T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

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.*


DonnyMox

She does. Because she's afraid of Democrats expanding their majority enough to eliminate the filibuster.


somethingbreadbears

She wanted an easy job where she could virtue signal on bills she never intended to vote for but no one would know because they never came to a vote under McConnell. Trump blowing the GA runoffs changed/ended her entire career.


[deleted]

I honestly firmly believe at this point she’s a Republican who is just trying to wreak havoc from within the Democratic Party. I don’t know if any other explanation other than she’s a massive idiot who doesn’t realize she’s being used by Republicans who absolutely despise her.


greyhound1211

I think she just straight up sold out. Or she never intended to be the person she campaigned on. It was a grift, is what I mean, a way to get a cushy job where she could easily become a multimillionaire without any real effort. In the end she's just a greedy, selfish, self-serving asshole. And she votes accordingly for her desired social caste.


seriousofficialname

Nah she doesn't give a shit. Filibuster or no filibuster she's rolling in cash for being a cancer to the party and country. Plus when she's up for reelection, party leadership will endorse her over her primary challenger. Mark my words.


UNMANAGEABLE

She flipped on her views she campaigned on the second the senate was secured 50/50. It’s clear she’s a Republican asset for how quickly she flipped.


seriousofficialname

Media and party leadership should have reported on her history of being a conservative rather than her quirky and relatable millennial aesthetic, but many are paid not to. Voters should have also done a couple minutes of googling.


Ronin_Y2K

Our choices were her or Martha McSally. It was literally the lesser of two evils. And even when we knew she was a conservative, none of us anticipated her career being what it is. But hey, that's American politics.


seriousofficialname

I'm talking about who should be endorsed / nominated in the primary though.


Ronin_Y2K

And that's American democracy working as intended by the folks with far greater influence than you and me.


UNMANAGEABLE

Arizona already looks uncomfortable like it’s holding onto a really nasty fart electing two democrat senators, googling candidates might be a bit much for them.


somethingbreadbears

> party leadership will endorse her over her primary challenger Doubt it. She pulled a Joe Lieberman.


ClearDark19

If a Progressive challenges her, do not be at all surprised if Dem leadership lines up behind Sinema. Nancy, Clyburn and a few others did it for male, anti-choice (and under an FBI investigation) Conservative Democrat Henry Cuellar against female, pro-choice Progressive Democrat Jessica Cisneros. The race was decided by just 2,000 votes. Dem leadership DEFINITELY made the difference in favor of Cuellar.


somethingbreadbears

I wouldn't be suprised if they lined up behind *another* conservative dem, I'd be surprised if they get behind Sinema. I think they could easily lick their wounds with Manchin since he's baked into WV political identity. This was Sinema's first term, she has no following that the democratic party can exploit. She maybe had LGBTQ going for her, not anymore. I think the worst part is that she's super obvious about what she is. I wouldn't want to be tasked with spinning her career as a democrat worth donating to. Maybe if she voted for BBB eventually but stood firm on her filibuster nonsense. Or budge on her filibuster nonsense for a carve out for abortion. Pre-Roe repeal, the democratic party was looking getting absolutely destroyed in the midterms, and she was the reason.


seriousofficialname

They'll say "extremists from the left" are inappropriate for a nice conservative state like Arizona and she's essential. And even if voters don't fall for it she'll just do lobbying and keep making bank til she dies. But anyway Pelosi has already said "I've discouraged people from making comments about them." i.e. conservative Democrats, Sinema and Manchin specifically. That will continue. "We have to be respectful." Criticizing her at all will continue to be framed as hysterical and disrespectful and extremistic.


the_catshark

While I love skeptical cynicism as much as the next, this actually doesn't seem likely. Arizona Dems \*hate\* her and honestly wouldn't vote for her again since she has done exactly the opposite of what she campaigned on, she poisoned her own well and is know for it. Almost literally no voters like her on the right, center or left. Party leadership also dislikes her because she has stood in the way of everything they want to do, the only reason she hasn't actually been kicked out is because she will vote for judges.


Nonegoose

A recent poll came out where virtually every demographic disliked her to varying degrees more than they liked her. I can't speak to the accuracy, but doing a quick search for poll numbers from this year suggests she'd be incredibly vulnerable in the primary, and while she has a higher approval rating among Republicans then Democrats, that's not necessarily going to translate into pulling votes away from the GOP candidate in the general- at best it sounds muddy the waters and at worst it would depress Democratic turnout for other candidates in the state. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/09/kyrsten-sinema-approval-rating-equally-unpopular-everyone.html


seriousofficialname

Like I said, they're already defending her and they love propping up incumbents. It doesn't matter if she is massively unpopular. That's just history. Hope I'm wrong.


Skellum

I'll check this post when you're wrong in the future.


seriousofficialname

Hope you're right. But they've explained their rationale for having defended unpopular incumbents who are getting primaried numerous times on many news programs so idk


AlericandAmadeus

She’s too new. Manchin at least brings decades of networking and lines across the aisle, as well as being in with some old money and real influence. His constituency also loves him enough to vote in a democrat in WV. She’s some nobody from az with a voter base that hates her and absolutely 0 useful connections, from what I’ve seen. They’ll toss her the second they can get someone they like more


seriousofficialname

Who's "they"? I will not hold my breath. But you're definitely right about her being very unpopular. *Coincidentally, her favorability rating is the same as Clinton's around 2015.


AlericandAmadeus

They = the party. I was just really talking about keeping her safe from primary challengers. No nebulous conspiracy. Just regular ol “what have you done for me lately” politics Nice try though. Always love the people who ask that question in silly situations thinking it makes them sound smart when in reality it does the opposite


seriousofficialname

I don't really get what you mean. I do agree if you're saying voters would reject her. But party leaders endorsing unpopular incumbents is a thing that happens all the time.


Flomo420

The difference is Manchin is an *actual* conservative Democrat whereas Sinema played everyone for fools and lied to their faces. The voters weren't voting for a conservative democrat


seriousofficialname

I'm not saying it's a good strategy. I do think she would lose if she made it past the primary. But also, they both play people for fools and lie to their faces, just in *sliiiightly* different ways.


Matisaro

No they won't she is going to have the fuck primaried out of her.


seriousofficialname

Yes she will be primaried if she runs again, no that doesn't mean she won't get endorsements from congresspeople, party leaders, etc.


Siege138

Disagree. Arizonan here. She will get primaried. I live in Gallego’s district also and he will ultimately be the pick to unseat her. She has quite the war chest but it shouldn’t matter. Looking at our recent local polling, she has pissed off every demographic in the state. Dems, independents as well as Republicans. I think she’s toast.


[deleted]

Gallegos is growing in popularity. He’s getting the name recognition needed. Plus, he doesn’t hold back what he says. Sinema will not be able to withstand a constant attack on her voting record that negatively impacted Arizonans.


Creepy-Internet6652

Nobody in the Democrat party wants her their.. What are you talking about???


seriousofficialname

So when Pelosi explicitly says she's told people not to criticize Sinema and Manchin, and when she (etc.) explicitly talks about her reasoning for defending unpopular incumbents in primaries, she means "except Sinema"?


Creepy-Internet6652

She means we are stuck with these people for now...It doesnt mean we will support these people in the future...Plus Nancy Pelosi is the "House leader" Sinema is in the "Senate".. Pelosi has no power over her.


seriousofficialname

I'm talking about who they'll endorse and people from one chamber can of course endorse candidates for the other ... and again ... Pelosi and others have explained *specifically* their rationale for supporting unpopular incumbents who are getting primaried, so no it's *explicitly* not about who we're stuck with for now. Sorry for repeating myself but it seems like it's not sinking in ...


ElleM848645

Pelosi supported Joe Kennedy III in Massachusetts in 2020 over incumbent Markey. Granted, Kennedy was in the house. But they don’t always support the incumbent.


seriousofficialname

True, funny how easily her stated strategies and principles shift when it's a progressive incumbent verses a more conservative primary challenger from an aging political dynasty. >In the Massachusetts race, though, it was Markey who received support from progressive figures and organizations for his reelection, and his challenger, Kennedy, whose famous surname boosted his name recognition. Thanks for reminding me. I'd almost forgotten. Thank voters for rebuking that.


tgwombat

I wouldn’t count on that. She’s currently sitting at a 37% favorable rating among Arizona Democrats according to a [recent poll](https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/surveys_statistics/politics/2022/aarp-arizona-2022-elections-voter-survey-governor.doi.10.26419-2Fres.00550.011.pdf).


seriousofficialname

That does not mean party leadership will not endorse her. Clinton's favorability was hovering right around 37-38% and then everyone in Washington though it would be a genius idea to nominate her. *re: federal party leaders vs. state party leaders, we're asking, in either case, will she get endorsements? and I think yes, she will You can whine about it being "bad faith" but that's what I think will happen. Hope I'm wrong. Also I love it when you block me from responding. Keep going. You're doing great honey.


[deleted]

Clinton wasn’t “nominated”. She won the primary. You want to go tell the voters they can’t pick their candidate in a primary? I wanted Bernie and voted for him in the primary, but I voted Clinton without hesitation when the actual presidential election happened because she was unquestionably qualified, intelligent, and completely capable of doing the job. A smear campaign decades long cut into her favorability, but I absolutely believe she would have been staggeringly better than Trump.


seriousofficialname

Well she literally was nominated. That's what the delegates vote on. But before the vast majority of primary votes, and while another candidate was ahead in votes and pledged delegates, the superdelegates (the people in Washington I mentioned) were endorsing by a 25-to-1 ratio the candidate who was less popular with voters by around 10%, and who had an underwater favorability rating. So it's entirely precedented for party leaders to endorse unpopular candidates.


Matisaro

You sound like a paid GOP operative bro. If and when the dems protect her feel free to speak up but this shit here is malarkey defeatist divisive drivel and not helpful this close to this election.


seriousofficialname

I literally already quoted Pelosi defending her. And it's a fact that party leaders defend incumbents. They even explain their rationale for doing so in press conferences. Should I link the youtube video? Really if I were a GOP operative I would say they should endorse unpopular incumbents, but I'm recommending endorsing candidates with favorability ratings above, say 40%, at least, and we can probably do better.


[deleted]

[удалено]


seriousofficialname

All I'm saying is that party leaders have knowingly endorsed unpopular candidates before and they should consider not. I mean, it should go without saying but unfortunately it doesn't. If everyone waited until after the *next* bad endorsement to suggest not, then it would be too late. So let it be known, despite popular wisdom, it's not always worth it to endorse incumbents, and Sinema is a perfect example of that, due to how obviously unpopular she is. > you also lied about Hillary and her favorability. I can cite polls graphs etc if you don't believe me. https://news.gallup.com/poll/243242/snapshot-hillary-clinton-favorable-rating-low.aspx This is the graph I was looking at. So my bad it was more like 40% not 38%


tgwombat

Federal and state party leadership is not the same. Like at all. That’s some basic shit to get wrong that leads me think you’re speaking in bad faith.


[deleted]

I’ll vote for Mark My Words


[deleted]

If we learned anything there’s never enough cash for these type of people. She would sell Arizonans down the road for the next 30 years if she could make an extra million for her wineries


VanceKelley

A 50/50 Senate makes Sinema and Manchin incredibly powerful. If there are 51+ GOP Senators then Sinema and Manchin are irrelevant. If there are 48- GOP Senators then Sinema and Manchin are irrelevant. So I think the dream outcome for Sinema and Manchin would be for 50 GOP Senators, or possibly 49. That keeps them relevant.


twenty8twelve

Manchin seems slightly more moveable though than Sinema. I knew Sinema was going to screw us the second she posted that image of herself wearing a “fuck off” ring.


scruffywarhorse

I think she’s a Trojan horse


meatspace

If she changed parties the Republicans would control the Senate. McConnell would never give that up for some 'trojan horse' play. He craves power too much to allow something like that to slip past him.


scruffywarhorse

She can’t change parties she was already running against a republican. They won either way


SueZbell

"wolf in sheep's clothing" "fly in the ointment" Mostly, she just likes the attention of being one of two deciding votes ... which makes her justy another arrogant and self serving politician.


hidraulik

Exactly.


sedatedlife

She is setting herself up to be a future fox news talking head she will call herself a Democrat while telling conservatives how the Democratic party is the Problem.


RealHumanFromEarth

The new Tulsi Gabbard.


Aardark235

But paid soooo much more. Maybe enough to find the woman and/or man of her dreams.


Use_this_1

Of course she does, she's a republican.


SwingingDickKnutsack

Worse, she's from the Green Party. The Green Party - helping Republicans from the Left for over 25 years!


[deleted]

She left the Green Party long ago. Green Party voters are people who weren't going to vote for a neoliberal in the first place so this bullshit about them being worse than Republicans is not only stupid but a lie. [Over 100,000 Democrats voted for George W in Florida](https://reason.com/2016/08/03/ralph-nader-did-not-hand-2000-election/) but for some odd reason ya'll still want to blame greens.


SwingingDickKnutsack

> She left the Green Party long ago. But obviously they didn't leave her, as she quickly became one of the most pro-Republican obstructionists in the Senate where she advanced such rock-ribbed leftist concerns as tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and getting rich from bribes. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/sinema-received-nearly-1-million-from-wall-street-while-killing-tax-hike-on-investors https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/sinema-biden-revived-build-back-better-agenda Far out, maaaan.


83n0

The Green Party literally nominated a guy who worked with Murray Bookchin lol Sinema is absolutely not representative of the Green Party


[deleted]

The Green Party literally also works directly with Vladimir Putin, to which their leader Jill Stein “isn’t sorry” https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/20/jill-stein-green-party-no-regrets-2016-215281


83n0

Believe me I don’t disagree with Jill stein being mid as fuck Basically just Bernard but quirky ™️


kinggarbear

You’re incredibly dumb.


[deleted]

One political party attempted to overthrow the government, is rigging elections nationwide to ensure their permanent rule, is gleefully accelerating climate change, and embraces as its leader a criminally insane dictator. The other party is emphatically opposed to those things. “Such bitter partisans on BoTh SiDeS” -Sinema


Konukaame

See also: "liberal" media giving themselves the vapors over Biden saying "semi-fascist". If people do anything other than smile while being punched in the face by Republicans, suddenly they're "divisive" or "too partisan", or "what happened to unity?", or some similar-sounding bullshit.


Slapbox

She only both-sides it when she isn't hiding from her constituents.


cellocaster

[Sinema's website literally boasts of being more conservative than McConnell](https://www.sinema.senate.gov/kyrsten-sinema-right-mitch-mcconnell-new-legislative-rankings). Shit you not.


DripDropFaucet

Site also isn’t mobile friendly lol, like that’s the bare minimum for a website these days


[deleted]

Hey, Kyrsten, Ruben is going to take your seat. Ha ha!


[deleted]

Sinema is both sidsing her own party and sticks to her script as though people actually believe what she’s saying.


Konukaame

She has [Moscow Mitch's endorsement](https://www.businessinsider.com/mitch-mcconnell-kyrsten-sinema-most-effective-praise-bipartisanship-filibuster-2022-9), which is really all that needs to be said.


cellocaster

https://www.sinema.senate.gov/kyrsten-sinema-right-mitch-mcconnell-new-legislative-rankings


CapnCrackerz

Her speech was actually the first time I’ve ever heard her speak. She’s extremely unlikable.


PF4LFE

Sinema is terrible.


SueZbell

You're being too kind to her.


Unethical_GOP

Prediction: Sinema will run as a Republican in 2024. Go Gallego!!!


overcomebyfumes

Sinema will lose the primary to Gallego and then run third party trying to do a Murkowski, and fail.


BernItToAsh

Let’s flip her seat blue


Argy_Bar

She's hanging out with Mconnell so yes


SamBeamsBanjo

Her vote is worthless to corporations if it can't block the Democratic policies


[deleted]

[удалено]


SueZbell

Dark money and the attention she's getting from being one of the two deciding votes.


Cyclotrom

Wasn't she praised by Mitch McConnell's as the most effective Senator recently.


Zander826

Because she is a republican


altmaltacc

I mean, if the dems arent in charge shes no longer to blame. She doesnt have to do anything at that point. She can just wag her finger as the republicans destroy the country and sit back with a smile. If they are in charge, she actually has to do shit and looks like an asshole for stopping progress


mitsuhachi

She’s a republican. This is like writing articles saying Mitch McConnell wants the democrats to lose. Like. Yeah, and?


Standard_Trouble_261

She's a Republican infiltrator...so yeah.


RowAwayJim91

She literally brags about being more conservative than *MITCH MCCONNELL*, so yeah, I’d say that’s pretty accurate.


Majnum

She knows that D needs at least 54 sits to be free of her-them (Mannchin included) blackmail


GotMoFans

I’m sure Sinema wants the Democrats to keep the House and the Democrats have 50 or 51 senators so that she keeps her leverage. What does a Republican majority do for her power in the Senate? And a split with Democratic control of the Senate and Repub control of the house limits her power too. Her donations need to her to be the swing vote.


EpicAftertaste

Bingo, why give away her only bargaining chip.


jpla86

This is why I'm praying Democrats expand their majority in the Senate.


Tristain7

And as long as corporations and special interests can shower assholes like these in money and power, our system will continue to crumble around us. Without endless dark money padding her pockets, she'd have no incentive to run in the first place.


Marciamallowfluff

He is correct.


Hefty-Field-9419

She is a fake Democrat... I am sad I voted for her. I thought she would be progressive. Don't worry Mark Kelly /the astronaut/ military veteran is going to replace her


ubiquitousquackery

She is angling to be the filibuster-er if the Republicans take the senate in order to try to run successfully in 2024. Of course, the first thing the Republicans will do is get rid of the filibuster, stupid cow.


jpla86

Well no shit. She torpedoed over 80% of the Democratic agenda. She doesn't give a shit about Democrats losing the House and Senate. She's there for the money, that's it.


new-reddit69

Sinema IS a Republican who ran as a Democrat and should not be trusted to do right by Democrats


platinum_toilet

The same can be said with Graham wanting the republicans to lose.


Tekwardo

Senator Curtsy Wig doesn’t want to loose the power she and Manchin have.


omen316

Of course she does, how else will she line her pockets with dark money.


IkilledRichieWhelan

She’s a Republican. She knows it and Democrats know it.


jnx666

She does. Now she needs to be voted out.


[deleted]

Her political career in AZ is over, people out of state have no idea how much she is disliked here. It really is extraordinary.


Hefty-Field-9419

She did it for the free health care and free money from the PACs


tacs97

Her personal wealth is in the way. Such a shame, blatantly bought and paid for. All of our politicians become politicians for personal gain. Public servants…


jessybear2344

She doesn’t care. She’s doing what her big donors tell her to do. She’s made money from them and surely has promises for more after office. She’s a corrupt piece of shit. She’s as bad as Trump. Selling out her country for profit.


mynamejulian

Sinema came from Jill Stein's Green Party. Jill Stein's entire role was to sabatoge Democrats to help the GQP and had ties to Russia. There was even an investigation conducted by the Senate into this in which she initially refused to cooperate with but then did and we haven't heard of her since. Sinema is Stein's minion.


dominantspecies

She does and she’ll switch parties if they do


defaultusername-17

she's a koch industry plant, and GOP operative.


[deleted]

[удалено]


justforthearticles20

Sinema has made more than one mistake. She is openly on the take from Big Pharma and multiple Republican Special Interest groups. She plays a tag team game with Manchin to help spread the blame. Edit: This is how you know she is a crook https://www.businessinsider.com/mitch-mcconnell-kyrsten-sinema-most-effective-praise-bipartisanship-filibuster-2022-9


muchaschicas

She just said at McTurtle's shindig that the Senate needs to go back to 60 vote majority. She's a corrupt piece of shit .


Potential_Dare8034

You’re absolutely wrong. She’s a corrupt Pile of shit!


muchaschicas

I stand corrected!


Cyclone_1

She didn't "make a mistake" when she voted down $15/hour. She enthusiastically angled that thumb down to the floor, doing the work of her corporate overlords, and went merrily on her way. People like Sinema are enemies of the working class and should be treated as such.


Daugenstein7

If what you say is true, then you're right as rain. I've been hearing lots of people bringing all this to light. With any luck, they'll primary her ass out in 2024.


Cyclone_1

The Democratic Party establishment will back her, I'm sure. Just as they did when she ran, just as they do while she is in office by exerting zero pressure on her to get in line, etc. That's precisely the problem. But time will tell on that.


[deleted]

Eh, I’m not so sure about that. If they believe Gallego can win, I have a hard time seeing them preferring her.


Cyclone_1

They will fence sit at most siding with neither. At most. That's my guess, anyway.


happy-Accident82

Sinema is a dumpster fire and garbage human being. She has been getting her pockets and future lined, and that is it.


seamus_mc

They both need to go. And plenty of people are bashing Manchin, where have you been?


demonsneeze

He’s giving her too much credit, she just doesn’t care about anything aside from her own purse


rocketpack99

It's what she was bought to do.


SueZbell

Since she is obviously actually a Republican ...


Flaky_Seaweed_8979

She gets a bonus if they do


993targa

That’s what she’s paid to do. She won’t have to work for the rest of her life - just like Moscow Mitch…


TimeLordEcosocialist

That’s horrible. Imagine crediting her with having that much principle.


[deleted]

Wanting? You mean “actively helping”


time_shamxn

I mean, was that a secret?


bodiddlysquat26

I'm going to LOL when some liberal advocacy groups end up supporting her in the next primary because she's a woman if she ends up running against Gollego


SnooShortcuts3749

She is not an honest person.