Sinema registers as independent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is anyone allowed to change party affiliation in the middle of their elected terms. Our democracy is so flawed. This should require her to resign. People did not vote her to be “independent”. She used Democratic machinations and voters for election and now she is saying f u!

This is a good point. She used Democratic donations to get into office.

Changes of party should only be allowed before election, not when in office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With Warnock’s win she wasn’t as special anymore; now she’s made herself special again. Main character syndrome at its finest

BINGO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such disingenuous bullsh|t.

She's right. We need a spectrum of ideas rather than two extremes. Good for her.

She ran as a progressive. If she really believed that, she should have run as an independent

She has a long history as very liberal in AZ politics. I’m not sure what happened to her.

That's the thing. What would cause this? All I can think is Washington power got to her head and she's overthinking how important she is personally.

As someone whose household gave a lot of money to the Senate Democrats fund to get her elected, I'm pissed. She's just a narcissistic person who doesn't actually care why the voters elected her.

She wants to be the center of attention not just 1 of 51.

I also think she’s planning for her next step because there’s no way she gets re-elected. If she somehow thinks changing affiliation WILL help her get re-elected , she’s even stupider than I thought.

She’s going to become head of the ABA, AIC, Business Roundtable or another swamp lobbying org.

I think it's all about $$$ for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such disingenuous bullsh|t.

She's right. We need a spectrum of ideas rather than two extremes. Good for her.

She ran as a progressive. If she really believed that, she should have run as an independent

She has a long history as very liberal in AZ politics. I’m not sure what happened to her.

That's the thing. What would cause this? All I can think is Washington power got to her head and she's overthinking how important she is personally.

As someone whose household gave a lot of money to the Senate Democrats fund to get her elected, I'm pissed. She's just a narcissistic person who doesn't actually care why the voters elected her.

She wants to be the center of attention not just 1 of 51.

This.
If you hate “Washington Politicians” this is peak behavior of such creatures. No dignity, lying, flip flopping, without a moral core, and attention seeking.

And rolling out your big announcement via Politico before anyone in Arizona is awake.

Excellent point. I got the notification on my phone around 645am, I think. 445am in Arizona. Peak attention seeking behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this? Running as an independent ensures no Dem in AZ will vote for her (or only they very disillusioned would) and it will split the Republican vote because the GOP will run a MAGA candidate.

You answered your own question. She is part of the Koch funded "greens" astroturfing who was more politically successful than anyone could have imagined. She isn't and never has been a progressive green party representative.

You don’t know much about her then before her Senate days.

You don't know much about the far right astroturfing "the green party" do you. Look at Jill Stein as another example.

But her party change causes defeat for GOP not the Dems

How so? Low information voters will see her name and vote for her. Hardcore dems will vote for Gallego. The GOP will vote for whoever the put up. The GOP will win in a plurality. She is splitting Dem votes, not GOP votes.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of pissed off Dems who are probably just mad that Sinema isn't in their camp anymore, but what, effectively, is going to changes in the next two years?

Sanders and King, both independents, caucus with the Democrats and are included in the 51 seat majority. Won't Sinema do the same?

And maybe she doesn't want to run for re-election. So what?

She holds a lot of traditionally liberal positions, so I fail to see that the fuss is about, other than the letter next to her name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is so Democrats can’t get any nominees out of committee. Really slithery.

Nope. Won’t impact that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Link to her op-ed here:
https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2022/12/09/sen-kyrsten-sinema-of-arizona-why-im-registering-as-an-independent/69712395007/

I can’t imagine bothsidesing anything after watching all the elections that just happened in her own state. Was she not paying attention? She certainly didn’t help any of the Democrats win.

She clearly did and acted accordingly, in my opinion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such disingenuous bullsh|t.

She's right. We need a spectrum of ideas rather than two extremes. Good for her.

She ran as a progressive. If she really believed that, she should have run as an independent

She has a long history as very liberal in AZ politics. I’m not sure what happened to her.

That's the thing. What would cause this? All I can think is Washington power got to her head and she's overthinking how important she is personally.

As someone whose household gave a lot of money to the Senate Democrats fund to get her elected, I'm pissed. She's just a narcissistic person who doesn't actually care why the voters elected her.

She wants to be the center of attention not just 1 of 51.

I also think she’s planning for her next step because there’s no way she gets re-elected. If she somehow thinks changing affiliation WILL help her get re-elected , she’s even stupider than I thought.

She’s auditioning for her next high-paying job once her term is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such disingenuous bullsh|t.

She's right. We need a spectrum of ideas rather than two extremes. Good for her.

She ran as a progressive. If she really believed that, she should have run as an independent

She has a long history as very liberal in AZ politics. I’m not sure what happened to her.

That's the thing. What would cause this? All I can think is Washington power got to her head and she's overthinking how important she is personally.

As someone whose household gave a lot of money to the Senate Democrats fund to get her elected, I'm pissed. She's just a narcissistic person who doesn't actually care why the voters elected her.

She wants to be the center of attention not just 1 of 51.

I also think she’s planning for her next step because there’s no way she gets re-elected. If she somehow thinks changing affiliation WILL help her get re-elected , she’s even stupider than I thought.

She’s auditioning for her next high-paying job once her term is over.

dumb take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does not this anger the voters? If my elected representative changed parties AFTER an election was over I would feel scammed.

I wonder if AZ Democratic voters can file a fraud lawsuit against her.

[Anonymous]

I predicted she was going to do this because she seems to have attention seeking and narcissistic personality traits. It was obvious if you’ve ever had to deal with people like that in your life. She craves attention, positive or negative, and she seeks moneu which is also about stature and attention. I blame all the people she has worked with over the years in the Democratic and Green parti and other organizations (she worked at Public Citizen) for ignoring these traits and helping her get this platform. No way she didn’t engage in attention seeking behavior before this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this? Running as an independent ensures no Dem in AZ will vote for her (or only they very disillusioned would) and it will split the Republican vote because the GOP will run a MAGA candidate.

You answered your own question. She is part of the Koch funded "greens" astroturfing who was more politically successful than anyone could have imagined. She isn't and never has been a progressive green party representative.

You don’t know much about her then before her Senate days.

You don't know much about the far right astroturfing "the green party" do you. Look at Jill Stein as another example.

But her party change causes defeat for GOP not the Dems

How so? Low information voters will see her name and vote for her. Hardcore dems will vote for Gallego. The GOP will vote for whoever the put up. The GOP will win in a plurality. She is splitting Dem votes, not GOP votes.

Gallego is very popular with everyone but MAGA. So Sinema will attract non-MAGA GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this? Running as an independent ensures no Dem in AZ will vote for her (or only they very disillusioned would) and it will split the Republican vote because the GOP will run a MAGA candidate.

You answered your own question. She is part of the Koch funded "greens" astroturfing who was more politically successful than anyone could have imagined. She isn't and never has been a progressive green party representative.

You don’t know much about her then before her Senate days.

You don't know much about the far right astroturfing "the green party" do you. Look at Jill Stein as another example.

But her party change causes defeat for GOP not the Dems

How so? Low information voters will see her name and vote for her. Hardcore dems will vote for Gallego. The GOP will vote for whoever the put up. The GOP will win in a plurality. She is splitting Dem votes, not GOP votes.

I know this last election was more than a month ago now, but I think it pretty clearly showed, particularly in Arizona, that Republican voters will not just vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this? Running as an independent ensures no Dem in AZ will vote for her (or only they very disillusioned would) and it will split the Republican vote because the GOP will run a MAGA candidate.

You answered your own question. She is part of the Koch funded "greens" astroturfing who was more politically successful than anyone could have imagined. She isn't and never has been a progressive green party representative.

You don’t know much about her then before her Senate days.

You don't know much about the far right astroturfing "the green party" do you. Look at Jill Stein as another example.

But her party change causes defeat for GOP not the Dems

How so? Low information voters will see her name and vote for her. Hardcore dems will vote for Gallego. The GOP will vote for whoever the put up. The GOP will win in a plurality. She is splitting Dem votes, not GOP votes.

I know this last election was more than a month ago now, but I think it pretty clearly showed, particularly in Arizona, that Republican voters will not just vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

That's certainly true, but a large number of them will. Both Masters and Lake got 49% of the total vote statewide, despite being absolute nutcases. If that block holds, and Sinema peals off even 2% of the republicans or independents who voted for Kelly and Hobbs, then the republican would win.