2020 AZ Senate Megathread: Kelly's Race to Lose

[Peanut]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

[Calthrina950]

Congratulations Senator Gallego

Why Gallego and not mark Kelly?

Coz astronut lost

Gallego would probably be too progressive for Arizona. Someone more moderate like Greg Stanton would do better.

Ideology hasn’t had a single ounce of effect on general elections so far, I doubt it starts to have one now

^^^^^^^^

I'm not the first one to say this about Stanton and Gallego. And I don't particularly care that much for what you guys have to say anymore.

[pppolitics]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

...doesn't matter


Sinema gets to be senior senator in a couple of years

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

...doesn't matter


Sinema gets to be senior senator in a couple of years

That's not guaranteed. Also, it's still just not right that McSally who just LOST to Sinema gets to be senior senator.

[Webnicz]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

Now that you bring this up I can only imagine how this only adds to the already very bad optics, an illegitimate senator becoming the senior senator.

looking forward to this, please ducey.

[lfromnj]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

Now that you bring this up I can only imagine how this only adds to the already very bad optics, an illegitimate senator becoming the senior senator.

looking forward to this, please ducey.

Brian Schatz

[Zaybay]

Congratulations Senator Gallego

Why Gallego and not mark Kelly?

Coz astronut lost

Gallego would probably be too progressive for Arizona. Someone more moderate like Greg Stanton would do better.

Ideology hasn’t had a single ounce of effect on general elections so far, I doubt it starts to have one now

^^^^^^^^

I'm not the first one to say this about Stanton and Gallego. And I don't particularly care that much for what you guys have to say anymore.

if a lie is repeated by everyone, does that make it a truth? No. There has been no correlation between ideology and general election performance, moderates dont do better than Progressives, and vice versa. There are barely any examples, especially in the modern political era, of a candidate's ideology causing them to over/underpreform.

Dont know why you dont want to hear from me, I am just pointing out a misconception in your analysis, nothing wrong with that, in fact, its the whole point of this forum.

[MAINEiac4434]

I actually hope ducey appoints mcsally. The attack ads write themselves for a situation like this. We look forward to defeating her again.

This, but it's so unfair she'd be the senior Senator.

Now that you bring this up I can only imagine how this only adds to the already very bad optics, an illegitimate senator becoming the senior senator.

looking forward to this, please ducey.

Brian Schatz

Bean Schatz hadn't just lost a statewide Senate race when he was nominated.

Can you argue about anything honesty?

[Continential]

I wonder if Ann Kirkpatrick will run in 2020?

[JMT]

I wonder if Ann Kirkpatrick will run in 2020?

I suppose it wouldn’t be all too surprising since she ran for Senate before, but I doubt she’ll run. She’s lost two high profile races (re-election in 2010, and Senate in 2016), and now is back in Congress in a seat she can probably hold for awhile. Given that re-election is a lot less risky, and she could stay in the House for awhile, I think she’ll stay put.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If Ducey is smart he won't nominate McSally. That'll be a smack in the face to voters, but then again, so is appointing someone for 2 years that the people have no say in so...

who else could he appoint besides her and Kimberly Yee

AZ GOP bench is absolutely garbage. And the voters didn't say no to Mcsally but more yes for Sinema.

Garbage bench? LMAO. I will remind Atlas that AZ is still a pink state, McSally just ran as a 2004 neocon and wasted all the opportunities afforded her to attack Sinema.

Garbage bench might be a bit strong, but it is a surprisingly weak one.  Ducey won’t run b/c Hobbs would become Governor, McSally would likely be sunk by the optics of appointing her, Kimberly Yee hasn’t even been sworn in as Treasurer yet which means the optics would be horrible with her too, and while Brnovich has been talked up a lot, his electoral track record is decidedly meh (a narrow win in the 2014 wave and a 51-48 win in 2018 against an underfunded, weak C-lister in a race that pretty much everyone had written off as Safe R). 

IIRC Salmon is generally regarded in Arizona as a right-wing firebrand to the point that he’d likely struggle a bit statewide these days in a way he didn’t back in 2002 (although he lost then too), plus he’s got has-been written all over him.  The GOP congressional delegation isn’t too impressive either.  Biggs and Schweikert are both way to the right of the state and at least one of them (forget which) has some scandals that were bad enough to trigger an ethics investigation by the Republican-controlled House.  Lesko seems like an underperformer, just got elected to the House, and IIRC has some ethics issues of her own, but I could be misremembering.  As for Paul Gosar...well...lol, you might as well run Ward since Gosar’s at that level. 

The smart play for AZ Republicans would have been to act like McSally was the frontrunner and then have McSally make a big feel-good show of taking herself out of consideration b/c of how important it is to respect the will of the voters and that she hopes to have another chance in the future to continue fighting for Arizona.  Maybe throw in some hokey nonsense like “if I’m blessed with such a chance in the future, I promise that will be reporting for duty just like when I fought overseas to protect the freedoms we hold dear” or whatever.  Ducey could then nominate a buddy of his as a placeholder like Kirk Adams with the understanding they won’t seek re-election and then McSally could have run in 2020 with decent optics.  She blew that though by being too obvious about how badly she wanted the appointment, so I don’t see many great options for the Republicans here.  Their best bet is probably still Brnovich, but [two years before the election] it looks the Democrats should be able to beat him on paper if they run Greg Stanton (all things being equal). 

Side note: I go back and forth on Gallego.  I like him, but I worry he may have a few cycles left to wait before he can win statewide in AZ against a generic Republican and the more I think about it, the more I think he’d have an especially hard time in a Senate race.  I think Gallego and the AZDP might both be better off if Stanton runs for Senate in 2020 and then Gallego runs for Governor in 2022 [if we pickup the Senate seat and it’s not looking like a GOP wave] and/or runs for Senate in 2026 [if Republicans hold the Senate seat in 2020]. 

[pops]

hahahahahaha what

when you have to bring up an example from 122 years ago to win an argument, you know you've lost

2016, 2012, 1996, 1992, 1972, and so on all had clear effects based on ideology. WJB is the biggest example by far, as  he handily won deeply red states,,   but these are  good examples   as well.

[Continential]

hahahahahaha what

when you have to bring up an example from 122 years ago to win an argument, you know you've lost

2016, 2012, 1996, 1992, 1972, and so on all had clear effects based on ideology. WJB is the biggest example by far, as  he handily won deeply red states,,   but these are  good examples   as well.

He won those states because he was Pro-Silver

[pops]

hahahahahaha what

when you have to bring up an example from 122 years ago to win an argument, you know you've lost

2016, 2012, 1996, 1992, 1972, and so on all had clear effects based on ideology. WJB is the biggest example by far, as  he handily won deeply red states,,   but these are  good examples   as well.

He won those states because he was Pro-Silver

And that wasn't an ideological belief???

[Calthrina950]

One thing more I would say is that Sinema's victory, in part, was due to her ability to draw from independents and more moderate Republican voters. The exit polls, I believe, indicated that she won ~10-12% of Republican voters, and got close to 60% among independents. Independents and Republican defectors were key to her victory; without them, she would have lost. By contrast, Garcia did badly with those two groups; hence, part of the reason why Ducey defeated him by 14%.

[Zaybay]

One thing more I would say is that Sinema's victory, in part, was due to her ability to draw from independents and more moderate Republican voters. The exit polls, I believe, indicated that she won ~10-12% of Republican voters, and got close to 60% among independents. Independents and Republican defectors were key to her victory; without them, she would have lost. By contrast, Garcia did badly with those two groups; hence, part of the reason why Ducey defeated him by 14%.

I mean, it could just be, just like in GA, D voters who use the label R in registration, considering Sinema didnt overpreform the congressional PV. Ducey was very popular, so these previous Rs turned Ds still voted for him.

Ideology had no effect.

[smoltchanov]

Ideology had no effect.

You probably must put it in your signature. That's your motto.... My is the opposite one.

[pppolitics]

One thing more I would say is that Sinema's victory, in part, was due to her ability to draw from independents and more moderate Republican voters. The exit polls, I believe, indicated that she won ~10-12% of Republican voters, and got close to 60% among independents. Independents and Republican defectors were key to her victory; without them, she would have lost. By contrast, Garcia did badly with those two groups; hence, part of the reason why Ducey defeated him by 14%.

Definitely.

Had she just won Democrats and evenly split independents, she would have lost.

[Xing]

The thing about states like Arizona and Colorado, though, is that a decent number of registered Republicans pretty vote straight-ticket Democrat now. Kind of the opposite of Appalachia. Sinema was always going to win more Republicans than McSally would Democrats.

[Calthrina950]

The thing about states like Arizona and Colorado, though, is that a decent number of registered Republicans pretty vote straight-ticket Democrat now. Kind of the opposite of Appalachia. Sinema was always going to win more Republicans than McSally would Democrats.

Where did you derive your impression of this from Colorado? I've been under the assumption that unaffiliated voters (independents) fueled the Democratic statewide, congressional, and legislative successes in my home state this year.

[Antonio the Sixth]

hahahahahaha what

when you have to bring up an example from 122 years ago to win an argument, you know you've lost

2016 ...  clear effects based on ideology

lol ok

[Zaybay]

The thing about states like Arizona and Colorado, though, is that a decent number of registered Republicans pretty vote straight-ticket Democrat now. Kind of the opposite of Appalachia. Sinema was always going to win more Republicans than McSally would Democrats.

Where did you derive your impression of this from Colorado? I've been under the assumption that unaffiliated voters (independents) fueled the Democratic statewide, congressional, and legislative successes in my home state this year.

Check the registration numbers. In heavily D trending states, specifically GA, AZ, CO, and TX, voters are switching to Ds faster than they change their registration(no one wants to go to the DMV). So what you have is a large chunk of Republicans voting straight ticket Dem, because they are Dems. Same thing in Appalachia.

Looking at Co, specifically, Dems had high turnout, and the unaffiliated vote split towards them, but the Democrats won a good chunk of the R vote(this would be the voters previously described). Though, then again, you could attribute the D victory to high D turnout, or the R "defections".

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

One thing more I would say is that Sinema's victory, in part, was due to her ability to draw from independents and more moderate Republican voters. The exit polls, I believe, indicated that she won ~10-12% of Republican voters, and got close to 60% among independents. Independents and Republican defectors were key to her victory; without them, she would have lost. By contrast, Garcia did badly with those two groups; hence, part of the reason why Ducey defeated him by 14%.

I mean, it could just be, just like in GA, D voters who use the label R in registration, considering Sinema didnt overpreform the congressional PV. Ducey was very popular, so these previous Rs turned Ds still voted for him.

Ideology had no effect.

It absolutely can. Just look at how much Harley Rouda outperformed Katie Porter, despite CA-45 being more D-friendly than CA-48. One to two percent is the difference between a win and a loss in modern Arizona.

[Zaybay]

One thing more I would say is that Sinema's victory, in part, was due to her ability to draw from independents and more moderate Republican voters. The exit polls, I believe, indicated that she won ~10-12% of Republican voters, and got close to 60% among independents. Independents and Republican defectors were key to her victory; without them, she would have lost. By contrast, Garcia did badly with those two groups; hence, part of the reason why Ducey defeated him by 14%.

I mean, it could just be, just like in GA, D voters who use the label R in registration, considering Sinema didnt overpreform the congressional PV. Ducey was very popular, so these previous Rs turned Ds still voted for him.

Ideology had no effect.

It absolutely can. Just look at how much Harley Rouda outperformed Katie Porter, despite CA-45 being more D-friendly than CA-48. One to two percent is the difference between a win and a loss in modern Arizona.

I see that in CA-45, a Democrat was going against the unpopular incumbent Dana, so yeah, makes sense why Rouda did well, and also there was Porter's fight against the relatively popular incumbent Walters, so yeah. Seems to have been popularity, not ideology.

I mean, to show how fickle that argument can be, you can compare the performance of CA-50 with ACN with any of the OC Democrats and conclude that Progressives like him do better, when there are external factors at play.

[Timothy87]

McSally did take the wrong path in her campaign. She decided to bear hug Trump rather than try and reclaim some independence and moderation. That is hers to own, but I do have sympathy given Arizona's horrifically LATE primary (Aug 28) and she had to beat two bat sh**t crazy right wing lunatics in a Trump loving electorate. She only had 8 weeks of general election while Sinema had the entire year.

I'd love to see her appointed. There's really no other good choice. A house member would force a special election which would suck, and after McCain and Sinema McSally did win the 3rd most Senate votes ever. Hate to see having to run 4 cycles in a row. If I were the AZ Leg I'd move the Senate special to 2019 so that whomever wins at least doesn't have to campaign again til 2022