AZ-SEN 2018: Sinema Paradiso

[wesmoorenerd]

Kirsten Gillibrand would make a great majority leader, but I doubt she's interested.

She'd be Pelosi 2.0. Very unpopular.

Why, because she's a woman who's a progressive?

Any Democratic leader is going to be slandered by the GOP no matter how centrist and inoffensive they are. Might as well choose someone who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.

Most posters here would throw their favorite Senate Democrat under the bus the second the GOP ran a web only ad against them, lol.

Yeah that's true. It's ridiculous how Schumer was praised by people from Warren to Manchin and he's already being thrown under the bus by panicking Democrats after being leader for less than 2 years.

Democrats are really spineless in this respect. I can see trying to disassociate from Pelosi, but Schumer is comparatively popular. What we have now is crabs in a bucket, Democrats dragging each other down to seem anti-establishment.

[pppolitics]

If winning the Senate this year wasn't so important, I'd honestly be rooting for Sinema to lose. The idea of being stuck with such deadweight for decades to come is painful.

She's running for Senate in Arizona, not Vermont.

She has to do what she has to do and there's nothing wrong with that.

You're right, she's running in Arizona, not Oklahoma. She's running a more conservative campaign than Clare McCaskill

Sinema is also doing better at this point than McCaskill.

Yeah, clearly that's because she's running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator in Politico interviews, and not because she's running in a Trump +3 state rather than a Trump +18 state. And I'm sure the fact that her opponent is locked in a fierce and bitter primary while McCaskill's has been already set for like a year now has nothing to do with it either. Clearly it's all because of her right wing posturing that 80% of voters aren't even paying attention to.

And what's wrong with "running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator"?

She ahead by a lot, so clearly, she knows what she's doing.

These days, you can't take anything for granted.

"She's ahead by a lot, so clearly she knows what she's doing"

No actually, that's not clear at all.

Actually, she's doing quite poorly. Joe Manchin embraced Schumer and is ahead by the same amount as her despite running a state that is 40 points more Republican. So by my calculations, if Sinema only embraced Schumer, she'd be ahead by at least 50 points.

See, this is the type of of #analysis you get to when you refuse to consider other factors in outcomes. You could run the worst campaign ever and be the worst candidate ever in an R+50/D+50 district and still win in a landslide. In fact, it doesn't even need to be a district that insanely partisan: just look at Joe Walsh and Allen West. Terrible candidates with terrible campaigns, yet won anyway due to other factors such as the very pro Republican political environment and low Democratic turnout. There's zero evidence to suggest that Sinema would be doing any worse than she currently is if not for her "campaign strategy." It's hard for political junkies on Atlas to imagine, but the vast majority of people are not paying attention to campaigns in July, and they're not paying attention to Politico interviews ever.

You've completely ignored the history of the states.

The last time Arizona elected a Democratic senator was 1988.

That was 30 years ago.

West Virginia may be a more Republican state right now, but it has a long history of electing Democrats to the senate.

[Maxwell]

Unless Pelosi's successor is notably to her left i'm not really interested in replacing her. As sorry as she is sometimes, she's genuinely a lot better than about 85% of the leadership prospects on the board in terms of ideology (I'd only place Barbara Lee and maybe, he's only a very outside shot, John Yarmuth or Mark Pocan as better).

Schumer, however, has made yearn for Harry Reid, something I didn't think I would do. Here's hoping someone does oust him, albeit not for the reasons Sinema is going for.

I'm not going to pretend I'm not irritated by some of the moves she's been making. I think Democrats are oddly trying to run and embrace this President despite him being pretty unpopular and I wouldn't be surprised if he was underwater in Arizona. That being said, like Manchin, Heitkamp, or most Democrats running, I'm not going to dwell on it because it will make me upset.

It helps that Sinema is running while the Arizona GOP is in the middle of a circular firing squad and their "moderate" candidate is being exposed as a far right fringe who is only a shade more moderate than Chemtrails Kelli and just a shade more human than Joe "Tent City" Arpaio.

[pppolitics]

If winning the Senate this year wasn't so important, I'd honestly be rooting for Sinema to lose. The idea of being stuck with such deadweight for decades to come is painful.

She's running for Senate in Arizona, not Vermont.

She has to do what she has to do and there's nothing wrong with that.

You're right, she's running in Arizona, not Oklahoma. She's running a more conservative campaign than Clare McCaskill

Sinema is also doing better at this point than McCaskill.

Yeah, clearly that's because she's running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator in Politico interviews, and not because she's running in a Trump +3 state rather than a Trump +18 state. And I'm sure the fact that her opponent is locked in a fierce and bitter primary while McCaskill's has been already set for like a year now has nothing to do with it either. Clearly it's all because of her right wing posturing that 80% of voters aren't even paying attention to.

And what's wrong with "running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator"?

She ahead by a lot, so clearly, she knows what she's doing.

These days, you can't take anything for granted.

Even conceding that this helps Sinema (which it doesn't), "maximize your chance of winning at any cost" is a pretty f**king stupid strategy if you want a party that's actually able to implement any coherent policy once in power.

The most important thing is that she wins.

If elected, she can move left with the state.

[IceSpear]

If winning the Senate this year wasn't so important, I'd honestly be rooting for Sinema to lose. The idea of being stuck with such deadweight for decades to come is painful.

She's running for Senate in Arizona, not Vermont.

She has to do what she has to do and there's nothing wrong with that.

You're right, she's running in Arizona, not Oklahoma. She's running a more conservative campaign than Clare McCaskill

Sinema is also doing better at this point than McCaskill.

Yeah, clearly that's because she's running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator in Politico interviews, and not because she's running in a Trump +3 state rather than a Trump +18 state. And I'm sure the fact that her opponent is locked in a fierce and bitter primary while McCaskill's has been already set for like a year now has nothing to do with it either. Clearly it's all because of her right wing posturing that 80% of voters aren't even paying attention to.

And what's wrong with "running as a Conservadem and bashing some random New York Senator"?

She ahead by a lot, so clearly, she knows what she's doing.

These days, you can't take anything for granted.

"She's ahead by a lot, so clearly she knows what she's doing"

No actually, that's not clear at all.

Actually, she's doing quite poorly. Joe Manchin embraced Schumer and is ahead by the same amount as her despite running a state that is 40 points more Republican. So by my calculations, if Sinema only embraced Schumer, she'd be ahead by at least 50 points.

See, this is the type of of #analysis you get to when you refuse to consider other factors in outcomes. You could run the worst campaign ever and be the worst candidate ever in an R+50/D+50 district and still win in a landslide. In fact, it doesn't even need to be a district that insanely partisan: just look at Joe Walsh and Allen West. Terrible candidates with terrible campaigns, yet won anyway due to other factors such as the very pro Republican political environment and low Democratic turnout. There's zero evidence to suggest that Sinema would be doing any worse than she currently is if not for her "campaign strategy." It's hard for political junkies on Atlas to imagine, but the vast majority of people are not paying attention to campaigns in July, and they're not paying attention to Politico interviews ever.

You've completely ignored the history of the states.

The last time Arizona elected a Democratic senator was 1988.

That was 30 years ago.

West Virginia may be a more Republican state right now, but it has a long history of electing Democrats to the senate.

You're right, I completely ignored the history of the states. As well as dozens of other factors. That was my exact point. Also that this forum (and political analysis in general) suffers from severe outcome and hindsight bias.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The most important thing is that she wins.

See, that's where you're wrong. I've just explained why, if you bother to actually read.

[MT Treasurer]

“Florida hasn’t had 2 Republican Senators since 1875. Clearly Scott would have been toast even in a Clinton midterm.”

[Webnicz]

“Florida hasn’t had 2 Republican Senators since 1875. Clearly Scott would have been toast even in a Clinton midterm.”

[Calthrina950]

Kirsten Gillibrand would make a great majority leader, but I doubt she's interested.

She'd be Pelosi 2.0. Very unpopular.

Why, because she's a woman who's a progressive?

Any Democratic leader is going to be slandered by the GOP no matter how centrist and inoffensive they are. Might as well choose someone who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.

Gillibrand is a flip-flopper, and she doesn't come across as genuine.

This. Plus she would likely be seen as an elitist. Democrats have better women in their ranks, like Amy Klobuchar or Maria Cantwell. Both are not older than 60 and have enough senate experience.

I agree with this. I don't know too much about these two Senators, but they are both popular incumbents in their own home states and come across as inoffensive, generic center-left Democrats.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Kirsten Gillibrand would make a great majority leader, but I doubt she's interested.

She'd be Pelosi 2.0. Very unpopular.

Why, because she's a woman who's a progressive?

Any Democratic leader is going to be slandered by the GOP no matter how centrist and inoffensive they are. Might as well choose someone who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.

Gillibrand is a flip-flopper, and she doesn't come across as genuine.

This. Plus she would likely be seen as an elitist. Democrats have better women in their ranks, like Amy Klobuchar or Maria Cantwell. Both are not older than 60 and have enough senate experience.

I agree with this. I don't know too much about these two Senators, but they are both popular incumbents in their own home states and come across as inoffensive, generic center-left Democrats.

Honestly, I would prefer Gillibrand over either of those 2.

[Mr. Smith]

Kirsten Gillibrand would make a great majority leader, but I doubt she's interested.

She'd be Pelosi 2.0. Very unpopular.

Why, because she's a woman who's a progressive?

Any Democratic leader is going to be slandered by the GOP no matter how centrist and inoffensive they are. Might as well choose someone who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.

Gillibrand is a flip-flopper, and she doesn't come across as genuine.

This. Plus she would likely be seen as an elitist. Democrats have better women in their ranks, like Amy Klobuchar or Maria Cantwell. Both are not older than 60 and have enough senate experience.

I agree with this. I don't know too much about these two Senators, but they are both popular incumbents in their own home states and come across as inoffensive, generic center-left Democrats.

Honestly, I would prefer Gillibrand over either of those 2.

Same. And besides, inoffensive, generic centre-left is only a beginning mode, once the actual campaigns start, that doesn't matter.

[Calthrina950]

Kirsten Gillibrand would make a great majority leader, but I doubt she's interested.

She'd be Pelosi 2.0. Very unpopular.

Why, because she's a woman who's a progressive?

Any Democratic leader is going to be slandered by the GOP no matter how centrist and inoffensive they are. Might as well choose someone who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.

Gillibrand is a flip-flopper, and she doesn't come across as genuine.

This. Plus she would likely be seen as an elitist. Democrats have better women in their ranks, like Amy Klobuchar or Maria Cantwell. Both are not older than 60 and have enough senate experience.

I agree with this. I don't know too much about these two Senators, but they are both popular incumbents in their own home states and come across as inoffensive, generic center-left Democrats.

Honestly, I would prefer Gillibrand over either of those 2.

Same. And besides, inoffensive, generic centre-left is only a beginning mode, once the actual campaigns start, that doesn't matter.

That is your preference. Gillibrand comes off as too much of an opportunist to me, and I don't particularly like people who are blatant opportunists.

[Gass3268]

Rep. Gosar endorses Chemtrail Kelli:

https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1019243536196210688

[KingSweden]

Rep. Gosar endorses Chemtrail Kelli:

https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1019243536196210688

Ooof.

Not that I think it will matter, I’m fairly confident McSally
Will win the nomination.

[Webnicz]

Rep. Gosar endorses Chemtrail Kelli:

https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1019243536196210688

not entirely surprising, remember back in November that story came out that none of the AZ republican delegation wanted to endorse McSally(most of the AZ delegation is pretty radical).

This just cements in that Ward will likely win AZ-04 with double digits (I'm pretty sure she won this district back in '16 this is the most nut job district.

Im also positive that Ward will replace Gosar once he retires, she's a good fit for that district.

[😥]

Sinema 50%
McSally 46%
Third party & write-in 4%

[Progressive Pessimist]

Rep. Gosar endorses Chemtrail Kelli:

https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1019243536196210688

Does anyone even care what he thinks?

[ON Progressive]

Rep. Gosar endorses Chemtrail Kelli:

https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1019243536196210688

Does anyone even care what he thinks?

This actually should help a little bit. Her entire state senate district is inside AZ-04, and IIRC she won AZ-04 in the 2016 US Senate primary against McCain.

[Webnicz]

Joe Arpaio and Martha MCSally have reportedly refused to do a debate on Fox News (similar to the national syndicated debate for the WV primary) which is kinda shocking, especially since McSally goes on any Fox News program the second she gets the chance.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Arpaio tries to walk back his Sacha Baron Cohen interview, and actually makes himself look even dumber in the process: http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/401284-arpaio-i-didnt-hear-what-sacha-baron-cohen-was-saying-when-i

[TheRocketRaccoon]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/10/trump-mcsally-ward-arpaio-arizona-primary-endorsement-773222

U can do this, Kelli!!!!!

[UWS]

McSally is endorsed by Mitch McConnell and by Newt Gingrich as well as by Students for Trump. Go Martha, you can do it!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Arizona,_2018#Endorsements

In addition, she is about to catch up to Kyrsten Sinema on campaign fundraising so I think that maybe we should not underestimate her and that she could actually pull up a win for the GOP in Arizona on November.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Arizona,_2018#Fundraising

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

Now watch trump endorse ward

[President Johnson]

Donny, please endorse Ward or, even better, Arpaio.

[UWS]

Donny, please endorse Ward or, even better, Arpaio.

Honestly. I don't think you should count on this since Luther Strange has been defeated in the Alabama senatorial primary despite being endorsed by Trump.