Share this page!

Maybe Scrolly?
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
Twitter logo
22 Jul, 11 tweets, 5 min read
The question people ask on this and similar polls is: what is Sinema doing? Is this a politically necessary or super=savvy ploy to hold her seat, one that justifies the big sacrifices to Biden's agenda on voting rights and much else? Let's take a look. 1/
If the goal of Sinema's rightward gambit is to be popular in AZ, the results are meh. She comes in at 44% and net +2 approval among Arizonans - an OK number since it's narrowly positive, but lower than Biden (50%, +2) and especially Kelly's net +11.
One clear effect of her rightward lurch is to severely harm her support among Dems. Being barely above 50% with your own party is not a great place to be, especially in our polarized era. Compare her approval among Dems (54%, +13) to Kelly's (85%, +76) and Biden's (94%, +89).
If Sinema has sacrificed support among Dems, she must be making up for it with independents, right? Wrong. Here, again, she trails Kelly. This gets to the cost/benefit question: Sinema is blocking Biden's agenda, but still has a lower approval among indies than Kelly, who is not.
The place where Sinema outperforms is with Republicans. But what is that worth? In a head to head, Republicans will vote for the Republican. Even if a candidate only has to win ~10%, Kelly has 21% with Rs while also enjoying much stronger numbers with Dems & indies. Seems better.
Sinema's decision to obstruct Biden's agenda has left her open to a primary challenge. But what's truly remarkable is that she has not just left herself vulnerable to the far left. She has left herself vulnerable to anyone who runs as a Democrat supporting the Democratic agenda.
Let's get to the question: what is Sinema doing? Do those relatively high approval numbers with GOPers mean she's going to switch parties? Probably not. While her numbers among Rs are reasonably high for a Dem, they are too low to win a GOP primary. Compare to Ducey, for example.
What about running as an indie? Maybe. But that's hard to do when your overall favorability rating is underwater (-4), and when you fail to achieve majority favs with any faction. Also, as stated above, her performance among indies is underwhelming, and lags far behind Kelly.
Another explanation, suggested by her “fuck off” photo, is that Sinema doesn’t care. Fair enough. But it’d also be fair for donors, grassroots leaders, and other supporters to ask why she is sacrificing Biden’s agenda and making it harder for Dems to hold the majority in 2022.
Clearly, Sinema’s gambit is not necessary for her politics. Kelly is in stronger standing, which he has achieved without blocking Biden’s agenda. It’d be entirely reasonable for supporters & donors to ask why she’s sacrificing priorities like voting rights for no good reason.
Sinema’s gambit is also hurting Dem efforts to hold the majority. Blocking S1/HR4 keeps the playing field tilted towards Rs. Without filibuster reform, other key priories won’t pass either. And Rs are using Sinema’s rightward shift to attack Kelly as a radical. Bad! And for what?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Adam Jentleson 🎈

Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AJentleson

Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
23 Jul
The BIF is at a critical moment and Dems have to be careful not to get played. It has spiraled from “we’ll be ready Monday” to “Ok maybe not Monday” to the fact that *transit* remains unresolved in an infrastructure package, to Coons suggesting the BIF drop transit altogether. 1/ ImageImageImageImage
First, caveat: it’s (often) darkest before the dawn. These kinds of deals can see a lot of last-minute squabbling before getting finalized. But the size of this group, intended as a show of force, makes it particularly unwieldy. So, this could all be last-minute jockeying. Or…
I have a habit (that I would love to shake one day) of looking at these things through the lens of, what does McConnell want? Ostensibly, he has been in the background. But on a high-profile issue that could define this session, he's probably not actually in the background.
Read 9 tweets
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
22 Jul
I don't hate this answer. If President Biden wants to pass voting rights, he'll have to go further. But this is an evolution, and a long way from where he was on the filibuster as recently as last year. That's progress. Whether it will happen fast enough remains to be seen.
The powerful framing by @donlemon and the audience reaction show how far the issue has come. Filibuster reform is re-establishing its place as a civil rights issue. Dems who used to relish defending it, like Biden, are now tentative and defensive. This is how change happens.
Amy Klobuchar was against filibuster reform during the campaign - now she's a champion. There's a tension here, because change can happen but also not happen fast enough, and we have a very limited window to pass voting rights. And it's quite possible it won't happen fast enough.
Read 6 tweets
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
28 Jun
Reid had a theory of politics that was different from other Dem leaders. A big part of it was that he gave absolutely zero fucks about what the Beltway crowd thought about him, or whether his actions met their approval. There’s only one other leader in DC of whom that is true.
On the worst days, Reid would get absolutely flayed. I would come in feeling like I’d failed. And he would just laugh. Not like, a laughing-on-the-outside-while-crying-on-the-inside kinda thing. Like: hearing about his bad press at the end of the bad day would *improve* his mood.
Reid grew up in a house made of railroad ties, in the middle of the desert. He learned to swim in a brothel pool (his mom did its laundry). He was self-aware about what he had attained. He kept his family close and cared very little about what anyone else thought.
Read 10 tweets
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
23 Jun
It’s worth reflecting on how much ink was spilled over the last few months about how S1 didn’t have 50 votes, and how lots of Dems had reservations beyond Manchin & Sinema. Yet when the vote was called and it was time for senators to go on record, lo and behold! S1 got 50 votes.
Everyone always has complaints. The tricky part is separating the showstoppers from secondary complaints and people just jockeying for position. Worth recalling the DADT repeal vote in 2010 which Reid brought up over the objections of the bill’s own sponsors. Yet, It passed!
Right, but this is the point. I don’t recall reading any stories about how Endless Frontiers was dead because some senators wanted changes and amendments to the bill. This is how it works (as you know): you get on the bill, make changes if you can, then see where thing stand.
Read 7 tweets
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
22 Jun
The question of whether to reform the filibuster boils down to whether we want a functional government or a dysfunctional one. This is how the Framers saw it. This is why they opposed the filibuster or anything like it, and why they created the Senate as a majority-rule body. 1/
Madison called majority rule the “republican principle.” He was consistent, from when he was a young man crafting the Constitution until the 1830s, when he was asked to respond to Calhoun’s argument that the minority should get to wield a veto over the majority (Madison said no).
Madison zeroed in on the principle that if the minority were allowed to wield a veto over the majority, “the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed.”

The reason? “The power would be transferred to the minority,” he said.

That’s exactly what Sinema is doing.
Read 13 tweets
Adam Jentleson 🎈 Profile picture
10 Jun
Since we’re all about gangs this week, please step into my TED talk about how the Gang of 14 was one of Democrats’ worst strategic mistakes of the past few decades.

The year is 2005. Republicans really, really want to go nuclear to confirm Bush’s judges. Like, really want to.
Bush, Cheney and Frist were all eager to go nuclear. The floor general for the fight was a young comer named Addison Mitch McConnell. In May, on the Senate floor, McConnell announced that the “Senate is prepared to restore the Senate’s traditions and precedents,” and go nuclear.
To lay the intellectual groundwork for the effort, former Baker counsel and all-around Senate guru Martin Gold penned a law review article dubbing it the “constitutional option.” It’s good! Makes a strong case the Framers would’ve opposed the filibuster 😊 faculty.washington.edu/jwilker/353/35…
Read 34 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @AJentleson has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @AJentleson!

Read all threads by @AJentleson

:(