2020 AZ Senate Megathread: Kelly's Race to Lose

[pppolitics]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/16/politics/ip-forecast/index.html

[windjammer]

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

Honestly, Kirk Adams or Matt Salmon would be far better appointees than Mcsally

[smoltchanov]

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

Honestly, Kirk Adams or Matt Salmon would be far better appointees than Mcsally

Criteria?

[Webnicz]

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

Honestly, Kirk Adams or Matt Salmon would be far better appointees than Mcsally

Any other appointment would keep the 2020 race competitive/favoring the GOP, McSally would not. McSally;'s own team said that in 2018 despite her being "the only republican running the had the best chance to win" in the general election she was never favored to win, due to her being unknown in the phoenix market, and she was defined in the phoenix market before she could do so herself. THis factor along with the "Participation Trophy Senator" aspect dont make 2020 look good.

Kirk Adams or anyone else however

[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

And that wasn't an ideological belief???

It was mainly a Democratic issue

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

[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.

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

[DaWN]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's the case, doesn't that mean Sinema becomes the senior senator from AZ, as she's been in the House longer than McSally and thus wins the 'former rep' tiebreaker?

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's the case, doesn't that mean Sinema becomes the senior senator from AZ, as she's been in the House longer than McSally and thus wins the 'former rep' tiebreaker?

Exactly. That's what I already said above lol

[DaWN]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's the case, doesn't that mean Sinema becomes the senior senator from AZ, as she's been in the House longer than McSally and thus wins the 'former rep' tiebreaker?

Exactly. That's what I already said above lol

So do you did, thanks

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's the case, doesn't that mean Sinema becomes the senior senator from AZ, as she's been in the House longer than McSally and thus wins the 'former rep' tiebreaker?

Exactly. That's what I already said above lol

So do you did, thanks

Np

[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.

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Oh OK, I hope that is correct. I hope that Ducey chooses Kirk Adams.

I know some Democrats want Ducey to pick McSally because she would be "easier" to defeat in 2020. However, I just don't feel that McSally should be appointed since she just LOST. That just irks me the wrong way.

[Unbeatable Titan Susan Collins]

Rumor is that's it's McSally and it will be announced today at noon

[Sir Mohamed]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Oh OK, I hope that is correct. I hope that Ducey chooses Kirk Adams.

I know some Democrats want Ducey to pick McSally because she would be "easier" to defeat in 2020. However, I just don't feel that McSally should be appointed since she just LOST. That just irks me the wrong way.

I thought actual age comes next to swearing-in date.

[Zaybay]

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1075051872925421569

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

WaPo reporting that Ducey will indeed name McSally to fill the open seat.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/arizona-governor-taps-martha-mcsally-to-fill-senate-seat-once-held-by-mccain/2018/12/18/7490c856-023a-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html?noredirect=on

[BuckeyeNut]

McSally is a bad choice. Slap in the face to the many Arizonans who just rejected her, and she’s not exactly a favorite of the base out there...

[Sir Mohamed]

Not the worst appointment, but not great either. She's beatable in '20, what gives me some confidence.

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Oh OK, I hope that is correct. I hope that Ducey chooses Kirk Adams.

I know some Democrats want Ducey to pick McSally because she would be "easier" to defeat in 2020. However, I just don't feel that McSally should be appointed since she just LOST. That just irks me the wrong way.

I thought actual age comes next to swearing-in date.

No, age has nothing to do w/ determining seniority.

When several new senators usually join on the same day at the beginning of a new Congress, seniority is determined by prior federal or state government service &, if necessary, the amount of time spent in the tiebreaking office. These tiebreakers in order are:

1. Former Senator
2. Former Vice President
3. Former House member
4. Former Cabinet secretary
5. Former state Governor
6. Population of state based on the most recent census when the Senator took office
7. Alphabetical by last name (in case 2 Senators came from the same state on the same day & have identical credentials)

When more than 1 Senator has served in the same previous role, length of time in that prior office is used to break the tie (e.g. Sinema having served 6 years in the House but McSally having served only 4 years in the House).

[Sir Mohamed]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Oh OK, I hope that is correct. I hope that Ducey chooses Kirk Adams.

I know some Democrats want Ducey to pick McSally because she would be "easier" to defeat in 2020. However, I just don't feel that McSally should be appointed since she just LOST. That just irks me the wrong way.

I thought actual age comes next to swearing-in date.

No, age has nothing to do w/ determining seniority.

When several new senators usually join on the same day at the beginning of a new Congress, seniority is determined by prior federal or state government service &, if necessary, the amount of time spent in the tiebreaking office. These tiebreakers in order are:

1. Former Senator
2. Former Vice President
3. Former House member
4. Former Cabinet secretary
5. Former state Governor
6. Population of state based on the most recent census when the Senator took office
7. Alphabetical by last name (in case 2 Senators came from the same state on the same day & have identical credentials)

When more than 1 Senator has served in the same previous role, length of time in that prior office is used to break the tie (e.g. Sinema having served 6 years in the House but McSally having served only 4 years in the House).

Interesting. What about a former prez?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

McSally is a bad choice. Slap in the face to the many Arizonans who just rejected her, and she’s not exactly a favorite of the base out there...

[2016]

BREAKING

Ducey appoints McSally to the Senate.

https://eu.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2018/12/18/martha-mcsally-named-doug-ducey-kyl-mccain-arizona-senate-seat-lost-sinema/2277884002/

[Comrade Funk]

Lean D as long as AZ Dems nominate someone decent. Bad optics.

[brucejoel99]

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.

To be fair, it doesn't matter who the appointee to replace Kyl is (whether it's McSally or not), they won't be the senior Senator, regardless of whether his resignation is December 31st or January 3rd.

The Senate won't be in session between Kyl's resignation on Dec. 31st & the convening of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3rd, so they'll end up being sworn in on the same day. Seniority is determined by the day one is sworn in, not necessarily the date of an appointment. W/ Sinema having served 6 years in the House & McSally having served 4 years in the House, Sinema will have the first tiebreaker, so she'll still be the senior Senator.

No, that's false. Seniority is based on date of appointment. However, McSally would be sworn in on January 3rd just like everybody else.

That means that McSally would have seniority over 10 senators even though she LOST her race.

No, she'd have to face the seniority tiebreaker on the day she's sworn in like everybody else. The prime recent example is Tina Smith, who was appointed to the Senate to fill Franken's vacancy on December 12, 2017, yet her date of seniority is the day she was sworn in, January 3, 2018. Doug Jones was also sworn in alongside her, & Smith won the seniority tiebreaker b/c Minnesota's population is greater than that of Alabama's.

Oh OK, I hope that is correct. I hope that Ducey chooses Kirk Adams.

I know some Democrats want Ducey to pick McSally because she would be "easier" to defeat in 2020. However, I just don't feel that McSally should be appointed since she just LOST. That just irks me the wrong way.

I thought actual age comes next to swearing-in date.

No, age has nothing to do w/ determining seniority.

When several new senators usually join on the same day at the beginning of a new Congress, seniority is determined by prior federal or state government service &, if necessary, the amount of time spent in the tiebreaking office. These tiebreakers in order are:

1. Former Senator
2. Former Vice President
3. Former House member
4. Former Cabinet secretary
5. Former state Governor
6. Population of state based on the most recent census when the Senator took office
7. Alphabetical by last name (in case 2 Senators came from the same state on the same day & have identical credentials)

When more than 1 Senator has served in the same previous role, length of time in that prior office is used to break the tie (e.g. Sinema having served 6 years in the House but McSally having served only 4 years in the House).

Interesting. What about a former prez?

Not part of the seniority hierarchy; i.e. if Obama returned to the Senate, he could only be treated as a former Senator for seniority purposes. If Bush, Clinton, or Carter went to the Senate, they could only be treated as former state Governors. And if Trump ran for the Senate after his term is up & had a tie to break w/ a fellow incoming Senator, said tie could only be broken based on the population of their states based on the most recent census when the Senators took office.