Kyrsten Sinema Switches to Independent (1 Viewer)

[bdb13]

Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is changing her party affiliation to independent, delivering a jolt to Democrats’ narrow majority and Washington along with it.

In a 45-minute interview, the first-term senator told POLITICO that she will not caucus with Republicans and suggested that she intends to vote the same way she has for four years in the Senate. “Nothing will change about my values or my behavior,” she said.

Provided that Sinema sticks to that vow, Democrats will still have a workable Senate majority in the next Congress, though it will not exactly be the neat and tidy 51 seats they assumed. They’re expected to also have the votes to control Senate committees. And Sinema’s move means Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) — a pivotal swing vote in the 50-50 chamber the past two years — will hold onto some but not all of his outsized influence in the Democratic caucus.

Sinema switches to independent, shaking up the Senate

The Arizona senator won't say whether she's running for reelection but said in an interview she doesn't expect a change in how the Senate operates.

www.politico.com

 

[samiam5211]

It's a good way to avoid being primaried i guess.

 

[bdb13]

And says she will not caucus with the Democrats in the way independents Angus King and Bernie Sanders do.

Edit: that was incorrect, she will caucus with the Democrats.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I guess the spotlight was off of her for too long...

 

[samiam5211]

If she isn't caucusing with either side, can't they screw her over by not giving her any committee assignments?

 

[GrandAdmiral]

It's a good way to avoid being primaried i guess.

This is definitely about 2024 and pretty much insures they'll be a run-off. This is her big fork you to the Arizona Democrats.

 

[MT15]

From Post:

 

[MT15]

And says she will not caucus with the Democrats in the way independents Angus King and Bernie Sanders do.

I didn’t see this statement. What I read is that she expects to keep her committee assignments, and she cannot keep them if she doesn’t caucus with democrats.

 

[bdb13]

I didn’t see this statement. What I read is that she expects to keep her committee assignments, and she cannot keep them if she doesn’t caucus with democrats.

I heard Robert Costa of CBS News say that she would not caucus with the Republicans or Democrats and that she would be a "true" independent.. will look for confirmation.

 

[MT15]

I heard Robert Costa of CBS News say that she would not caucus with the Republicans or Democrats and that she would be a "true" independent.. will look for confirmation.

Thanks, it’s sort of funny that she says she will be a true independent but yet it’s pretty obvious her vote is definitely for sale to lobbyists.

 

[bdb13]

Thanks, it’s sort of funny that she says she will be a true independent but yet it’s pretty obvious her vote is definitely for sale to lobbyists.

Yeah I think I either misunderstood or Costa misspoke.. she won't be attending the weekly Democratic meetings but I think that's as far as she's gone for now.

 

[MT15]

Lol

 

[MT15]

Yeah I think I either misunderstood or Costa misspoke.. she won't be attending the weekly Democratic meetings but I think that's as far as she's gone for now.

And the Dems will go out of their way to be nice to her. As they should, because they need her to stay on their side. I have seen statements from the Dem Party in AZ promising to primary her for years, now she doesn’t have to face that. It will be interesting to see if Dems decide to run someone, or will they leave her alone, like they do with Bernie and Angus King. I suppose her behavior for the next two years will determine that.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I have seen statements from the Dem Party in AZ promising to primary her for years, now she doesn’t have to face that.

That's all this is about. That primary challenge was coming and now that the campaign to get Mark Kelly is over with, it only was going to ramp up. She's going to try to pull the Lisa Murkowski move that happened before Alaska went rank choice.

 

[SystemShock]

In the great scheme of things, I don't think it is a big issue. It's not like Sinema was toeing the party line to begin with.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

It depends on the 'not caucusing' paradigm. Although that might just be semantics. Having 51 votes was critical because it would enable Dems to have a majority (versus an even split) on all Senate committees which makes it easier to push legislation (and, more critically, judicial nominations) through committee votes and on to floor votes where they will inevitably win. Not sure how it will work out now but if she expects to keep her committee assignments then she must, in some form, caucus with Dems to ensure the benefits I just mentioned. Otherwise I'd expect the Dems to tell her to go fork herself because they owe her nothing if she refuses to enable faster committee work.

In the grand scheme of things I think it's good to have true independents in the Senate but, at the same time, Sinema is merely an attention-seeker.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Sinema is merely an attention-seeker.

No lies told here...

 

[J-DONK]

I heard a summation of what's wrong with Sinema long ago, and this move just reinforces it. She was super gifted as a kid. She graduated from college at 18. She has never really matured beyond needing to feel special, and the center of attention.

This is two years of look at me.