One has to appreciate the game @SenatorSinema is playing and what's at stake in order to evaluate it.
Because it's a risky game. The future of her career depends on it.
The game will help determine the fate of Democratic initiatives and electoral fortunes.
Because it's a risky game. The future of her career depends on it.
The game will help determine the fate of Democratic initiatives and electoral fortunes.
Whether @kyrstensinema fully appreciates the long game and how Democratic fortunes at large, in Arizona, and her own career are intertwined is another issue altogether.
That's what makes the game she's playing most curious.
Her saving grace: Arizona Republicans.
That's what makes the game she's playing most curious.
Her saving grace: Arizona Republicans.
Sinema's position on the filibuster is a bluntly political one that has nothing to do with the virtues of bipartisanship.
1. She wants reelection (2024). Arizona's competitive.
2. Supporting the filibuster makes her important. She leverages her position.
There's a third ...
1. She wants reelection (2024). Arizona's competitive.
2. Supporting the filibuster makes her important. She leverages her position.
There's a third ...
3. She does not believe the Democrats will retain control of Congress in the 2022 midterms. Republican majorities will run roughshod in Congress.
Of course, she forgets the power of the presidential veto. That will still be in Democratic hands through the 2024 election.
Of course, she forgets the power of the presidential veto. That will still be in Democratic hands through the 2024 election.
Still, you might at first glance say she's a political realist. Indeed, if she were up for reelection in 2022, her instinct for survival would be even more understandable.
But it complicates her ability to realize it.
But it complicates her ability to realize it.
The filibuster complicates passage of or dooms much of her party's agenda. Arizona Democrats are questioning their support of her. Primarily electorates tend to be more extreme than general election electorates, so a primary challenge would be costly.
Even if she wins a primary challenge (and she should), she would have to depend upon Republican incompetence or extremism in their 2024 Senate candidate. McSally-like challengers don't come along often.
It's not as if she'll pull any Republican votes otherwise.
BYTW, the Democratic establishment (especially in the Senate) endorsed Sinema in her primary run in 2018.
She sure fooled them ... or did they fool themselves?
BYTW, the Democratic establishment (especially in the Senate) endorsed Sinema in her primary run in 2018.
She sure fooled them ... or did they fool themselves?
But frustrating the Biden plan while highlighting one's negotiations with the White House is a different thing altogether.
What does she want? Other than a lower price tag, no one knows. Specifics?
Why does she want what she wants? She sees no reason to tell you.
What does she want? Other than a lower price tag, no one knows. Specifics?
Why does she want what she wants? She sees no reason to tell you.
By now it should be clear that some Republicans embrace bipartisanship only when it serves their interests. There's no real appetite for compromise.
All Sinema's doing is frustrating members of her own party. That's "Democratic disarray" in the Senate.
All Sinema's doing is frustrating members of her own party. That's "Democratic disarray" in the Senate.
Of course, her recent fundraising activities suggest that she's really a DINO. She's not on board with many Democratic party initiatives. She opposes some of them, and has the contributions to explain why.
Still, Republicans will paint her as a Democrat, although it seems to me that if you look closely, there's traces of libertarianism there, and Democrats rarely understand what that means.
All of this suggests that @SenatorSinema is trying to navigate her way through a difficult path. The process alone can be perilous. She's angering Arizona Democrats while Arizona Republicans watch with ill-concealed glee.
But there's another reason why @SenatorSinema may find it too difficult to pursue an already problematic course.
She's annoying. Obsessed with getting attention. Overly enamored with her sense of self-importance.
She's annoying. Obsessed with getting attention. Overly enamored with her sense of self-importance.
By the way, some of this has to do with the politics of gender and representation. Let's be honest about that.
Male politicians, even in the age of casual business, tend to have a limited wardrobe. Yellow or purple tie? No tie? And watch out for those tan suits!
Male politicians, even in the age of casual business, tend to have a limited wardrobe. Yellow or purple tie? No tie? And watch out for those tan suits!
The age of the French blue shirt is in decline, as are patterned ties (and ties, period ... remember power ties?). But we are still talking black, navy, and occasionally blue suits and blazers.
In short, male politicians rarely draw attention because of what they wear.
In short, male politicians rarely draw attention because of what they wear.
Not so with Sinema. People are divided about how her wardrobe represents the message she wants people to take from it ... and some take away a different message that serves their ends. Can she be fashionable and be taken seriously?
Mind you, I don't care much for her sense of fashion in the first place, but that's her business. But I can't escape suspecting that she might not irritate people so much if she dressed ... more traditionally. There's something irrational in the sentiments she inspires.
Now, I know what you will say ... and you're right. Male politicians are rarely judged on their fashion choices. True. But they are aware of them. JFK, for example, didn't like hats. LBJ did. Jimmy Carter's sweaters during the energy crisis. And on and on and on.
Women's fashion choices usually inspire much more commentary, and some of it's politicized. I think Sinema's conscious of that and she's aware of how she comes across and how people will react (depending on how they feel about her).
But don't tell me she wasn't awake of this when she did a weak tribute to John McCain:
Yet it's Sinema's attitude, and not just her fashion choices [that sometimes express that attitude]) that may prove her downfall.
She's not making friends. She treats the media with contempt. She has an elevated sense of her self-importance.
She's not making friends. She treats the media with contempt. She has an elevated sense of her self-importance.
She also wants us to believe that her political actions are based on principle, not pragmatic political considerations or policy preferences (as the fundraising reports suggest). She is extreme in her own way, just not at the polar ends of the political spectrum.
It's one thing to oppose someone on principle or policy while getting along with them personally. For those who wax romantic about bygone days of bipartisanship, they point to those moments (as opposed to, say, Preston Brooks and Charles Sumner).
But you also have to get along with members of your own party. Even the little-remembered "The Seduction of Joe Tynan" reminded us of that, as did (upon occasion) "The West Wing." Eventually, you'll need them.
You don't want to become the Democrats' version of Ted Cruz, who is not beloved by his colleagues ... and, there are others.
And you would be well advised not to draw fire needlessly, but that's what Sinema does with her attitude.
And you would be well advised not to draw fire needlessly, but that's what Sinema does with her attitude.
Maybe Sinema has staff advising her on this score. I don't think they wanted this:
newsweek.com/kyrsten-sinema…
newsweek.com/kyrsten-sinema…
There's a growing dislike for Sinema that seems to have a personal edge to it, just as her way of going about business has a personal edge to it.
In her eagerness to embrace bipartisanship, Sinema may have forgotten to remember to dance with who brung ya.
In her eagerness to embrace bipartisanship, Sinema may have forgotten to remember to dance with who brung ya.
That may prove fatal ... because at some point it's hard to get people mobilized to support someone they find so annoying, attention-seeking, and flawed on the issues.
At a time when turnout is king, that's worth remembering.
At a time when turnout is king, that's worth remembering.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
