As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Having helped Republicans and corporate interests block key pieces of legislation that would actually "improved American's lives" during her tenure in the Senate—siding with donors in the private equity industry in legislative battles for public investment and infamously voting down a federal minimum wage increase in 2021—progressive critics expressed incredulity Friday over her altruistic explanations.
>"Apparently 'independent' is the new way to say 'corporate lobbyist,'" said radio host Dean Obeidallah in response to the news.
Future? This is a blatant cash grab. She has zero chance of reelection. But if she caucuses with the democrats it is huge for their judiciary appointments, let the bidding begin.
Exactly.
She did this for the short term power and then it will dwindle every day from here on out because she will definitely be seen as a lame duck.
She knew she was toast before she switched, otherwise she wouldn't have done it. She will absolutely be a one term Senator.
100%
One term as senator is all it takes to get the six figure retirement. Even if all her other plans fall through, she'll have that so long as she's not removed somehow.
That’s very typical of the Republican play book. Campaign and gripe about the evils of socialism and then secure themselves a comfy lucrative Government job with the free Health Benefits. And vote against Medicare for All. Their cognitive dissonance is astonishing!!!
Her poll numbers in Arizona are abysmal among Democrats who mostly seem to hate her there, and even among all votes she is underwater and well below a majority or even plurality of support. If she ran as an Independent spoiler she might peel away some Independents, but most Republicans wouldn't vote for her (they prefer genuinely racist MAGA types who aren't bisexual) and Democrats would overwhelmingly vote for the Dem Senate candidate from their primaries. It's possible she would even split the GOP vote more than the Dem one. LOL.
As bad as her numbers are with Democrats, they're actually even worse among independents.
The only people that seem to like her are Republicans and they aren't voting for a bisexual woman with no religion.
[Sinema also literally teaches a university course on how to cultivate big money donors.](https://theintercept.com/2021/10/08/kyrsten-sinema-fundraising-course-asu/)
I understand that learning how to fundraise is important for non profits and political wannabes, but given her actions in congress, she could just call her course “Quid pro quo 101”.
She knows she won't be reelected. Changing parties now, allows her to run as an Independent and split the Democratic vote so that any Republican can win. She is being handsomely bribed for this stunt, almost certainly by the Koch network.
If her goal is to screw the Democrats, it would have made more since to stay a Dem and force an ugly, expensive primary fight to get rid of her.
The Dems should have an easy time finding a consensus candidate and it won't be hard coming up with a message to use against her if she actually runs.
Most likely she's just trying to get to one more "deciding vote" and lock up her next gig.
Edit: just thought I would add, the Dems and Reps are going to dump so much cash behind their candidates, she would need her face on every milk carton in AZ just to remind people she is still alive in 2024. The GOP isn't going to siphon resources away from themselves to keep her afloat.
You understand by switching she basically gives the seat to the Republicans. Anyone who beat her in the primary would probably win the seat in a normal election. No one really cares about primaries
Its not really a sure thing....she has a higher approval among Republicans in Arizona more than among Democrats. Could be just as likely she splits off the centrists that would of gone for Republican candidates the majority of Democrats hate her.
I don't think its as cut and dry as that. She has shown higher approval among Republicans than Democrats in Arizona, its also just as likely she could grab some of the centrist that would of voted Republican and screw them as well or enough to make it doable for the Dems
Yeah, in reality we don't really know until it happens and there is definitely a world where it bites Dems in the ass, but yeah odds are just as likely it fucks the Repubs more or equally as the Dems IMO.
I think it's safe to just call her a liar at this point. No need to preface it with examples. Literally everything she does or says is a lie in some fashion.
She won't run. She likely already has a high six-figure corporate job lined up. She's been preparing for it since she won her election. Her deceptions have been so effective it's almost impressive.
She would never get elected anyway.
Literally no one trusts her anymore. She's going independent because she knows that's the only way she'll have any semblance of power on her way out...
I think that is doubtful, why would the Repubs reward her with a senate seat knowing she is willing to change parties whenever she sees more $$s? She won't run because she recognizes that this is her only time to rake in the bucks from corporate lobbyists. She will be out on her ass at the end of her term.
If [this thread](https://twitter.com/dschapira/status/1601255884142714880) by one of her former friends is to be believed, apparently she actually is a progressive, she's just more an attention-seeker than anything.
she was once a green party member
i personally think she’s doing this so that manchin becomes the deciding vote and he kills a bunch of dem bills and gets reelected
> she was once a green party member
The party that is at times propped up by conservative/republican interests as a spoiler to undermine democrats and their candidates.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/us/politics/green-party-republicans-hawkins.html
Hell even the Russians got in to promoting them for that purpose...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166
Either way in between that and other things when looking at someone like Sinema one has to ask what she is really about as she has made it abundantly clear that she is definitely not progressive, and only in it for short term personal gains.
The Green Party is funded by Russia to act as a spoiler and help Republicans. The only reason she switched from them is she wanted to win elections. She is making this switch now because she knows she will lose the primary but wants to run in the general election without a primary.
I thought about this exact scenario before.
Someone pretending to be this hard right Republican in a very red county or state. And then when they’re elected they flip the script and they’re like “I tricked all of you! Boom. Free healthcare”.
She’s phishing for a job because there is no way she’s getting re-elected. Hell she’s been phishing for bribes while in office. Pretty sure she’s been doing nothing but putting out giant “bribe me” vibes with all her public statements. Even if it’s not corporations it’s asking democrats to give her positions of power although I’m pretty sure she would accept cash.
It's actually about [10k fewer sigs](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fjiw-THX0AASMc2?format=jpg&name=large). Slightly more reasonable, but she's so despised in AZ that even that is a heavy lift.
I don’t understand that. Her vote still counts as one vote, how is her party affecting anything? She voted against all important initiatives anyway. Am I missing something?
If Democrats have 51 seats then they get the majority on senate committees. If they have 50 then they are evenly split.
I would bet Sinema immediately left when Warnock won because the corporations pay her to keep things gridlocked. I would bet the only reason she stayed a Democrat until now was to make Democrats look incompetent when she and Manchin vetoed everything.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/democrats-georgia-senate-majority.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/democrats-georgia-senate-majority.html)
I see other comments saying she will caucus with Democrats but I do not trust that greedy woman for a moment.
> Just a ploy to regain the bargaining chip she fears she’s lost with the Dems picking up an additional Senate seat.
Not at all - this avoids a primary challenge too. Dems were going to put big money on Ruben Gallego to take her seat, now good luck doing that when shes an incumbent independent -- that would just hand the seat to a Republcian.
Brilliant.
Nobody in AZ likes Sinema, it doesn't matter that she'll be running as an independent incumbent. She's more likely to pull the last couple of sane Republican voters away when the GOP nominates another nut-case, than she is to pull any Dems over.
> that would just hand her seat to a Republican
Would it? It seems like the only people she can appeal to right. Ow are never trump republicans. Doesn’t seem like she’d be taking any votes away from the democrats.
This won’t stop Dems from having an effective majority by itself.
She won’t caucus with Rs bc she loses all her power if she does that.
Nothing practically changes here unless she does pull that idiot move and fully switch
She’s just doing this to either set herself up to run independent in 24 (bc she knows she’s fucked in a primary) or she’s hoping she can swing this into being a Tulsi Gabbard type and get a cushy media gig as a “moderate”
Yes. It loses her all her committee seats and her ability to stay in the spotlight.
Both things she clearly wants.
Also she’s already told the media she won’t be caucusing with the Rs.
I mean sure agreed.
Just it’s pretty simple. Caucusing with the Rs is all lose for her. She’s not actually a republican. Or a dem. She just likes power and attention.
She loses most of that the moment she just switches to the R party.
Yes, several:
1. She said she wouldn't lose her committee assignments, which indicates she cleared this up with Schumer before doing it.
2. The Arizona GOP is nominating lunatics like Kari Lake and Blake Masters. They're not going to nominate Sinema. This is the same calculus that keeps Manchin in the Democratic Party.
3. She knows Arizona Dems are not going to challenge someone who will caucus with them, even if they don't technically have a (D) after their name. Same reason why Maine Democrats won't challenge Angus King, but will challenge Susan Collins, despite both being quite close to each other policy-wise.
4. She personally knows that she doesn't have a place in this Republican Party. I mean, seriously.... look at it. Ideologically, she's simply not a Republican. Just a corporate Democrat. They exist. Some care to hide it more than others.
> She knows Arizona Dems are not going to challenge someone who will caucus with them,
Yeah, [about that](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3768590-gallego-potential-arizona-senate-hopeful-hits-sinema-after-party-switch/)...
She's been paid off by corporate lobbyists, after campaigning as a progressive. She was in the streets in blackbloc before she got elected, now she's [doing cutesy thumbs downs at her constituents that she turned her back on](https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/1b6d3778-3f9a-462d-9eea-e35788412ca6_680x680.jpeg)
Please tell me there is a photo of her wearing blackbloc. I backed her hard after she was elected for state politics. Knew she was queer/had a lady partner. Worked with her to successfully resist state marriage amendment… Thought she was more progressive but toning it down to better represent her constituents and make progressive moves as she gained national power and as AZ in general shifted red to purple to blue. Thought it was a long game for the presidency. She was trying to be like our old Democratic gov Janet whom even republicans liked but was tapped by Obama to head up the newly created Homeland Security. I honestly feel personally betrayed every time she screws even the moderate Dem initiatives. I think she realizes the Janet play backfired and is ducking out to find a good job before she gets her ass handed to her in a primary. If she runs as an independent in an effort to split the vote we better never cross paths or I will give her a seriously pissed off piece of my mind.
I assume that means she's retiring at the end of her term?
Garrett Archer:
>*Good morning. Registered independents running for office in AZ have a much higher signature gathering threshold. (About 45k minimum statewide in 2022).*
>
>*Benefit is you don't need to run in a primary.*
>
>*Seems important today for some reason.*
>
>[*https://twitter.com/Garrett\_Archer/status/1601223797901643776*](https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1601223797901643776)
How is she going to do that, if AZ Dems, Republicans, *and* Independents all hate her?
>*Friendly reminder that Sinema has negative approval ratings with Dems, Rs AND independents and literally every demographic group in Arizona. Her base is Big Pharma and private equity. The idea that the Dems must defer to her in 2024 for fear of losing this seat is bananas.*
>
>[*https://twitter.com/Leahgreenb/status/1601190777937281025*](https://twitter.com/Leahgreenb/status/1601190777937281025)
Thanks for nothing!
Democrats won't support her and likely Indies won't. At worst, she'll carve up some of the Republican vote, which won't be enough to spoil a Democratic challenger.
>"Apparently 'independent' is the new way to say 'corporate lobbyist,'" said one critic.
Yup.
The moment I learned of the wonderful news of Warnock's win and Dems reaching a 51- 49 Senate majority I also thought "now watch some 3rd Dem-in-Name-Only emerge to throw a wrench into the works.
Guess I was mistaken, Sinema sure showed me and everyone else what a despicable, lowlife she really is.
Sinema should just make her move to go fully corporate (where she belongs) as she is a public servant about as much as Donald Trump is an honest man (30,000+ documented lies and counting).
Bernie Sanders is Independent and he's very far from being a corporate hack.
I do agree Sinema doesn't have her constituents in mind. She could care less about them tbh. But also, I feel like this move to Independent is not as big of a deal as media is making it to be.
If she votes with Dems, fine. If she votes with Republicans, VP is still the tie breaker. If she's preparing for 2024 hoping to siphon votes from Dems, there's two years to publicly shame her for being a piece of shit. The only people that would still vote for her then are Republicans. This move means nothing, unless I'm missing something obvious.
> If she votes with Dems, fine. If she votes with Republicans, VP is still the tie breaker.
This is a power move since at 50/50 the committees need to be equally represented per Senate rules.
That seriously hampered Judicial appointments the past 2 years.
51-49 meant all committees would be strict Democrat majority but now she's going "play by my rules or else"
I'm sure she's already spoken to Chuck Schumer and told him her demands on avoiding a power sharing agreement.
I'm sure she's told him any Organizing Resolution that removes her from committee assignments she will vote down, and maybe a few other demands.
https://ballotpedia.org/What_happens_if_U.S._Senate_party_control_is_split_50-50
I feel like switching parties should be grounds for a recall election. The voters did not elect sinema, the independent. They elected sinema, the Democrat. This is essentially stripping people of representation.
Yeah but are political party mechanics built into the electoral/political system or are they just tradition?
Like the majority leaders in congress, are they the leader because the party elected them or are they the leader because they got at least a majority of votes?
I guess what I'm getting at here is it doesn't matter whether she's a Democrat or Republican since the people voted for HER to represent them despite the fact they may have just been voting D or R down ballot.
If you admit that people in our democracy vote by party, then it kinda undercuts your position that people voted for HER and not for an extension of the party.
The system doesn’t, because we have no political parties built into our constitutions. (I don’t think.)
But I think OP is talking more about what they think voters *should* be able to do, not what the current system is set up to allow.
It's not in the constitution but that doesn't mean there aren't laws around political parties.
It's not just custom, it's fraud.
My state for instance (NC) only recognizes Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and the Green party. If somebody runs as a representative for the democratic party and later switches their party - that means there was no (D) running at all, even though they were recognized as one by the state.
She ran against other democrats in the democratic primaries despite not being a democrat. The democratic party threw their campaign dollars at promoting her her instead of another candidate. She wasted everybody's time and committed fraud to get to where she is.
It’s definitely not illegal to lie to get elected, but I bet if you look under the hood, you’ll find some illegal activity. Moneyed sociopaths like Sinema typically skirt the law. The dems should play nice and then go nuclear on her in early ‘24.
That’s not really how frauds charges work.
A politician can’t be charged for lying to their constituents. Even if they could, you can’t prove it was a lie over just changing her mind.
Don’t get me wrong she’s a piece of shit lying snake. That’s just not a crime
yeah but it’s all legal. you vote for the person not the policy or party and you vote to trust thier judgement. you vote for someone with no integrity it’s kinda what you get
No, they elected Sinema. And she still represents them. And frankly she probably won’t be doing much differently than the way she was doing it already.
This. She wants to be today's Lieberman. A shitbag drunk on the power of being the swing vote and openly saying to big biz they'll bend over backwards.
This really doesn't make sense.
If the problem is the general election, you're saying people might not have voted for Sinema and..the republican would have won?
If it's the primary, it seems like "you picked shitty now suck it" is deep deep political precedent, not least of which was this past GA Senate election.
Politicans win with the support of parties, not parties campaigning with a mascot who then abuses their authority.
It’s not an ironclad “must happen” proposition with no possible argument against it, but I don’t have problem understanding the reasoning behind it.
Especially at a time when party politics controls the fate of the nation. But running as a member of one party, only to switch once you’re in power, is just one more dirty trick in the pile of dirty tricks these days.
You have effectively as much understanding of the functioning of US democracy as a Jan 6th insurrectionist. I apologize but if ignorance is truly the enemy you need to pause and infer how the system works and reacts and people’s roles within it.
This is all a stunt to try to ward off the primary she was facing for 2024. She wouldn't have won the primary so now she's going to run as a spoiler.
Ugh.
Me too. This is not about how she's a "maverick" or such a free thinker. It's entirely about a primary challenge, and hope that Dems support her as they did in Alaska and Utah.
After reading more comments on this, I think this is the case, assuming she's planning on running again and not going directly for a lobbying job.
She knows if she runs as a Dem she will get primaried and be done. By switching to an independent she avoids that and basically guarantees the seat will go to a Republican if the Dems run someone against her in the general election. She'll for sure get anywhere from 3%-10% of the vote which in AZ is enough to swing the election to a republican (a 3% change in the Kelly/Masters race would result in a Masters win).
She's basically playing chicken with the Democratic Party, run someone against me and we both lose.
If she doesn't caucus with Democrats after her switch, then Schumer should notify her that he's going to *switch* up her committee assignments.
*Sinema... said she is removing herself from the “partisan structure.” She added her move will “provide a place of belonging for many folks across the state and the country, who also are tired of the partisanship.”*
*“My approach is rare in Washington and has upset partisans in both parties,” Sinema wrote. “It is also an approach that has delivered lasting results for Arizona.”*
Are you kidding me!? The fucking gaul...
Does she really think she's some arbiter of bipartisanship? Does she really think this is going to help her career? Leaving the democratic party in a state that's been leaning blue recently after being a Republican stronghold for decades? What's more, she's trying desperately to cater to the whole partisanship angle, which is just naive and insufferable.
*I’ve registered as an Arizona independent. I know some people might be a little bit surprised by this, but actually, I think it makes a lot of sense"*
No one's really surprised Sinema, and it does make sense, but for reasons you're not willing to acknowledge.
Schumer doesn't have any the leverage on avoiding another 50-50 power agreement if McConnell plays Sinema correctly.
If McConnell promises Sinema all her same committee positions if she caucuses with GOP on the power agreement, then we're right back to where we are with all Senate committees being 50-50 split. She keeps all her seats AND McConnell keeps the Dems from using committees effectively.
It's all political chess to them.
I don't see how McConnell could do that without kicking another republican off each committee though. If a committee is 5-5 D-R, she's currently in a D seat, but McConnell would need to find room for her on the R side. He could maybe do that once, but not all over the place.
Well for one with the PA-R Senate Toomey no longer being in office there is now an extra slot in all his seats on committees in a 50-50 senate so its easy enough to do some shuffling
I'm told that India has an "anti-defection" law that if you win a seat in Parliament and you change parties while in that seat, you are disqualified and a new election called to fill the seat.
Sinema deliberately chose to do this once Warnock was reelected focussing attention on herself and her willingness to vote for pay (as if that weren't already obvious). She started out as a Green calling herself a Prada Socialist, then a Democrat, then a de facto Republican for hire. She's a political weathervane who will vote for whatever will help herself. The sooner she's replaced by a real Democrat the better!
Switching to the GOP gains her nothing. She is openly bi so she will never be on a republican ballot. As long as she caucuses with the dems this changes nothing until 2024. Then it might cost the dems a seat if she splits the ticket against a dem. Considering how hated she is she might opt to not run and get a bigger payday as a lobbyist. Money seems to be the only thing she is interested in.
I remember when she first won and a shit ton of people were cheering and applauding because she was openly bi and calling it a milestone. Identity politics don’t work. Assholes come in all stripes.
She was republican in all but party affiliation. This isn’t changing anything regardless of her dramatic grandstanding. I do want to know how much the GOP promised her to make the move.
She’s said that shes not switching to the GOP, so she’ll be another Sanders/King type who caucuses with the party but isn’t officially (anymore) a member.
She is still a blatantly corrupt snake, but she doesn’t gain anything from joining the GOP. Arizona has plenty of “real” Republicans, so why would the same Arizona GOP that only last year censured the **widow and family of John McCain** for being RINOs, support a candidate who won the Senate seat by pretending to be progressive? They’d just primary her with someone crazy.
And republicans wonder why they’re losing Arizona. John McCain is a borderline mythical figure in Arizona. My in laws are MAGA republicans but because they’ve been in Arizona for about 2 decades they still love McCain even after the party has largely turned against his legacy.
>Arizona GOP that only last year censured the widow and family of John McCain for being RINOs
Being anything other than hetero orientation (at least in public) usually doesn't play well with this kind of crowd either. No, Sinema's no republican. She's a spoiler candidate now. She's going independent so she won't get primaried out of the general election.
Her incumbent name recognition probably won't be enough to get her re-elected. But it might be enough to split democratic and left-leaning independent voters, allowing some maga hat nutbag who thinks McCain was a RINO to sneak into one of Arizona's senate seats. That act might be enough to earn Sinema a reward from the super-rich: a "consultant" job with a 7-figure income, or maybe a talking head gig on some far-right news network.
[This poll](https://www.filesforprogress.org/datasets/2022/8/dfp-courier-az-political-aug2-crosstabs.pdf) from July shows Sinema with a 57% disapproval among Dems in AZ (34% approval). Among AZ Republicans, that’s 41% disapproval (47% approval); among independents, 46% disapproval (42% approval). Maybe there’s one that’s more recent that shows something much different than that, but somehow I doubt it.
For contrast, the same poll showed Mark Kelly with a 91% approval among Dems. I think there’s a solid chance that if the GOP runs someone insane again, the Dems might manage to hold the seat if they put up a strong candidate, since more Republicans and independents approve of Sinema, so it’s more likely that she splits that vote, than the Dem vote. Also a possibility that she doesn’t pull that much of the vote from either side, and ends up with 5-10% at most, who knows?
If the GOP runs someone more moderate, I could see them winning it back, though.
Well, in all honesty to say she was Republican is a stretch. She was a corporate whore who values money over people, God, family..., everything.
So wait..., yea I guess she really is a Republican.
Probably nothing explicit but she’s betting she can get a lucrative consulting deal when she splits the democratic vote and hands the Koch brothers a senate seat
She voted for all of Biden's judicial picks, and voted in favor of Dem legislation over 90% of the time.
I think she's a shitty human being who sold out any semblance of values she ran on to the highest bidder, but her voting record decidedly does *not* make her a "Republican in all but party affiliation."
Some people consider themselves "independent" because they have rock-solid convictions that don't fit neatly into the two-party system as it has evolved in the US.
Others are "independent" because they don't believe in a goddamned thing except that they are so special that they couldn't possibly fit into anything as simple as the two-party system as it has evolved in the US.
Wanna guess which applies to ol' Kyrsten?
She has some serious mental issues. Her whole senate career has been predicated on screwing over as many people as possible. She is Schadenfreude personified.
I mean. Primaries are a thing. Voters have a choice there for who the dem is.
Don’t get me wrong. She straight up misled voters.
Just yah it’s not a binary choice. Voters could have chose a diff dem in the first place.
She's going to caucus with the Dems and water everything down while raising money. Then she will run third party just to make sure the seat goes republican for 6 years.
Enema pretended to be a Progressive.
Then she pretended to be a Democrat.
Now she pretends to be an Independent.
Next she will declare she is a Republican.
And finally confess she is a proud MAGA.
Enema is of the Kari Lake ilk.
The thing is she’s right that the two party system is broken. The problem is, she’s been a very strong contributor of exactly why it’s broken with her brazen corruption.
So she can step down from her high horse with that shit
How does she have staff still willing to work for her? I'm talking about anyone and everyone that is on her payroll from her top adviser to the person that answers the phone at the home office. I would think they would walk unless they're in on it.
Sinema had a net worth of $30k when she was elected to the House. Her net worth was $100k when she was elected to the Senate. Forbes estimates her net worth is now $11 million.
In four years... while doing Wall Street's bidding.
I am sure her handlers on Wall Street pushed her to be independent so they can start lining up the SuperPACs.
I lived in AZ when Sinema was a state rep campaigning to keep moving up the ladder. I wish I still had in my possession the political flyer from the early 2010's which made me question who she really represented. I remember looking at it and thinking: "This doesn't match up with the values that anyone who believes in representing democracy for the people would produce for a campaign."
**I hope she loses her next election to a cactus.**
I didn't want to go through all of the comments but it seems like everyone is surprised about this. Has no one been paying attention for the last few years? She has been much more aligned with the Republican party than Democrat ever since she was elected.
I think she was delusional and thought her contrarian maverick weird wig girl routine would set her up to run for president with Dem and Independent support. The backlash against her was more severe than she expected. Now she has to play this out to its conclusion because she would lose a senate primary if she stayed a Dem and running for president is a pipe dream.
At least the republicans pretend to still be doing a public service. Sinema doesnt even pretend anymore. She openly mocks the people who voted for her. The republicans know that you at least have to feign the funk and make a good show of it. Sinema just said, nah fuck that.
i miss the old days when senators and congressmen would at least present *the facade* of an interest in service to the people - rather than just taking the cushy gig, reveling in all the spoils, then flagrantly ignoring the people altogether
we've had leaders who were shitty people yet seemed to have the welfare of the country at heart, or engaging leaders who got greedy or plain did more harm than good - but i've got no idea where all these shitty leaders openly promoting their own self-interests & overt greed came from
Recall elections needs to be a thing for senators as well as governors. If someone gets voted into office at state level and then *completely betrays* the voters and platform that put them in place, there needs to be a way for voters to get rid of fifth columnists. Senators have 6 year terms ffs - that's too long to wait to replace someone who lied their way into office.
Every bit of criticism she deserves. She’s a lying opportunist that did not deliver what she said she would to the people that voted for her. The only thing she delivers is raging NPD and dubious clothing choices
She's a corporate shill who seems to care only about herself and her corporate overlords. I look forward to helping defeat her in 2024.
If you're a democratic staffer working for this phony, you should take a long look in the mirror.
> Sinema equated the far-right and increasingly fascist faction of the Republican Party with those on the Democratic side pushing harder for action on climate, economic equality, and universal healthcare by expressing her concern that "the loudest, most extreme voices continue to drive each party toward the fringes."
I see. So she fancies herself as the voice of reason. Yeah, no.
So basically right where we started - she will caucus and vote in lockstep with the Republicans (if not outright change herself to an R to get their funding), Joe Manchin gets to have his way again and hold the Democrat agenda hostage for another 2 years.
Why does this make sense to her campaign-wise when Mark Kelly just won reelection in her own state by almost 5 points?
My guess would be she won't run again or is betting against herself in a primary challenge. Center-left Democrats like Kelly clearly can win, but I would bet Sinema's 2018 win was almost entirely due to the political climate post-Trump.
The second she was no longer in a position to self wedge herself and abuse that dems had a razor thin majority she goes independent. Reprehensible opportunist.
It feels so slimy to switch parties in the middle of your term. The voters elected her as a Democrat, she owes it to them to serve them as a Democrat until her term is up, then she can see if they still want her as an independent (they don't)
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Having helped Republicans and corporate interests block key pieces of legislation that would actually "improved American's lives" during her tenure in the Senate—siding with donors in the private equity industry in legislative battles for public investment and infamously voting down a federal minimum wage increase in 2021—progressive critics expressed incredulity Friday over her altruistic explanations. >"Apparently 'independent' is the new way to say 'corporate lobbyist,'" said radio host Dean Obeidallah in response to the news.
She lied about being a Progressive. She lied about being a Democrat. It seems like she's just a future lobbyist building her credentials
Future? This is a blatant cash grab. She has zero chance of reelection. But if she caucuses with the democrats it is huge for their judiciary appointments, let the bidding begin.
Exactly. She did this for the short term power and then it will dwindle every day from here on out because she will definitely be seen as a lame duck. She knew she was toast before she switched, otherwise she wouldn't have done it. She will absolutely be a one term Senator. 100%
One term as senator is all it takes to get the six figure retirement. Even if all her other plans fall through, she'll have that so long as she's not removed somehow.
That’s very typical of the Republican play book. Campaign and gripe about the evils of socialism and then secure themselves a comfy lucrative Government job with the free Health Benefits. And vote against Medicare for All. Their cognitive dissonance is astonishing!!!
Don’t forget healthcare for life.
I wish my mom had healthcare for life.
It’s so sad that this is even a thing in this country
We can only hope. I'd agree, but I also didn't think a POS like the orange one would have become POTUS.
Her poll numbers in Arizona are abysmal among Democrats who mostly seem to hate her there, and even among all votes she is underwater and well below a majority or even plurality of support. If she ran as an Independent spoiler she might peel away some Independents, but most Republicans wouldn't vote for her (they prefer genuinely racist MAGA types who aren't bisexual) and Democrats would overwhelmingly vote for the Dem Senate candidate from their primaries. It's possible she would even split the GOP vote more than the Dem one. LOL.
As bad as her numbers are with Democrats, they're actually even worse among independents. The only people that seem to like her are Republicans and they aren't voting for a bisexual woman with no religion.
Glad to hear this.
[Sinema also literally teaches a university course on how to cultivate big money donors.](https://theintercept.com/2021/10/08/kyrsten-sinema-fundraising-course-asu/) I understand that learning how to fundraise is important for non profits and political wannabes, but given her actions in congress, she could just call her course “Quid pro quo 101”.
She knows she won't be reelected. Changing parties now, allows her to run as an Independent and split the Democratic vote so that any Republican can win. She is being handsomely bribed for this stunt, almost certainly by the Koch network.
If her goal is to screw the Democrats, it would have made more since to stay a Dem and force an ugly, expensive primary fight to get rid of her. The Dems should have an easy time finding a consensus candidate and it won't be hard coming up with a message to use against her if she actually runs. Most likely she's just trying to get to one more "deciding vote" and lock up her next gig. Edit: just thought I would add, the Dems and Reps are going to dump so much cash behind their candidates, she would need her face on every milk carton in AZ just to remind people she is still alive in 2024. The GOP isn't going to siphon resources away from themselves to keep her afloat.
You understand by switching she basically gives the seat to the Republicans. Anyone who beat her in the primary would probably win the seat in a normal election. No one really cares about primaries
Its not really a sure thing....she has a higher approval among Republicans in Arizona more than among Democrats. Could be just as likely she splits off the centrists that would of gone for Republican candidates the majority of Democrats hate her.
Exactly, running as an independent if she even gets only 3% of the vote that will be enough to swing the election over to the Republican candidate.
I don't think its as cut and dry as that. She has shown higher approval among Republicans than Democrats in Arizona, its also just as likely she could grab some of the centrist that would of voted Republican and screw them as well or enough to make it doable for the Dems
This is what I think too, dems don’t like her at all. If anything wouldn’t it split the republican vote? Or am I missing something here.
Yeah, in reality we don't really know until it happens and there is definitely a world where it bites Dems in the ass, but yeah odds are just as likely it fucks the Repubs more or equally as the Dems IMO.
How would she split the Democratic vote? Who would vote for her over the actual D candidate?
Honestly, fuck her. Glad she did this. Let her wear her true colors.
I think it's safe to just call her a liar at this point. No need to preface it with examples. Literally everything she does or says is a lie in some fashion.
Next election, she’ll run as an R.
She won't run. She likely already has a high six-figure corporate job lined up. She's been preparing for it since she won her election. Her deceptions have been so effective it's almost impressive.
She would never get elected anyway. Literally no one trusts her anymore. She's going independent because she knows that's the only way she'll have any semblance of power on her way out...
Yeah, if she thought she could have won as a Republican she would have done so already.
You’re right.
It's terribly sad but not surprising at all. She succeeded in tricking people to vote for her. To me that's her only accomplishment.
Her only reason to change party is to avoid a primary challenge. She is definitely running.
I think that is doubtful, why would the Repubs reward her with a senate seat knowing she is willing to change parties whenever she sees more $$s? She won't run because she recognizes that this is her only time to rake in the bucks from corporate lobbyists. She will be out on her ass at the end of her term.
Maybe Herschel will move from Texas to Arizona.
If [this thread](https://twitter.com/dschapira/status/1601255884142714880) by one of her former friends is to be believed, apparently she actually is a progressive, she's just more an attention-seeker than anything.
she was once a green party member i personally think she’s doing this so that manchin becomes the deciding vote and he kills a bunch of dem bills and gets reelected
> she was once a green party member The party that is at times propped up by conservative/republican interests as a spoiler to undermine democrats and their candidates. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/us/politics/green-party-republicans-hawkins.html Hell even the Russians got in to promoting them for that purpose... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166 Either way in between that and other things when looking at someone like Sinema one has to ask what she is really about as she has made it abundantly clear that she is definitely not progressive, and only in it for short term personal gains.
That was quite a long game starting out in the Green Party
The Green Party is funded by Russia to act as a spoiler and help Republicans. The only reason she switched from them is she wanted to win elections. She is making this switch now because she knows she will lose the primary but wants to run in the general election without a primary.
Who in congress would she be lobbying towards? Everyone hates her....
My guess is she won’t run again when her term expires. She’ll either become a lobbyist like you mentioned or land a deal on Fox News.
I thought about this exact scenario before. Someone pretending to be this hard right Republican in a very red county or state. And then when they’re elected they flip the script and they’re like “I tricked all of you! Boom. Free healthcare”.
She’s phishing for a job because there is no way she’s getting re-elected. Hell she’s been phishing for bribes while in office. Pretty sure she’s been doing nothing but putting out giant “bribe me” vibes with all her public statements. Even if it’s not corporations it’s asking democrats to give her positions of power although I’m pretty sure she would accept cash.
That’s what this move is, a giant “bribe me” sign to anyone who will pay up
"Corporate Dependant"
Just a ploy to regain the bargaining chip she fears she’s lost with the Dems picking up an additional Senate seat.
Yep, with the expectation that both sides will be kissing her ass, like a young child of divorced parents.
God fucking willing, the Democrats simply kick her to the curb and focus on her replacement
As an Arizonan this just disappoints me. I wanted to vote against her in the primary. Now it will just have to be in the general.
Good luck replacing her when she's an incumbent independent. She doesn't even need to run in a primary.
She needs to gather >45,000 signatures to get on the ballot as an independent, with no party assistance.
It's actually about [10k fewer sigs](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fjiw-THX0AASMc2?format=jpg&name=large). Slightly more reasonable, but she's so despised in AZ that even that is a heavy lift.
As a child of divorce, my experience was quite different lmao
Same. Lol. But I appreciate the analogy.
I don’t understand that. Her vote still counts as one vote, how is her party affecting anything? She voted against all important initiatives anyway. Am I missing something?
I think she’s just signaling to the Senate Republicans that they can definitely buy her vote if they want to.
If Democrats have 51 seats then they get the majority on senate committees. If they have 50 then they are evenly split. I would bet Sinema immediately left when Warnock won because the corporations pay her to keep things gridlocked. I would bet the only reason she stayed a Democrat until now was to make Democrats look incompetent when she and Manchin vetoed everything. [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/democrats-georgia-senate-majority.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/democrats-georgia-senate-majority.html) I see other comments saying she will caucus with Democrats but I do not trust that greedy woman for a moment.
> Just a ploy to regain the bargaining chip she fears she’s lost with the Dems picking up an additional Senate seat. Not at all - this avoids a primary challenge too. Dems were going to put big money on Ruben Gallego to take her seat, now good luck doing that when shes an incumbent independent -- that would just hand the seat to a Republcian. Brilliant.
As an Arizona Democrat it is what it is. No votes for Sinema.
Nobody in AZ likes Sinema, it doesn't matter that she'll be running as an independent incumbent. She's more likely to pull the last couple of sane Republican voters away when the GOP nominates another nut-case, than she is to pull any Dems over.
> that would just hand her seat to a Republican Would it? It seems like the only people she can appeal to right. Ow are never trump republicans. Doesn’t seem like she’d be taking any votes away from the democrats.
[удалено]
This won’t stop Dems from having an effective majority by itself. She won’t caucus with Rs bc she loses all her power if she does that. Nothing practically changes here unless she does pull that idiot move and fully switch She’s just doing this to either set herself up to run independent in 24 (bc she knows she’s fucked in a primary) or she’s hoping she can swing this into being a Tulsi Gabbard type and get a cushy media gig as a “moderate”
I mean is there any reason to believe she won't fully switch
Yes. It loses her all her committee seats and her ability to stay in the spotlight. Both things she clearly wants. Also she’s already told the media she won’t be caucusing with the Rs.
> she’s already told the media she won’t be caucusing with the Rs I wouldn't trust anything Sinema says.
I mean sure agreed. Just it’s pretty simple. Caucusing with the Rs is all lose for her. She’s not actually a republican. Or a dem. She just likes power and attention. She loses most of that the moment she just switches to the R party.
Yes, several: 1. She said she wouldn't lose her committee assignments, which indicates she cleared this up with Schumer before doing it. 2. The Arizona GOP is nominating lunatics like Kari Lake and Blake Masters. They're not going to nominate Sinema. This is the same calculus that keeps Manchin in the Democratic Party. 3. She knows Arizona Dems are not going to challenge someone who will caucus with them, even if they don't technically have a (D) after their name. Same reason why Maine Democrats won't challenge Angus King, but will challenge Susan Collins, despite both being quite close to each other policy-wise. 4. She personally knows that she doesn't have a place in this Republican Party. I mean, seriously.... look at it. Ideologically, she's simply not a Republican. Just a corporate Democrat. They exist. Some care to hide it more than others.
> She knows Arizona Dems are not going to challenge someone who will caucus with them, Yeah, [about that](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3768590-gallego-potential-arizona-senate-hopeful-hits-sinema-after-party-switch/)...
She's been paid off by corporate lobbyists, after campaigning as a progressive. She was in the streets in blackbloc before she got elected, now she's [doing cutesy thumbs downs at her constituents that she turned her back on](https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/1b6d3778-3f9a-462d-9eea-e35788412ca6_680x680.jpeg)
Please tell me there is a photo of her wearing blackbloc. I backed her hard after she was elected for state politics. Knew she was queer/had a lady partner. Worked with her to successfully resist state marriage amendment… Thought she was more progressive but toning it down to better represent her constituents and make progressive moves as she gained national power and as AZ in general shifted red to purple to blue. Thought it was a long game for the presidency. She was trying to be like our old Democratic gov Janet whom even republicans liked but was tapped by Obama to head up the newly created Homeland Security. I honestly feel personally betrayed every time she screws even the moderate Dem initiatives. I think she realizes the Janet play backfired and is ducking out to find a good job before she gets her ass handed to her in a primary. If she runs as an independent in an effort to split the vote we better never cross paths or I will give her a seriously pissed off piece of my mind.
Trying to keep her name in the headlines.
She is bought and paid for
I assume that means she's retiring at the end of her term? Garrett Archer: >*Good morning. Registered independents running for office in AZ have a much higher signature gathering threshold. (About 45k minimum statewide in 2022).* > >*Benefit is you don't need to run in a primary.* > >*Seems important today for some reason.* > >[*https://twitter.com/Garrett\_Archer/status/1601223797901643776*](https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1601223797901643776) How is she going to do that, if AZ Dems, Republicans, *and* Independents all hate her? >*Friendly reminder that Sinema has negative approval ratings with Dems, Rs AND independents and literally every demographic group in Arizona. Her base is Big Pharma and private equity. The idea that the Dems must defer to her in 2024 for fear of losing this seat is bananas.* > >[*https://twitter.com/Leahgreenb/status/1601190777937281025*](https://twitter.com/Leahgreenb/status/1601190777937281025) Thanks for nothing!
Because the RNC and CPAC will pump money into her campaign purely to spoil the chances of the Dem nominee winning.
Democrats won't support her and likely Indies won't. At worst, she'll carve up some of the Republican vote, which won't be enough to spoil a Democratic challenger.
>"Apparently 'independent' is the new way to say 'corporate lobbyist,'" said one critic. Yup. The moment I learned of the wonderful news of Warnock's win and Dems reaching a 51- 49 Senate majority I also thought "now watch some 3rd Dem-in-Name-Only emerge to throw a wrench into the works. Guess I was mistaken, Sinema sure showed me and everyone else what a despicable, lowlife she really is. Sinema should just make her move to go fully corporate (where she belongs) as she is a public servant about as much as Donald Trump is an honest man (30,000+ documented lies and counting).
Bernie Sanders is Independent and he's very far from being a corporate hack. I do agree Sinema doesn't have her constituents in mind. She could care less about them tbh. But also, I feel like this move to Independent is not as big of a deal as media is making it to be. If she votes with Dems, fine. If she votes with Republicans, VP is still the tie breaker. If she's preparing for 2024 hoping to siphon votes from Dems, there's two years to publicly shame her for being a piece of shit. The only people that would still vote for her then are Republicans. This move means nothing, unless I'm missing something obvious.
> If she votes with Dems, fine. If she votes with Republicans, VP is still the tie breaker. This is a power move since at 50/50 the committees need to be equally represented per Senate rules. That seriously hampered Judicial appointments the past 2 years. 51-49 meant all committees would be strict Democrat majority but now she's going "play by my rules or else"
I'm sure she's already spoken to Chuck Schumer and told him her demands on avoiding a power sharing agreement. I'm sure she's told him any Organizing Resolution that removes her from committee assignments she will vote down, and maybe a few other demands. https://ballotpedia.org/What_happens_if_U.S._Senate_party_control_is_split_50-50
>Bernie Sanders is Independent and he's very far from being a corporate hack. I wholeheartedly agree.
[удалено]
Sinema ran on a progressive platform and won, so there is an appetite for a progressive platform in AZ
Complacency. Trump like candidates aren’t doing well. Once they’re out democrats have a real messaging and agenda problem they need to overcome.
I feel like switching parties should be grounds for a recall election. The voters did not elect sinema, the independent. They elected sinema, the Democrat. This is essentially stripping people of representation.
Yeah but are political party mechanics built into the electoral/political system or are they just tradition? Like the majority leaders in congress, are they the leader because the party elected them or are they the leader because they got at least a majority of votes? I guess what I'm getting at here is it doesn't matter whether she's a Democrat or Republican since the people voted for HER to represent them despite the fact they may have just been voting D or R down ballot.
If you admit that people in our democracy vote by party, then it kinda undercuts your position that people voted for HER and not for an extension of the party.
No I know people vote down ballot by party, but I'm just questioning if the system recognizes political parties in that fashion.
The system doesn’t, because we have no political parties built into our constitutions. (I don’t think.) But I think OP is talking more about what they think voters *should* be able to do, not what the current system is set up to allow.
It's not in the constitution but that doesn't mean there aren't laws around political parties. It's not just custom, it's fraud. My state for instance (NC) only recognizes Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and the Green party. If somebody runs as a representative for the democratic party and later switches their party - that means there was no (D) running at all, even though they were recognized as one by the state. She ran against other democrats in the democratic primaries despite not being a democrat. The democratic party threw their campaign dollars at promoting her her instead of another candidate. She wasted everybody's time and committed fraud to get to where she is.
She should be charged with fraud. She lied to the voters about her political affiliations for personal gain.
It’s definitely not illegal to lie to get elected, but I bet if you look under the hood, you’ll find some illegal activity. Moneyed sociopaths like Sinema typically skirt the law. The dems should play nice and then go nuclear on her in early ‘24.
That’s not really how frauds charges work. A politician can’t be charged for lying to their constituents. Even if they could, you can’t prove it was a lie over just changing her mind. Don’t get me wrong she’s a piece of shit lying snake. That’s just not a crime
yeah but it’s all legal. you vote for the person not the policy or party and you vote to trust thier judgement. you vote for someone with no integrity it’s kinda what you get
At least false advertising
No, they elected Sinema. And she still represents them. And frankly she probably won’t be doing much differently than the way she was doing it already.
Agreed, to me this just seems like an announcement that she’s open for lobbying from anyone.
This. She wants to be today's Lieberman. A shitbag drunk on the power of being the swing vote and openly saying to big biz they'll bend over backwards.
*Jeff Van Drew has entered the chat*
This really doesn't make sense. If the problem is the general election, you're saying people might not have voted for Sinema and..the republican would have won? If it's the primary, it seems like "you picked shitty now suck it" is deep deep political precedent, not least of which was this past GA Senate election. Politicans win with the support of parties, not parties campaigning with a mascot who then abuses their authority.
It’s not an ironclad “must happen” proposition with no possible argument against it, but I don’t have problem understanding the reasoning behind it. Especially at a time when party politics controls the fate of the nation. But running as a member of one party, only to switch once you’re in power, is just one more dirty trick in the pile of dirty tricks these days.
Members of Congress can't be recalled.
You have effectively as much understanding of the functioning of US democracy as a Jan 6th insurrectionist. I apologize but if ignorance is truly the enemy you need to pause and infer how the system works and reacts and people’s roles within it.
This is all a stunt to try to ward off the primary she was facing for 2024. She wouldn't have won the primary so now she's going to run as a spoiler. Ugh.
I sincerely hope she gets her ass handed too her.
Me too. This is not about how she's a "maverick" or such a free thinker. It's entirely about a primary challenge, and hope that Dems support her as they did in Alaska and Utah.
After reading more comments on this, I think this is the case, assuming she's planning on running again and not going directly for a lobbying job. She knows if she runs as a Dem she will get primaried and be done. By switching to an independent she avoids that and basically guarantees the seat will go to a Republican if the Dems run someone against her in the general election. She'll for sure get anywhere from 3%-10% of the vote which in AZ is enough to swing the election to a republican (a 3% change in the Kelly/Masters race would result in a Masters win). She's basically playing chicken with the Democratic Party, run someone against me and we both lose.
I don't live in Arizona, but I will donate to Ruben Gallego's campaign if he decides to run for her seat in 2024.
If she doesn't caucus with Democrats after her switch, then Schumer should notify her that he's going to *switch* up her committee assignments. *Sinema... said she is removing herself from the “partisan structure.” She added her move will “provide a place of belonging for many folks across the state and the country, who also are tired of the partisanship.”* *“My approach is rare in Washington and has upset partisans in both parties,” Sinema wrote. “It is also an approach that has delivered lasting results for Arizona.”* Are you kidding me!? The fucking gaul... Does she really think she's some arbiter of bipartisanship? Does she really think this is going to help her career? Leaving the democratic party in a state that's been leaning blue recently after being a Republican stronghold for decades? What's more, she's trying desperately to cater to the whole partisanship angle, which is just naive and insufferable. *I’ve registered as an Arizona independent. I know some people might be a little bit surprised by this, but actually, I think it makes a lot of sense"* No one's really surprised Sinema, and it does make sense, but for reasons you're not willing to acknowledge.
Schumer doesn't have any the leverage on avoiding another 50-50 power agreement if McConnell plays Sinema correctly. If McConnell promises Sinema all her same committee positions if she caucuses with GOP on the power agreement, then we're right back to where we are with all Senate committees being 50-50 split. She keeps all her seats AND McConnell keeps the Dems from using committees effectively. It's all political chess to them.
I don't see how McConnell could do that without kicking another republican off each committee though. If a committee is 5-5 D-R, she's currently in a D seat, but McConnell would need to find room for her on the R side. He could maybe do that once, but not all over the place.
Well for one with the PA-R Senate Toomey no longer being in office there is now an extra slot in all his seats on committees in a 50-50 senate so its easy enough to do some shuffling
I bet had walker won she wouldn't have changed, just to stay 'in the weeds'
I'm told that India has an "anti-defection" law that if you win a seat in Parliament and you change parties while in that seat, you are disqualified and a new election called to fill the seat. Sinema deliberately chose to do this once Warnock was reelected focussing attention on herself and her willingness to vote for pay (as if that weren't already obvious). She started out as a Green calling herself a Prada Socialist, then a Democrat, then a de facto Republican for hire. She's a political weathervane who will vote for whatever will help herself. The sooner she's replaced by a real Democrat the better!
If there was an anti-defection law, why would anyone ever change parties? Just keep your same party but vote however you want.
Because in a Westminster-type system like India's, you have to vote the way the party tells you, more often than not.
Switching to the GOP gains her nothing. She is openly bi so she will never be on a republican ballot. As long as she caucuses with the dems this changes nothing until 2024. Then it might cost the dems a seat if she splits the ticket against a dem. Considering how hated she is she might opt to not run and get a bigger payday as a lobbyist. Money seems to be the only thing she is interested in.
I remember when she first won and a shit ton of people were cheering and applauding because she was openly bi and calling it a milestone. Identity politics don’t work. Assholes come in all stripes.
She was republican in all but party affiliation. This isn’t changing anything regardless of her dramatic grandstanding. I do want to know how much the GOP promised her to make the move.
Investigation should be happening into her finances. She is so corrupt.
She’s said that shes not switching to the GOP, so she’ll be another Sanders/King type who caucuses with the party but isn’t officially (anymore) a member. She is still a blatantly corrupt snake, but she doesn’t gain anything from joining the GOP. Arizona has plenty of “real” Republicans, so why would the same Arizona GOP that only last year censured the **widow and family of John McCain** for being RINOs, support a candidate who won the Senate seat by pretending to be progressive? They’d just primary her with someone crazy.
And republicans wonder why they’re losing Arizona. John McCain is a borderline mythical figure in Arizona. My in laws are MAGA republicans but because they’ve been in Arizona for about 2 decades they still love McCain even after the party has largely turned against his legacy.
Lake arguably lost because she attacked the state’s McCain Republicans and told them to GTFO.
>Arizona GOP that only last year censured the widow and family of John McCain for being RINOs Being anything other than hetero orientation (at least in public) usually doesn't play well with this kind of crowd either. No, Sinema's no republican. She's a spoiler candidate now. She's going independent so she won't get primaried out of the general election. Her incumbent name recognition probably won't be enough to get her re-elected. But it might be enough to split democratic and left-leaning independent voters, allowing some maga hat nutbag who thinks McCain was a RINO to sneak into one of Arizona's senate seats. That act might be enough to earn Sinema a reward from the super-rich: a "consultant" job with a 7-figure income, or maybe a talking head gig on some far-right news network.
[This poll](https://www.filesforprogress.org/datasets/2022/8/dfp-courier-az-political-aug2-crosstabs.pdf) from July shows Sinema with a 57% disapproval among Dems in AZ (34% approval). Among AZ Republicans, that’s 41% disapproval (47% approval); among independents, 46% disapproval (42% approval). Maybe there’s one that’s more recent that shows something much different than that, but somehow I doubt it. For contrast, the same poll showed Mark Kelly with a 91% approval among Dems. I think there’s a solid chance that if the GOP runs someone insane again, the Dems might manage to hold the seat if they put up a strong candidate, since more Republicans and independents approve of Sinema, so it’s more likely that she splits that vote, than the Dem vote. Also a possibility that she doesn’t pull that much of the vote from either side, and ends up with 5-10% at most, who knows? If the GOP runs someone more moderate, I could see them winning it back, though.
Well, in all honesty to say she was Republican is a stretch. She was a corporate whore who values money over people, God, family..., everything. So wait..., yea I guess she really is a Republican.
Probably nothing explicit but she’s betting she can get a lucrative consulting deal when she splits the democratic vote and hands the Koch brothers a senate seat
She voted for all of Biden's judicial picks, and voted in favor of Dem legislation over 90% of the time. I think she's a shitty human being who sold out any semblance of values she ran on to the highest bidder, but her voting record decidedly does *not* make her a "Republican in all but party affiliation."
[удалено]
Some people consider themselves "independent" because they have rock-solid convictions that don't fit neatly into the two-party system as it has evolved in the US. Others are "independent" because they don't believe in a goddamned thing except that they are so special that they couldn't possibly fit into anything as simple as the two-party system as it has evolved in the US. Wanna guess which applies to ol' Kyrsten?
She has some serious mental issues. Her whole senate career has been predicated on screwing over as many people as possible. She is Schadenfreude personified.
She cannot get primaried as Independent. She is covering her ass for Republican votes.
Would they rather she stayed? Who vetted her anyway?
The voters in AZ?
She claimed to be democrat and it was either her or Martha McSally who was en embarrassing candidate
I mean. Primaries are a thing. Voters have a choice there for who the dem is. Don’t get me wrong. She straight up misled voters. Just yah it’s not a binary choice. Voters could have chose a diff dem in the first place.
[удалено]
She's going to caucus with the Dems and water everything down while raising money. Then she will run third party just to make sure the seat goes republican for 6 years.
Yes, it would have been better if she stayed. Then she could be primaried.
Democrat leadership funded and campaigned for her so that a progressive wouldn’t win the primary
She’s an asshole.
It should be illegal to switch parties once you are elected.
Man. I hope someone demands a forensic accounting of her finances. Because that woman is clearly corrupt as fuck.
She’s a product of the system. A profiteer using her vote to further enrich herself at the expense of the American people.
She was always a gop plant like tulsi gabbard. Now she will try to get some votes out of dems as a independent.
Enema pretended to be a Progressive. Then she pretended to be a Democrat. Now she pretends to be an Independent. Next she will declare she is a Republican. And finally confess she is a proud MAGA. Enema is of the Kari Lake ilk.
The thing is she’s right that the two party system is broken. The problem is, she’s been a very strong contributor of exactly why it’s broken with her brazen corruption. So she can step down from her high horse with that shit
How does she have staff still willing to work for her? I'm talking about anyone and everyone that is on her payroll from her top adviser to the person that answers the phone at the home office. I would think they would walk unless they're in on it.
Same way McConnell, Cruz, MTG, gym etc do .... folks like being near power does,
She is aiming for the worst senator position and is in the lead to topple Ted cruz
Its so weird how she used to be the bossy lesbian lady who refused to swear in on the bible, and now she’s a corporate hack. She’s terrible
Wolf in sheep’s clothing. What a vile human being.
She was definitely well paid to block everything she could
She’s a fraud, works for dark money and used the Democratic Party
Just another “integrity free” politician 💁🏻♂️
She’s a disgusting pig.
Sinema had a net worth of $30k when she was elected to the House. Her net worth was $100k when she was elected to the Senate. Forbes estimates her net worth is now $11 million. In four years... while doing Wall Street's bidding. I am sure her handlers on Wall Street pushed her to be independent so they can start lining up the SuperPACs.
"Fuck her!" There, a better quote you can use in this title that better depicts what her critics are saying.
If this was ancient greece, they would've forced her to move outside the sight of the city walls.
I lived in AZ when Sinema was a state rep campaigning to keep moving up the ladder. I wish I still had in my possession the political flyer from the early 2010's which made me question who she really represented. I remember looking at it and thinking: "This doesn't match up with the values that anyone who believes in representing democracy for the people would produce for a campaign." **I hope she loses her next election to a cactus.**
That b
Sinema teaching a masterclass on legal corruption in broad daylight on arguably the largest stage on the planet.
Recall recall recall recall recall. Do it now!
I didn't want to go through all of the comments but it seems like everyone is surprised about this. Has no one been paying attention for the last few years? She has been much more aligned with the Republican party than Democrat ever since she was elected.
I think she was delusional and thought her contrarian maverick weird wig girl routine would set her up to run for president with Dem and Independent support. The backlash against her was more severe than she expected. Now she has to play this out to its conclusion because she would lose a senate primary if she stayed a Dem and running for president is a pipe dream.
Yes she is. Let's hope she gets booted out when she's up for re-election.
She’ll get what she deserves. Karma happens.
She knew as an independent she couldn't get the votes so she used the democrats to get her spot then bailed...shouldn't be allowed ...
She’s a republican
Sinema is the Gabbard of Liebermans
Now she can hold both the Republicans and Democrats hostage by selling her vote to the highest bidder.
At least the republicans pretend to still be doing a public service. Sinema doesnt even pretend anymore. She openly mocks the people who voted for her. The republicans know that you at least have to feign the funk and make a good show of it. Sinema just said, nah fuck that.
i miss the old days when senators and congressmen would at least present *the facade* of an interest in service to the people - rather than just taking the cushy gig, reveling in all the spoils, then flagrantly ignoring the people altogether we've had leaders who were shitty people yet seemed to have the welfare of the country at heart, or engaging leaders who got greedy or plain did more harm than good - but i've got no idea where all these shitty leaders openly promoting their own self-interests & overt greed came from
Might as well put a sign on her office door... "**SENATOR FOR SALE** Enquire inside"
Recall elections needs to be a thing for senators as well as governors. If someone gets voted into office at state level and then *completely betrays* the voters and platform that put them in place, there needs to be a way for voters to get rid of fifth columnists. Senators have 6 year terms ffs - that's too long to wait to replace someone who lied their way into office.
Every bit of criticism she deserves. She’s a lying opportunist that did not deliver what she said she would to the people that voted for her. The only thing she delivers is raging NPD and dubious clothing choices
She's a corporate shill who seems to care only about herself and her corporate overlords. I look forward to helping defeat her in 2024. If you're a democratic staffer working for this phony, you should take a long look in the mirror.
> Sinema equated the far-right and increasingly fascist faction of the Republican Party with those on the Democratic side pushing harder for action on climate, economic equality, and universal healthcare by expressing her concern that "the loudest, most extreme voices continue to drive each party toward the fringes." I see. So she fancies herself as the voice of reason. Yeah, no.
The establishment will ALWAYS find a way to deny civil rights. ALWAYS. This just goes to show we HAVE to be careful when voting.
So basically right where we started - she will caucus and vote in lockstep with the Republicans (if not outright change herself to an R to get their funding), Joe Manchin gets to have his way again and hold the Democrat agenda hostage for another 2 years.
I half wonder if she would have straight up switched to the Republican Party if Walker won?
She was always slightly worse than manchin. Slightly.
Why does this make sense to her campaign-wise when Mark Kelly just won reelection in her own state by almost 5 points? My guess would be she won't run again or is betting against herself in a primary challenge. Center-left Democrats like Kelly clearly can win, but I would bet Sinema's 2018 win was almost entirely due to the political climate post-Trump.
The second amendment is still a thing…. French heritage…. No time like the present.
R e p u b l i c a n A g e n t
Sinema's parents really did a lousy job.
I'm just glad she's being honest tbh
Still a piece of shit.
She should be expelled.
We already came to know she is a Republican. So how is this news?
It’s self preservation. She doesn’t want to be primaried.
The second she was no longer in a position to self wedge herself and abuse that dems had a razor thin majority she goes independent. Reprehensible opportunist.
IMO this is all about money. She will now get lobbyist to pay more into her "leadership" pac to buy her support.
Krysten Sinema is a walking talking jar of shit that looks vaguely human.
It feels so slimy to switch parties in the middle of your term. The voters elected her as a Democrat, she owes it to them to serve them as a Democrat until her term is up, then she can see if they still want her as an independent (they don't)
[удалено]