Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If she still caucuses with the Democrats (as independents Sanders and King do), why is this a big deal?

Because if she wants attention, she can threaten to caucus with republicans.

Seriously? I don't see that happening at all.

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.

Anonymous wrote:If she still caucuses with the Democrats (as independents Sanders and King do), why is this a big deal?

Because if she wants attention, she can threaten to caucus with republicans.

If she still caucuses with the Democrats (as independents Sanders and King do), why is this a big deal?

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.

Only one party has the fringes in totally control and it’s not the one who’s going to let her keep her current committee assignments.

You are part of the problem. Open your eyes.

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

I don't know that Sinema would have a lock on independents I her state, they have voted Democrat (her) in past. And loyal democrats maybe don't like a bait and switch

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.

Only one party has the fringes in totally control and it’s not the one who’s going to let her keep her current committee assignments.

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

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.

Corruption and ego.

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.

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.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all about avoiding the embarrassment of losing the Dem primary in 2024. There will be no functional difference in the Senate.

Precisely. The most interesting part will be how her dem opponent plays it. Does he go left or center. If he goes left he gives her a shot to split the electorate.

It doesn’t matter which way Ruben Gallego goes, she and him both running in the general will split that vote and both will lose to whatever Republican runs.

Based on polling, she would more likely split with a Republican and Gallego would coast.

Yep, this is what I see.

~native AZ now in DC

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

Anonymous wrote:

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!

That's the problem of people voting party over person. Being an independent forces voters to actually look at her positions.

And I think she was a sincere Democrat when elected but became disillusioned as time went on. Very understandable.

That’s not what this is.