This is very interesting indeed. Longtime Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein is an institution in California, but she's often made liberals' teeth ache. The most recent trip to the dentist became necessary just the other day, when Feinstein rather startlingly declared she believes Trump "can be a good president," something it's hard to believe any mainstream Democratic politician would ever think, let alone say aloud. Feinstein's full remarks were even worse:
"I think we have to have some patience. I do. It's eight months into the tenure of the presidency … We'll have to see if he can forget himself and his feeling about himself enough to be able to really have the kind of empathy and the kind of direction that this country needs. The question is whether he can learn and change. If so, I believe he can be a good president."
Feinstein thinks it's possible Trump can learn and change? Forget himself? Show empathy? Seriously? Which Donald Trump has Feinstein been watching these last few terrifying years? Any hypothesis that involves Trump doing something you'd want him to do is automatically null and void. These are not open questions, because we already have the answers.
Feinstein's comments provoked a hot response from California Democrats, particularly state Senate President Kevin De León, who fired back in lacerating terms:
"I don't think children who breathe dirty air can afford patience. The LGBT worker or woman losing their rights by the day or the black student who could be assaulted on the street—they can't afford patience. DREAMers who are unsure of their fate in this country can't afford patience. Even a Trump voter who is still out of work can't afford to be patient.
"We don't have much patience for Donald Trump here in California. This president has not shown any capacity to learn and proven he is not fit for office. It is the responsibility of Congress to hold him accountable—especially Democrats—not be complicit in his reckless behavior."
On this one, it's safe to say that De León speaks for progressives everywhere, while Feinstein is wildly out of step. But electorally speaking—because that's what we care about at Daily Kos Elections—does any of it matter? It just might.
Following this exchange, San Jose Mercury News reporter Casey Tolan asked De León if he's considering a primary challenge to Feinstein, and the response from De León's staff in no way ruled out the possibility. In fact, the statement took a further jab at Feinstein, saying the odds of Trump changing his ways are "probably worse" than winning the lottery.
How about De León's odds of beating Feinstein, though? It would be difficult, to say the least. One huge obstacle is California's top-two primary system, which we've long inveighed against, and here's yet another reason to despise it. Under this system, all candidates from all parties run together on a single primary ballot, and the top-two vote-getters advance to the November general election—regardless of what party they belong to.
That makes it almost impossible to defeat an incumbent in the primary, because only the most scandal-tarred dimwit is going to come in third and miss the runoff (something that has yet to happen since California adopted top-two ahead of the 2012 elections). That means an intra-party challenger has to find a way to make it to the general election, which involves a whole lot of things going right over which no candidate has control. Most importantly, if a single Republican opts to enter a primary with two major Democrats, that alone likely means only one Democrat will make it to the second round—and there's nothing Democrats can do to keep that Republican out of the race in the first place.
There have been instances when an incumbent has squared off against a member of their own party in November, but it's been rare, and it almost always only happens in districts that lean heavily to the left or right (meaning that two Democrats or two Republicans have more votes to divide up, giving both a better chance of advancing). Last year, in an open seat race for the Senate, Democrats Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez did both take the top two slots in the primary, but they benefitted from a badly split Republican field, something De León couldn't count on.
And that's not to mention Feinstein's universal name recognition, her easy access to huge sums of money, her support throughout the Democratic establishment, and the fact that Republican voters would likely cotton to her in a general election as the more moderate option. But De León is term-limited next year, and while he's looked like a likely candidate for the 2018 governor's race, the field there is already very crowded and very high-powered.
So it may be that a high-risk Senate gamble is looking more appealing, and in the age of Trump, any Democrat who's less that vociferously opposed to the man in the White House is at risk of winding up on the wrong side of progressive voters. There's another possibility, here, too: Feinstein, who is 84, has yet to formally declare that she'll seek re-election. While she's signaled that she will in fact run again (chiefly by raising money), it's notable that she has yet to do so. De León could thus be positioning himself as the state's most vocal anti-Trumper should Feinstein ultimately decide to retire—an event that would trigger a huge wave of interest from other Democrats eyeing her seat.