California Has 3 Good Choices For Senate: Barbara Lee, Katie Porter And Adam Schiff

Will Republicans Decide Which One Becomes A Senator?

Interpreting all those numbers ProgressivePunch feeds us about voting records can be complicated if not downright daunting. So for this cycle, corrupt corporate whores like Tony Cardenas (D-CA), Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Adam Smith (D-WA), Shontel Brown (D-OH), Greg Meeks (D-NY), Troy Carter (D-LA) and Dwight Evans (D-PA) all score 98.53, exactly as progressive as progressive icons Cori Bush, Pramila Jayapal, Raul Grijalva and Greg Casar. And all of them score better than the 3 members of Congress running for the open California Senate seat:

• Adam Schiff- 96.97

• Barbara Lee- 96.83

• Katie Porter- 95.59

The differences between the 3 are fractional and, basically, meaningless. Their voting records have been very, very progressive this year. Conventional wisdom— endlessly repeated by the media— would have us believe that Barbara Lee and Katie Porter are much more progressive than Adam Schiff. Schiff certainly started off on the wrong foot— joining the conservative Blue Dog Coalition when he was first elected to the House. But he soon found himself voting counter to the rest of the members and about a decade or so ago, he quit and his voting record has been moving left ever since. In the 117th Congress his record wasn’t as progressive as Barbara Lee’s but it was much more progressive, on face value, than Katie Porter’s, who— unlike Lee and Schiff— has a significant number of Republicans and right-leaning independents in her district… just as Schiff did when he was first elected.

Yesterday, Politico reporter Steven Shepard made the same mistake: “Of the three Democratic candidates, Schiff’s voting record is the least liberal.”

It isn’t really, especially not in the last decade. But he was making a salient point: “On paper, that would potentially be more attractive to Republican voters, who would be without a candidate of their own in this scenario. But Schiff is perhaps best known for his role in investigating and impeaching then-President Donald Trump— something likely to actively repel the state’s Republicans.”

The question is what happens if— as is likely— Katie and Adam come out of the jungle primary as the two finalists. There are after all, millions of Republican voters. If they act as a bloc— not likely— they could throw the election to one or the other. Adam has the reputation for being more conservative anreven though he isn’t, the media will endlessly repeat that. Katie has the reputation for being far left— not exactly true either. What is true, though, is that Adam is absolutely hated by MAGAts for his very prominent role in impeaching Trump. Will that be enough for California Republicans to swing the election to Katie?

Shepard made a good point: “It’s not clear whether the more liberal Lee or Porter would benefit from Republicans disliking Schiff. A large chunk of them could leave the race blank. In 2018, 12.5 million votes were cast in the governor’s race, which featured Newsom against Republican Dan Cox. But only 11.1 million were cast in the Feinstein-de León race, which was on the same ballot.”

It’s clear that MAGA Republicans aren’t about to vote for Adam Schiff, Blue Dog background or not. But would they vote for Barbara Lee or Katie Porter? If 1.4 million voted in the gubernatorial race in 2018 and then didn’t bother voting in the Senate race, my guess is that far more than that will vote in the presidential race and then not vote at all in the Senate race— unless Trump tells them too. Trump's personal animus towards Schiff is so overwhelming that I could actually see him telling his followers to vote for Porter— which, let's face it, would be hilarious.