old" either.

[redstateblues]

46. I saw the guy running against her and his beef was incrementalism

It sounded a lot like a Jeff Weaver

[ehrnst]

48. Every other sentence, he worked in "status quo."

Status quo is women being harassed in the workplace.

[Blaukraut]

52. And it's men doing the attacking n/t

[trueblue2007]

53. and I'm angry our Female women are usually "too establishment" if they are older than 50 years old

why are the old men not "too establishment" ??? Is it sexism?

[vkkv]

55. WRONG !

Pelosi wants to be the rotating Speaker Of The House.. sorry, that's not exactly moving forward, is it..

This is the perfect time and rare opportunity to put some REAL progressives in office.

Wendy Davis could have won now.

[EffieBlack]

68. People who insist that Pelosi needs to be replaced seem to have no idea what

a Speaker actually does or understand why a party needs someone in that role with looking years of experience in the House.

[vkkv]

98. Ah, you mean like a "den mother" ?

no thanks.

I voted for Pelosi for 12 years when I lived in SF - yes, years !
And she was the BEST at THAT time.. no longer.


Time to move on.

[EffieBlack]

99. No, not like a "den mother" - like a Speaker of the House

But, whatever ...

[vkkv]

100. She needs to retire...

[MrsCoffee]

132. She needs to do whatever she and her constituents want.

Your opinion is irrelevant.

Those of us still in SF will be happy to keep her as long as she can do the job. She shows no signs of slowing down.

Go Nancy!!

[George II]

144. That's how it works in this country, a person's constituents elect him/her, not outsiders.

[vkkv]

175. When lived in SF, 1988 to 1999, I voted for her. I would still vote for her as a Rep. - but not for

Speaker.

We need younger Dems to begin taking positions of power so that Dems have a wider variety of known quants to choose from when it comes to higher positions of power.

What Dem that isn't an old person is well enough known and qualified to campaign for President in 2020 ?

While the Repukes have all of those idiot teabagging Reps, the Dems stuck with the established old people blocking younger up & comings to be ready when the time comes.

I'm not the only one saying this, Dem leadership has put the party at risk by not letting in more progressive young people.

[ehrnst]

151. Why? (nt)

[vkkv]

173. She's fine for the left - but the right and middle have been brainwashed to hate her.

That doesn't bring in voters to flip.

We need younger Dems to begin taking positions of power so that Dems have a wider variety of known quants to choose from when it comes to higher positions of power.

What Dem that isn't an old person is well enough known and qualified to campaign for President in 2020 ?

While the Repukes have all of those idiot teabagging Reps, the Dems stuck with the established old people blocking younger up & comings to be ready when the time comes.

I'm not the only one saying this, Dem leadership has put the party at risk by not letting in more progressive young people.

Repukes are going to make the 2020 election about "Speaker Pelosi" - why give them the ammo? Why not put a younger person in there, Nancy has already been Speaker and lost the House, remember that one?

[George II]

145. Isn't Wendy Davis from Texas? Is she in the House of Representatives?

[vkkv]

170. When she ran for Governor.. She might have won in this climate.

[GWC58]

56. I do not agree

with Sen. Feinstein on everything, but she’s much, much better than a Thuglican. No doubt about it, not even close! As for Nancy Pelosi? Only one of the very best House Speakers in a long time. Why is she not progressive? What am I missing here?

[iluvtennis]

57. Well said...++++++++++++++++++ agree. I'm a Californian and will vote for Sen Feinstein.

[wryter2000]

65. Same here

And I'd vote for Pelosi if I were in her district

[MaryMagdaline]

58. Feinstein is a woman the Russians fear like Hillary

[smirkymonkey]

60. Hear, Hear!

Thank YOU!

[PatrickforO]

61. Feinstein is the one who ignored the Republicans and published those

documents they were trying to suppress.

She's fine. She has seniority. She's on an important committee.

Let's focus on flipping the US House and Senate. Go after Republicans that desperately need to be defeated, not other Dems.

[Egnever]

164. Because she is being challenged

if you think she would have done that without a real challenge to her position you are dreaming.

[R B Garr]

165. Not really. This Trump coup is unprecedented. Did you see

the testimony yesterday from the NSA Director? He was visibly agitated by the lack of concern from the Trumpies about the Russian election hacks.

Not to mention, Feinstein herself said she was going to step away, but Clinton's loss made her reconsider. Stability and seniority were needed to see some of these Russia investigations through.

[EffieBlack]

167. Funny thing - they accuse her of not doing the right things

but when presented with proof otherwise, they credit it to "the resistance."

So predictable.

[R B Garr]

181. Yes, it is predictable. It looks like they can't accept that the strategy

for all this disruptive change has been exposed. It was just a means to a coup. The "insider" mantra was meaningless -- just a way to attack elected Democrats.

[zentrum]

62. The only way

…..for any politician to survive is to prove themselves over and over. That's what they are there for—to constantly defend us, sponsor new initiatives, fight for issues etc. The nature of politics is that there's no such thing as just having seniority. It's not a corporate job. It's governance.

I'm one of the women who wishes Pelosi and Feinstein were more progressive—these are different times calling for real boldness on a daily basis. Warren proves herself anew every day. DC politics is not for those resting on history—it's for making history. Daily, if necessary.

It's necessary now.

[spooky3]

63. You are 100% right!!

Recently I've even seen Warren (who once was deemed a champion of progressives, as MORE than acceptable to those who couldn't support H. Clinton, despite similarities in voting records,etc.) criticized as being too old, too SOMETHING, etc. It's sexist or an interaction between sexism and ageism.

[JohnnyRingo]

64. K&R

Thanx for posting.

[mythology]

66. Pelosi is damn good at her job

How many times did she bring a vote up when she was Speaker only to have her to not have the votes. Never. Paul Ryan, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell can't say that.

[tiredtoo]

67. do not fall into the divisive trap being set by the russians

we have a chance to regain our government if we avoid total conflict. ALL Democratic candidates are better than ANY repug candidate.

[EffieBlack]

69. Surely, you're not saying I'M falling into a Russian trap by standing up for our female stalwarts?

Ok ...

[tiredtoo]

85. No

I am just saying we all must avoid creating stress amongst ourselves. In primaries there are tough conditions. And many things said that can be harmful later. If you support our female stalwarts, good for you. Just do not attack those that support other candidates. Regardless of what they say.

[EffieBlack]

88. I suggest you direct your lectures to those who are attacking our female stalwarts

and not to those of us who refuse to allow them to get away with it. I'm not going to shut up and look the other way out of fear that somebody's might call me "divisive" because I refuse to put up with that shit. That's the excuse that's always given to shut down people who call out racism and sexism, but I'm not having it and certainly am not going to stfu "regardless what they say."

[tiredtoo]

90. point one out to me and i will gladly lecture them. EOM

[R B Garr]

74. Great post. The irony is that Feinstein said herself that she thought about

stepping away, but decided to stay a little longer for stability after Clinton's loss. She was on all the committees and saw suspicious activity and wanted to see it through.

So for people to be so anxious to get rid of good Democrats, they have actually accomplished the opposite. Now people are more invested in maintaining positions and having stability in government. They have made their own movement suspect and less credible. Look what the change has gotten us -- an absolute maniac. Stability in government is useful and necessary after all.

[EffieBlack]

75. Great point!

[mudstump]

76. Feinstein and Pelosi are part of the establishment...

that didn't do enough to keep the republicans from taking everything from the state houses to the White House. No thanks....it's time for new dems who will actually respect their base and fight for real progressive principles.

[EffieBlack]

81. It wasn't Feinstein's and Pelosi's fault that too many progressives got a boo boo hurt because Obama

didn't force single payer through Congress in his first year in office and in order to "teach him a lesson," refused to vote (or voted third party) in the mid-term elections, thereby handing the House of Representatives and statehouses across the country over to Republicans.

Here's a little civics lesson for you: It's not the job of the Speaker of the House and Senator from California to turn out the grassroots vote across the country. And if you weren't paying attention enough to see that Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama fought for progressive principles, and won several battles by using every ounce of blood they had to drag Obamacare and other legislation over the finish line, while fighting tooth and nail not only Republicans but whiny baby progressives in their own party who would rather lose the fight than get a partial win, then you have a lot to learn, so please spare us lectures about political commitment and strategy.

[Wwcd]

83. Most Righteous Post, EffieBlack🍃

I will bookmark, copy & save.

Truth.
Thank You.

[EffieBlack]

84. :-)

[certainot]

92. the left has been really fucking stupid expecting their reps to stick their necks out while

totally ignoring the right's best weapon. the 'left' lets 1500 corporate think tank-coordinated radio stations take free pots shots at dems all day and them expect them to keep going left.

if the koch bros or NRA or Putin would spend $1000 /hr for pro corporate propaganda 1200 radio stations doing the typical 15 hrs a day would be worth $18mil/PER DAY! or $5bil/year

so they're all working for the NRA all day now getting a free speech free ride attacking those parkland student activists and when the nra wins and the gop cons get away with a minimum a lot of idiot 'liberals' (and russian trolls) will once again put their music on, analyze fish without the water, and attack 'spineless' democrats

it's really the biggest political mistake in history -

[dlk]

77. Amen!!! Misogyny Takes Many Forms Including Demanding Accomplished Women "Step Aside"

It's long past time to call out what this insidious behavior really is -- misogyny!

[dlk]

79. Amen! It's Long Past Time to Call BS on this Insidious Form of Misogyny

We need more women "elder statesmen " not fewer. At every turn, men will find a way to undermine successful, accomplished women. We need to stand behind them and support them. Not pull the rug out.

[Hekate]

80. Spot on, EffieBlack

[EricMaundry]

82. Thank you

I agree. And I live in CA.

[Bettie]

86. So no more primaries

we just take whoever is in office, no matter what and never, ever have anyone run against them unless/until they die in office?

[EffieBlack]

89. You surely didn't get that from my OP

And if you did, I suggest that you go back and read it again before making any further comments.

[apcalc]

87. Damn right!

[lunatica]

91. Liking them or not it's certainly not because they're women

I've always thought of Feinstein as Republican Lite. She just makes a big democratic splash every once in a while on a national level that makes everyone think she's really great. But she isn't what she appears to be. Most of her big splashes don't usually go anywhere, but they do make the news.

On the other hand I like Nancy Pelosi a lot and I think she has plenty of fight still left in her.

[EffieBlack]

95. I never said you like or dislike them because they're women nt

[meadowlander]

105. You said they are attacked as "too establishment" because they are women

and not because they are, you know, too establishment. Pelosi lost any support from me when she took Bush impeachment off the table and when she refused to even try for single payer in 2008 when we had unified Democratic government. How is that a criticism that wouldn't have been leveled at a male speaker of the house from the same era?

It's not really that helpful to impugn motives on other peoples legitimate criticisms of our leaders. Why not try listening to where they are coming from instead?

My absolute nightmare is that we bust our asses to win majorities in Congress and January 3, 2019 the first words out of Speaker Pelosi's mouth (again) are "we need to work with the Trump administration and put the past behind us". And I have no confidence that that will not be the case. Because she has never given any indication that it will not be. On the contrary, she thinks pursuing Trump impeachment is a "waste of time" without even waiting to hear the outcome of the Mueller investigation: http://time.com/5029752/nancy-pelosi-impeach-trump/

We're in this shit today because we didn't rip the throat out of the Republican party in 2008 when we has the chance over all the bullshit they pulled during the Bush era. We need leadership in 2019 - not the same people who punted the ball last time and are lining up to punt it again.

[EffieBlack]

117. I did NOT say "they are attacked as 'too establishment' because they are women"

If that's what you got out of it, you've completely missed the point.

[whopis01]

122. Really? Because thats one of the things I got from your post as well

Regarding the women, you said:

They get criticized and mocked - by Republicans AND Democrats - as "too establishment," as "tools," as "past their shelf life,"etc.

And regarding men you said:

Meanwhile, men stroll (and are often carried) into the ring in and stay there for as long as they want without anyone telling them they need to get out of the way.

That seems to pretty clearly state that women get criticized as being too establishment much more so than men do.

Which I agree with. But I am left wondering what your point was since I seemed to have missed it as well.

[meadowlander]

169. That's literally the title of your OP.

[EffieBlack]

177. You need to learn the definition of "literally". Nt

[melman]

182. Yeah, you actually did

[EffieBlack]

183. Whatever

[tirebiter]

93. DiFi's Assault Weapon Ban is the only one ever passed.

The 2017 version needs a Democratic majority to pass. Doesn't sound any kind of Republican to me.

[betsuni]

96. K&R

[MLAA]

97. 👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾👏🏻👏🏿

[Hekate]

101. Kick again

[Stonepounder]

102. I lived in California for a number of years. I love CA Dems.

Pelosi, Feinstein, Brown (both Willie and Jerry) and voted for both Pelosi and Feinstein. And I would probably vote for them again if I still lived there.

But...

Not to throw shade on either of them because I think they are great Congresswomen, but we Democrats and the DCCC have to face the fact that we are all mortal and we need to think about passing the political power torch to the next generation of up and coming politicians. Nancy Pelosi is 77 and Diane Feinstein is 84. We need new blood in the Democratic Party to energize the younger voters. Just an unavoidable fact of life/

[EffieBlack]

103. I agree

New faces always need to be brought into the party so we have the strongest possible bench. But that's very different than saying that our effective, experienced senior leaders need to replaced right now by those new faces.

Succession plans = good
Coup = short-sighted disaster

[seta1950]

104. I agree

I’m with you

[Gothmog]

106. I totally agree

[citizen blues]

108. I'll probably get flamed for this, but hear me out. . .

Overall, this is an issue that I keep hearing being brought up. I'm not going to directly address the issue with Feinstein, but will use Pelosi to illustrate my point instead.

I don't support Pelosi becoming Speaker again or really anyone of her generation - male or female. But it's not for the reasons many may assume. I do not doubt that she earned the Speakership before, nor do I think she's "too establishment."

My concern is about the Democratic leadership of the future. Pelosi was one of the most effective, if not THE most effective Speaker we have seen in a generation. But who do we have coming up to take her place? I would love to have her still in the House to guide and advise the next Democratic Speaker. Not only Democrats, but the entire country would greatly benefit from her wisdom and experience. The next generation needs to learn which buttons to push and what levers to pull to get things done as well as she did. Yet, if she's not wiling to pass the baton by mentoring those who will follow her, who is she really serving?

I have to agree with Howard Dean on this one; it's time for Boomers to start stepping aside and putting their weight behind the next generation of Democratic leaders.

[Lil Missy]

109. Agreed. I put it in the same category as the "purity" shit.

[Tumbulu]

110. Well said!!!👏👏👏

[Sophia4]

111. Dianne Feinstein is 84 years old.

She was born in 1933.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein

If elected this year, since she was born in June, she will be 85 years old.

She has done the job well, but it is time for her to let someone younger do it.

And we in Southern California make up a population of over 22 million people. We have no senator from our part of the state, haven't had one since 1992 (that's 16 years) and would like to have one.

Kevin de Leon has been the president of the California Senate. I don't know whether I will vote for him yet because I don't know what he will run on, but he should have a chance.

If Dianne Feinstein can't win the Senate seat, she shouldn't have it.

She is 10 years older than I am. That is too old to run for the Senate.

I don't think a man should run for the Senate at the age of 84 either.

[LAS14]

134. I don't think the OP was about her age. nt

[R B Garr]

154. This anti-Feinstein spam again??

The population of Southern California has nothing to do with anything. Boxer and Feinstein represented my state just fine for decades, and this is really just a red herring meant to add irrelevant criticism of Feinstein to bolster the revolution cred against her. It is really pointless overall. California is huge -- with only two Senators. That's the reality. There are no rules in anyone's mind that California has to be divided between Northern and Southern unless it is just a useless divisive tactic. This divisiveness gets really old.

And this ageism standard is again arbitrary unless you apply the same standards to Bernie. He is also older and President is notoriously an aging position. Let's see the ageism standards applied to the men you like as well. To say older people shouldn't run for Senator but President is okay just reeks of double standards.

Kevin de Leon already has some character issues at play, and he has no name recognition. Unfortunately, he has limited his appeal by associating with the Sarandonite types. That lost here in California -- a very liberal state -- two years ago.

[Sophia4]

157. Let's have the election.

I have met Kevin De Leon. He is a good person and middle-of-the-road in his opinions.

Dianne Feinstein will be 91 when she finishes her term as senator.

Personally, I was hoping that Xavier Becerra would run but he is now attorney general.

This year, the Democrat will win the general election. Who knows whether that will still be the case in six years. If a change in our Senate representation is to be made, now is the time to make it.

As for representation of the 22 million people who live in Southern California, we have a lot of problems here like drilling for oil on our coasts, like housing (huge numbers of homeless due to our warm weather), like our busy ports, like immigration, like our water shortages and many other issues that are unique to our area. It should not surprise anyone that we would like to have just one person in the Senate who truly comes from and represents our area.

Let's have the election. I haven't decided who I will vote for yet, but Dianne Feinstein's age is an issue. It just is. And I say that as one who is only ten years younger than she is.

As a woman, I respect her accomplishments. She has done a good, courageous job.

Here is her story.

I have voted for her in every election. But we need a senator who will be in office six years from now unless she has really bad luck.

Age is cruel, but it is real, and aging is inevitable.

[R B Garr]

162. Again with the anti-Feinstein spam. This ageism double standard is just that.

Unless you have the same standards for Bernie's age, it is just an excuse. That's why double standards are used so often to illustrate flaws in logic. If age is cruel to women, it is cruel to men, as well. President is a more taxing job, so you should have the same concerns about age, but you don't have spammed posts about Bernie's age. Only Feinstein.

The population of Southern California has nothing to do with Senatorial representation. Never has; never will. That is just a red herring. Every state has two Senators. Boxer and Feinstein have done a great job representing California.

All of what you attribute to Southern California's population happen to coincide with de Leon's limited regional accomplishments. California is a huge state. That isn't a good reason to spam negativity about Feinstein. California is not split into two sections. That is just unnecessary divisiveness. It's a shame that the revolution insists on these divisive tactics.

Feinstein has seniority on the committees, especially with the Russia investigations. We need her seniority. Seniority is irreplaceable. We need to see which Americans were helping the Russians hack our election.

[EffieBlack]

166. A voice of reason

Thank you

[Egnever]

168. it's time for all of those old fucks to go

they are a large part of why we are here to begin with. Time to move on. Term limits should be a thing but baring them leadership needs to be changed when the chance presents.

[geardaddy]

176. Point of information

Bernie's only 76. Otherwise I agree with your comments about ageism.

[R B Garr]

191. Yes, that's why this is so superficial. Both look the same in age, or

they could be interchangeable. Bernie could look 84, and Feinstein could look 76. Neither displays health problems, so why only single out the female politician with so-called problems she does not even exhibit.

Plus, that poster does not have a problem with an 80-year-old President, which is a much harder job, so the "argument" is just trumped up. Very contrived.

[geardaddy]

192. Yep, totally agree.

Ageism definitely is bandied about more with women than men.

[Honeycombe8]

113. There have actually been calls fr McConnell to step down. & Paul Ryan is fresh blood.

The others you list aren't officially party leaders.

I'm just sayin'....it's not just Feinstein & Pelosi. I've also heard similar statements about Schumer, as well as Republicans.

People don't have to leave Feinstein alone, if they think it's time for fresh blood. That's California's business. They'll decide.

I think Feinstein and Pelosi are smart and talented. But I see the argument for fresh blood. Any group can get stale after awhile with the same leadership doing the same ol' same ol'. But it's not up to me. It's up to their respective states.

[EffieBlack]

119. Fresh blood is always needed.

But that doesn't mean we push out our smartest and most seasoned leaders.

Too many of these "fresh bloods" seem to think they should be put in leadership positions just because they are new faces and not put in the hard, sloshing, unsexy dirty work required to move up.

Nancy Pelosi worked her ass off the hard way to become Speaker. She toiled for years, becoming a strong legislator while building her relationships within the Caucus the (including traveling tirelessly to help other Members in their elections), often without a lot of credit before running for Minority Whip. Then she was worked to become one of the most effective Whips ever, honing her skills and further building those relationships within the Caucus before running for Minority Leader and, again, performed superbly, helping the Dems take back the House in 2006. And only then did she put in her bid for Speaker.

She didn't just appear out of nowhere and pitch spitballs at the then-current leadership, claiming Gephardt et al were all wrong or ou-of-touch or too old or too establishment and that SHE should be given their positions. When she was the new blood, worked her ass off to move her way up and then assumed leadership without weakening the party by undermining the party leaders.

[arthritisR_US]

114. TY!👍🏼✊🏼

[Thekaspervote]

116. Thank you!!!

[TheFrenchRazor]

118. good points. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

124. Thank you, EffieBlack!

GOPers hate her.

Which is EXACTLY why she needs to stay.

I'm tired to see so-called Dems carrying water for the GOP. They need to rethink their positions. Fast!

[samnsara]

126. I AGREE!! WELL SAID!

[Pacifist Patriot]

127. Thank you for saying this!

[LAS14]

133. Wonderfully well stated. K & R

[jimlup]

136. I can not rec... why so sensitive?

This is overkill. Family infighting is different from political fighting.

This kind of post only leads to more division within the family.

Why so sensitive?

[Cartoonist]

138. I voted for her every time

I will be glad to see her go. I know it's a small issue in the big picture, but her opposition to flag burning really bugs me. Her approval of George Bush's tax cuts made me sick.

As for Pelosi, her "impeachment is off the table" decree was nothing more than a green light for Bush.

Now Kamala Harris has courage. She stood up to the police by not seeking the death penalty for a cop killer.

[George II]

139. donald trump is a perfect example of what you get when voting against the "establishment".

[AlexSFCA]

141. seniority on congressional committies is more important than ever

Feinstein doesn’t even need to waste money on campaignning, she’s got my vote already and will landslide in CA. She is one of the most popular and respected senators. There is no viable competition and definately no female opponents. We need way more talented and fierce women in all levels of politics. She is one of the strongest ones, rarely falls for partisan politics and has a mind of her own. Some poorly informed folks try to pain her as ‘dino’, this has never worked because she is one of the most liberal ones when it comes to actual votes. She is also very politically savvy, knows how to win. She will serve her last term, meaning she can do anything she wants w/o any political reprecussions to her, including releasing materials from intelligence committes if she feels the country has the right to know. No junior senator will ever do that.

[NoMoreRepugs]

142. I appreciate the passion in all the posts above.

Just seems to me that at this point in time, the country being divided the way it is, the most important thing to remember is that the great majority of Repug voters will ALWAYS vote for the Repug candidate no matter how vile or disgusting they are.

Sometimes the purity test needs to take a back seat to the greater good, in this case I would conjecture that is taking back the country from the Repugs at any cost.

[IronLionZion]

148. Having a younger brown male compete in the primary is good for Democracy

in a time when being born in America doesn't make us Americans. People are pretending there's only one type of American right now and the 14th amendment never existed. Yes, it's terrible that women weren't supposed to be in the room back in the day but they think brown people aren't supposed to be in our country right now.

I like and respect Feinstein. She is a powerful elder stateswoman who has accomplished a lot in her impressive career. She wrote the 1994 assault weapons ban. There is a long impressive lists of things where she was the first and still only woman to have ever done. Her leadership qualifications are not the issue. Her gender and age are not the issue. It's her policy positions. California is a liberal state.

She has a massive 30 point lead in the primaries and will win easily without the party's endorsement. It's good for our party to have people challenge her from the left since she's famously centrist. There's also a young white woman challenging her in a long shot bid. Maybe Alison Hartson is the patriarchy too? Is Kevin de León the patriarchy?

Young liberal Democrats are not the enemy. Republicans are. Let the primaries be competitive and discuss the difficult issues, remind our Dems we'd like them to be liberal, then support the Dem in the general election.

[BeyondGeography]

152. They are too damned old, Bernie and Biden too

Please. We used to have a poster here called Old And In The Way, that’s what Democratic leadership has become. The only semi-young rising star we have on the national level is Harris and she’s only there because someone retired (Boxer, who could have served two more terms and no one would have said boo, so bless her). There is such a thing as knowing too much and going stale. Look what high school kids were able to achieve in two fucking weeks.

[EffieBlack]

156. Boxer continued to serve as long as she did because her constituents voted for her

And the high school kids have achieved a lot but their ultimate goal is to get legislation passed, which will require legislators with experience and savvy. Good luck getting that done with Democratic Caucus comprised of just "new faces."

[BeyondGeography]

158. We have a lot of talented people in our Party who have to wait an eternity for their turn

Our seniority rules are actually less fair than the Republicans, who at least put term limits on committee chairs. Ours have barely been updated since the 70s when the goal was to promote diversity within the party. Mission happily accomplished, but four decades on entitlement and stagnation is the outcome. Pelosi, Hoyer and Clyburn are the top three Dems in the House. That's an abomination. They are the living definition of reactive on just about every issue (see the comically tone deaf response to John Conyers' misconduct by Pelsoi and Clyburn for instance).

The status quo sucks. Look at where it has gotten us as a party. Please open your eyes.

[left-of-center2012]

203. "Old And In The Way, thats what Democratic leadership has become"

Amen !

[NCTraveler]

155. Some have not gotten over Pelosi kicking Mr. "Economic Anxieties" ass for house speaker.

Others are a part of the "not good enough" brigade.

These are people who have never been a part of high level negotiations. They are ignorant to all that goes into them.

[xxqqqzme]

171. All you argue is true.

If California was in dire need of progressive, smart, 'earning; their way up the ladder democratic congress people then we would need her. But we have very smart, talented public servants who need to move into positions. The democrats in office now have, for the most part, proven themselves through their years of service on the State government stage or in DC.

As much as I supported, and hated to see her go, I was glad Barbara Boxer chose to retire. And look who we elected - Kamala Harris. She does not yet have Boxer's seniority but until she does 'earn' it, we are being progressively represented.

After being active in CDP for a number of years, I am of the opinion the CDP should be doing a better job of moving our excellent farm team members into offices of long serving public servants.

As an example:

I first heard John Chiang, at a CDP convention, in 2003. I was very impressed and have been following him ever since. I am pleased he is running for Governor. I am supporting his candidacy. When he was State Comptroller, he stood up to Scharzenegger and paid the teachers and nurses. California democrats are fortunate that we have many public servants like John Chiang.

[saidsimplesimon]

174. Effie

Forgive me for the "hit and run" comment. I am the driver today for a patient in need.

I tried to warn both ladies of my beloved California. They are both tied to donors of the military money establishment. They face abandonment from both sides. Best wishes for a retirement Madame Feinstein and Pelosi.

[Tarheel_Dem]

186. I'm right there with ya, Effie!

[shenmue]

193. Amen

[still_one]

197. Thank you Effie

[The Mouth]

199. Age is just a number, but

A lot of Californians of all genders have *NEVER* been comfortable with some of her positions.

NO politician is going to satisfy a lot of Californians.

She will run and be re-elected again.

I detest ageism in any way.

Interesting point in your OP, thought provoking

[HenryWallace]

200. Establishment?

Biden & Sanders never argued to keep the Confederate flag flying on public land...

[Catch2.2]

204. I see a lot of discussion on age & gender...

to me, "too establishment" has nothing to do with that. "Too establishment" is more on her policies and how she votes. Now that may have to do with her age, but not in the way of physically not being able to do the job. I'm sure physically she can do the job but her age may put her more out of touch with today's issues. Just my .02

[hueymahl]

206. Yep

Age has nothing to do with it (neither does gender). It is policies and performance.

[Progressive dog]

210. I agree

The Democratic establishment is why I am a Democrat. I don't understand why anyone would belong to a political party if they don't like the leaders of it.

[EffieBlack]

212. When McCain was running for President I pushed back on his Im a maverick boasts

by pointing out that, if after 30 years in the Senate, you’re still a “maverick,” it means you’re doing something wrong and can’t claim to be any kind of leader, since you haven’t been able get enough of your colleagues to follow you to stop being a maverick and become “establishment” - after, isn’t the point supposed to be to “establish” a new way of doing things into the body politic?

I felt the same about Sanders. If, after 20-some years, you’re still yelling at people from outside the ring, your heart may be in the right place, but you haven’t been very effective as a leader or a change-agent.

If people like Feinstein and Pelosi have become “establishment,” it doesn’t mean they’ve sold out - it means they’ve been successful at getting into the system and working it from the inside, the not place change is ever going to happen. That’s supposed to be the whole point.

[HenryWallace]

215. Lets take a time out for a little self-awareness.

“I don't understand why anyone would belong to a political party if they don't like the leaders of it…..”

Let’s review facts; shall we:

• We have just been through a crushing defeat, which culminated a ten-year period of 1,000+ seat loss (we are at century-long lows).
• Party membership as a percent of population is at a 25 year low.
• Since 1993, the favorability ratings of both parties have suffered double digit losses.

Now, if we examine your proposition, there must be a hell of a lot of people who don’t like this party’s leaders.

[StevieM]

218. There was a gerrymander in there that you didn't include. And a corrupt FBI director. (eom)

[HenryWallace]

224. Oh my, that's really uninspired!

As long as we're listing items to deflect focus from their performance how about we add:

-Russia
-Fox News
-Stupid Southern Whites
-Facebook Trolls
-the Nazi Alt-Right
-the Vast Right-Wing conspiracy

It can't be what we're doing or what we stand for; its got to be what they are doing to us!

[StevieM]

225. Well, she did put on a good convention and win all three debates.

And the polls showed that voter concerned with the economy voted Democrat.

Of course, that isn't a big accomplishment, I admit, when your opponent is Donald Trump.

Republicans win elections by swift boating.

[k8conant]

227. Whom are you talking about? Feinstein had debates???

[StevieM]

228. We were talking about HRC 2016. (eom)

[Progressive dog]

223. You should spend some time there.

The Democratic leaders are obviously more popular than their opponents within the party. Third parties don't win many offices, so the loss of party members hasn't been reflected in votes. BTW Party membership is not at a 25 year low according to Galluip http://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

[oasis]

216. "There is no substitute for experience"

DiFi possesses the political savvy most needed at present. This is no time to break in newbies.

[EffieBlack]

220. Bingo!

[NurseJackie]

221. Her connections and calling-in-favors owed are valuable too!

Call me suspicious and skeptical, but I suspect those who are targeting her aren't actually trying to strengthen the Democratic party.

[StevieM]

219. I would add John Kerry and Mitt Romney to your list of men who are given a double standard

when compared to women.