Krysten Sinema Leaves Democratic Party

[ZiprHead]

Believe it or not, she's voted in 93% agreement with Biden.

That 7 percentage points was some pretty big differences on major legislation though.

 

[Harry Bosch]

She needs to be replaced by an actual democrat.

How do you define "an actual democrat[sic]"?
Somebody who blindly follows directives from the party headquarters?

I would define an actual Democrat as one who adhere's to the national democratic platform. A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters that they represent.

IOW, I think that it's a great mistake to attack local politicans trying to remain in office when they don't agree with an entire national platform. Politics is local. And democrats in Arizona, Oregon, and/or New York are not always in uniform belief. As a party, the dems are more numerous than republicans. However, we have less power. The reasons for this are numerous. But we can only overcome these differences by allowing a larger tent.

 

[Elixir]

A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters donors that they represent.

FIFY.

 

[Toni]

She needs to be replaced by an actual democrat.

How do you define "an actual democrat[sic]"?
Somebody who blindly follows directives from the party headquarters?

I would define an actual Democrat as one who adhere's to the national democratic platform. A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters that they represent.

IOW, I think that it's a great mistake to attack local politicans trying to remain in office when they don't agree with an entire national platform. Politics is local. And democrats in Arizona, Oregon, and/or New York are not always in uniform belief. As a party, the dems are more numerous than republicans. However, we have less power. The reasons for this are numerous. But we can only overcome these differences by allowing a larger tent.

I agree re: voting to act in the best interests (or interests as expressed by voters) in one's home district state. Too often, though Sinema has, imo, voted in only her own best interests. She and Manchin have had the unenviable position of being democrats in conservative states. Manchin has definitely used it to his political advantage.

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

 

[Harry Bosch]

She needs to be replaced by an actual democrat.

How do you define "an actual democrat[sic]"?
Somebody who blindly follows directives from the party headquarters?

I would define an actual Democrat as one who adhere's to the national democratic platform. A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters that they represent.

IOW, I think that it's a great mistake to attack local politicans trying to remain in office when they don't agree with an entire national platform. Politics is local. And democrats in Arizona, Oregon, and/or New York are not always in uniform belief. As a party, the dems are more numerous than republicans. However, we have less power. The reasons for this are numerous. But we can only overcome these differences by allowing a larger tent.

I agree re: voting to act in the best interests (or interests as expressed by voters) in one's home district state. Too often, though Sinema has, imo, voted in only her own best interests. She and Manchin have had the unenviable position of being democrats in conservative states. Manchin has definitely used it to his political advantage.

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

Yes, Arizona is a conservative state. It's a great thing that we don't have a Qgoper in her position! According to the below link: "But there are and more independents in Arizona. In the recent midterm election, just 22% of Arizona voters described themselves as liberal and 36% said they were conservatives. The largest portion, 42%, said they were moderates. About a third of voters said they were Republicans, 27% said they were Democrats and 40% said they were independents."

Kyrsten Sinema's defection without a difference

Here's the deal: I really like AOC. I'm glad that she's in my party. However, she could not win in Arizona today with the current positions that she holds.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The last few elections have seen a rising number of young voters. Generation Z voters in Georgia gave Warnock his win. Two years is a long time in politics. If Sinema plays obstructionist as she has been doing, losing support of young voters may indeed be a mistake on her part. With the GOP House promising to act like a troop of shrieking, agitated purple assed baboons, Sinema has a choice. Stand with them or against them in the Senate.

 

[Derec]

How do you define "an actual democrat[sic]"?
Somebody who blindly follows directives from the party headquarters?

Someone who prioritizes people over her own interests.

Stopping B³ was good for the people. Of Arizona, and also of US at large.

Believe it or not, she's voted in 93% agreement with Biden.

That 7 percentage points was some pretty big differences on major legislation though.

Just because it was "major legislation" does not mean it was good legislation, or that she she is not "an actual Democrat" for opposing it. You just want somebody who follows party directives 100% without question.
Voting 93% with Biden shows that she was "an actual Democrat" (big D) and not an "obstructionist", but that she also has a mind of her own and does not vote for stuff just it is pushed by Biden/national party.

And we should all want Senators (and Reps) like that. No mere rubber-stamping drones, but people with their own opinions and points of view.

 

[Derec]

I would define an actual Democrat as one who adhere's to the national democratic platform.

"Adheres". It's not a possessive or a contraction.
Sinema mostly supports the national Democratic platform. A Democrat should still be allowed to disagree.

A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters that they represent.

No. That should be all big-D Democrats, and big-R Republicans for that matter.
Small-d democrat is a person who adheres to a democratic form of government. Similar to small-r republican.

IOW, I think that it's a great mistake to attack local politicans trying to remain in office when they don't agree with an entire national platform. Politics is local.

I agree with that.

And democrats in Arizona, Oregon, and/or New York are not always in uniform belief. As a party, the dems are more numerous than republicans. However, we have less power. The reasons for this are numerous. But we can only overcome these differences by allowing a larger tent.

Which is why purity tests, as well as trying to primary any Dem who is right of the Squad are bad things.

 

[Derec]

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

You do understand that nuking the legislative filibuster has consequences far beyond one piece of legislation, right?
One can be for codifying RvW while still opposing having to remove the filibuster in order to pass it.
Nothing inconsistent there.

 

[Derec]

Yes, Arizona is a conservative state.

VW certainly is. AZ is a more moderate, purple state.

Here's the deal: I really like AOC. I'm glad that she's in my party. However, she could not win in Arizona today with the current positions that she holds.

I doubt she could even win in NY statewide. Not all of the Empire State is Queens.

 

[Derec]

The last few elections have seen a rising number of young voters. Generation Z voters in Georgia gave Warnock his win.

Make no mistake, Rs nominating a dumbass like Walker is what gave Warnock the win.
A semi-competent Republican would have sent the pastor back to the pulpit.

Two years is a long time in politics. If Sinema plays obstructionist as she has been doing, losing support of young voters may indeed be a mistake on her part.

93% voting record with Biden is not being an obstructionist. But it is not being a rubber stamp either. Biden and national Dems need to rethink their national agenda. Bernie and AOC should not be influencing it as much as they have been during Biden's first half term.

 

[Toni]

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

You do understand that nuking the legislative filibuster has consequences far beyond one piece of legislation, right?
One can be for codifying RvW while still opposing having to remove the filibuster in order to pass it.
Nothing inconsistent there.

Of course I understand the risks! But at the very least, the filibuster must be overhauled. As it stands now, it acts very much as a toddler placing its fingers in its ears and holding its breath until it gets its way.

 

[Toni]

The last few elections have seen a rising number of young voters. Generation Z voters in Georgia gave Warnock his win.

Make no mistake, Rs nominating a dumbass like Walker is what gave Warnock the win.
A more competent Republican would have sent the pastor back to the pulpit.

Two years is a long time in politics. If Sinema plays obstructionist as she has been doing, losing support of young voters may indeed be a mistake on her part.

93% voting record with Biden is not being an obstructionist. But it is not being a rubber stamp either. Biden and national Dems need to rethink their national agenda. Bernie and AOC should not be influencing it as much as they have been during Biden's first half term.

No. The GOP needs to rethink its agenda. They were the big losers at the midterms. Their race to the bottom/drag us all back to 1950 mentality is harming everyone.

 

[Toni]

Yes, Arizona is a conservative state.

VW certainly is. AZ is a more moderate, purple state.

Here's the deal: I really like AOC. I'm glad that she's in my party. However, she could not win in Arizona today with the current positions that she holds.

I doubt she could even win in NY statewide. Not all of the Empire State is Queens.

AZ is not very purple at all. That faint tinge is fir to younger people reaching voting age and then voting. I recognize that a candidate more progressive than Sinema would be unlikely to win in AZ. Yet.

BTW, my phone frequently changed spelling of words I type sometimes to the incorrect word or punctuation so maybe lay off a little?

 

[Rhea]

I would define an actual Democrat as one who adhere's to the national democratic platform. A small d democrat (which is how I'd describe Sinema, is one who follows the national platform as closely as possible, until it conflicts with the interests of the voters that they represent.

IOW, I think that it's a great mistake to attack local politicans trying to remain in office when they don't agree with an entire national platform. Politics is local. And democrats in Arizona, Oregon, and/or New York are not always in uniform belief. As a party, the dems are more numerous than republicans. However, we have less power. The reasons for this are numerous. But we can only overcome these differences by allowing a larger tent.

And I would support that democrat if I felt their local allegience were clear and openly stated. Like Manchin’s is. He is what he is and he’s for what he’s for and you can count on him to be that, every day.

But Sinema makes me uneasy because when asked point-blank, “what do you want,” was dodging and weaving and obfuscating. And she did that a number of times. Several of the jouranlists I follow kept saying, “we can’t tell what she wants. She says she doesn’t want this and that after it’s presented to her, but she never will say what she DOES want.”

Which is weaselly, and not reliable on one’s team.

 

[southernhybrid]

The last few elections have seen a rising number of young voters. Generation Z voters in Georgia gave Warnock his win. Two years is a long time in politics. If Sinema plays obstructionist as she has been doing, losing support of young voters may indeed be a mistake on her part. With the GOP House promising to act like a troop of shrieking, agitated purple assed baboons, Sinema has a choice. Stand with them or against them in the Senate.

No they didn't. Black voters, non religious folks and Republicans who couldn't stand Walker gave Warnock his victory. The turn out for Gen Z was less than 25%. Actually, to be honest, it took voters from several different groups who gave Warnock his win. Gen Z turnout may have been better than usual, but they certainly didn't give Warnock his victory, and plenty of Gen Z's are Republicans in Georgia too. One knocked on my door and asked us to vote for Walker. That was a mistake.

I'm not a fan of Sinema, but she has said that she won't caucus with the Republicans, so it's likely that nothing will change. Bernie Sanders calls himself an independent too. Why are we so hard on Sinema, but not on Sanders? He's only a Democrat when it's convenient. I think that we may be over reacting to her saying she's an independent. Of course, as Rhea mentioned, Sinema isn't always clear about her positions so let's hope she doesn't join the Republican Party.

But, the Democratic Party has always been a "big tent party", with people who are progressive, centrist or in a few cases, conservative. That's why it's harder to get Democrats to agree on everything. It's hard to herd the cats. The Republicans are more like sheep. They usually vote lock step with their party leaders. That's just the way it is, especially these days.

 

[Rhea]

I'm not a fan of Sinema, but she has said that she won't caucus with the Republicans, so it's likely that nothing will change.

I agree with this. For now, nothing will change. I was relieved when she said she would not caucus with them (she would lose all of her committee assignments as her seniority would go to zero, so there’s some self-interest there.). And it is not surprising that she took this path as it is the most likely to retain her seat (I think she felt the risk from Gallego was real).


And yet - she is indeed choosing a tight-rope. Between now and her next campaign, a lot could change about her and her electorate due to this independent status.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

You do understand that nuking the legislative filibuster has consequences far beyond one piece of legislation, right?
One can be for codifying RvW while still opposing having to remove the filibuster in order to pass it.
Nothing inconsistent there.

The Republicans will remove it as soon as it interferes with passing something they want.

 

[Toni]

One example of Sinema being very ... inconsistent or voting to try to play both sides is campaigning on women's reproductive rights---right after voting with Manchin to keep the filibuster, and so kill the plan to codify Roe V Wade.

You do understand that nuking the legislative filibuster has consequences far beyond one piece of legislation, right?
One can be for codifying RvW while still opposing having to remove the filibuster in order to pass it.
Nothing inconsistent there.

The Republicans will remove it as soon as it interferes with passing something they want.

Well, they can't at the moment. Not without the agreement and cooperation of the Democrats.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The last few elections have seen a rising number of young voters. Generation Z voters in Georgia gave Warnock his win.

Make no mistake, Rs nominating a dumbass like Walker is what gave Warnock the win.
A more competent Republican would have sent the pastor back to the pulpit.

Two years is a long time in politics. If Sinema plays obstructionist as she has been doing, losing support of young voters may indeed be a mistake on her part.

93% voting record with Biden is not being an obstructionist. But it is not being a rubber stamp either. Biden and national Dems need to rethink their national agenda. Bernie and AOC should not be influencing it as much as they have been during Biden's first half term.

No. The GOP needs to rethink its agenda. They were the big losers at the midterms. Their race to the bottom/drag us all back to 1950 mentality is harming everyone.

They're not going to rethink their agenda, they're going to think of how to subvert democracy.