>

She made her name.  She will ghost write a book and then get a deal with Fox.  She is set for life.  No need to worry about that mere $174,000 annual senate pay.
What Sinema has become is what’s particularly gross to me. She was on video back in 2010 stumping for the Affordable Care Act, calling out Senators like Joe Lieberman and taking them to task for refusing to change the filibuster rules to pass significant legislation; explaining how she and other Democrats were going to use the budget reconciliation process to get good work done. Very much seeming to care about keeping an open dialogue with working class voters.
Now she’s fucking off in Davos, wearing a sheep or whatever and opining about the national debt on a huge stage in front of global business elites. That’s the kind of shit she wants to do, when she’s not killing bill after bill and doing curtsies on the Senate floor. She’s become worse than Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus and those intransigent assholes she used to name and shame. >

She betrayed everything she claimed to believe in for money. >

How long before she sells out the LGBTQIA community too? 
If she hasn’t already >

In 30 minutes for 2 million?! >

I think you're severely overestimating how much a politician costs.
I'm guessing somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000. >

3 paper clips and a subway coupon. >

Nah you're thinking of McCarthy. >

McCarthy pays other people to listen to him. >

At this point, she has 0 path to reelection. The absolute most she can do is spoil it for someone else.
If the Democrats had decided not to run a candidate, maybe she could have won as an independent. I doubt it, but at least it would have been possible. With a Democrat already publicly announcing, that's shot.
So, what does she want to do with the rest of her life? Does she want to spend it as a conservative pundit, or lobbyist? If so, she should run, and try to take votes from the Democratic candidate, and then get the best such deal she can get. If she'd prefer to work on the Democratic side, or even centrist for what that's worth, she needs to not run at all.
But in neither case is she ever going to hold a national public office again. >

What if she went Republican? >

Not enough Republicans would vote for her, as she was a Democrat. >

Depends on who the Republican primary candidate is.  Keli Ward, Joe Arpaio, or even Kari Lake?  There is a non-zero chance she wins.  Also, I think her approval rating is higher among Republicans than Democrats. >

If she ran as a Republican and won the primary, the Democrats would run a candidate. She would lose enough Republicans that she really couldn't beat the Democrat. >

When Kyrsten Sinema was at Davos high-fiving Joe Manchin over their mutual vow to protect the filibuster, she may have actually given Ruben Gallego a boost. >

Arizona could have twin astronaut senators. >

Gallego's an astronaut?
Or are you saying that Kelly's brother should also run? >

Good fucking riddance. >

I despise this woman so much. Rarely does one individuals greed hurt so many. >

I doubt she's interested in running. I'm betting she has a cushy job waiting for her somewhere. >

Nah she wants to be the new McCain and be a senator for life.  She has a good shot, in like 60 years I don't believe an incumbent elected senator in Arizona has ever lost. >

I don't think she has a good shot at all. Recent polls actually have her losing to both the republican and democratic likely candidates by double digits while she is already an incumbent. >

Is it a three way poll? I’d be interested to see it if you could link. >

Thanks, that is much lower than what I would have guessed for her, especially since AZ is about a third independent. >

She's not getting reelected. The question is whether she'll run or not. The question if she runs is who/what type of Republican will win their primary? Gallego/Sinema/Ducey is a different story than Gallego/Sinema/Lake. >

I hope she spends the rest of life as a lonely, broke cat lady whose cats hate her. >

Sadly, she’ll probably end up with a lucrative career as a lobbyist and will be laughing all the way to the bank. >

Who is she going to lobby to- she literally pissed off the democratic leadership, and what use would she be to the republicans when there are a million other republicans who actually have decades of forming connections within their own party. >

Let's hope so.  Sinema can't win as either a Democrat or an "Independent" but she can be a spoiler and I have no doubts she would enjoy being a spoiler if it gets her $ post election from corporate benefactors. >

Sinema already negotiated her posh post-congressional life, it was obvious she wasn't really seeking reelection when she left the Dems. >

Wouldn't it make sense for her to switch to Independent if she was planning to seek reelection? 
She puts the Democrats in a difficult spot by forcing them to either not run anyone against her to (hopefully) prevent a Republican from taking the seat or by siphoning votes away from whoever they do decide to run against her and increasing the probability of a Republican winning. >

Sinema was the better choice in 2018, at the very least her win gave us the senate majority. 
Gallego will be the best choice in 2024 regardless of whatever whackadoodle republican (or independent) runs against him. I sent him my first donation yesterday. >

If no consequences get added for what Sinema and Manchin have done then we will just get more of them in office. They've abused their office, deceived their constituents which they are supposed to be working for, and have voted non stop for their own interests much like a lot of people in Congress.
Even lying all the way through and through has no consequences, look at fucking Santos. I don't think we can just go on faith or trust that these people running will actually do their job and work for us anymore, even if they do look and seem great. >

Her path to reelection has been zero since her little "thumbs down" antics.  Democrats HATE her and Democrats just fall in line like Republicans do.  Her current favorability is mostly on the Republican side and they only like her because she's a train wreck.  They aren't going to actually vote for her when they can vote for a Republican.  
Not really sure what her play was her other than enriching herself (which could have been done without killing her political career).  Manchin at least makes sense being in West Virginia. >

That's the thing about her that I don't get. If she wanted to rack up influence and enrich herself the smart play would be to try and stay in the Senate as long as possible. (As gross as that is). She just got too greedy and destructive and is doing a speedrun on sabotaging her political career. >

Sinema knows she won’t win re-election. She is running as a favor to the GOP to assure Lake gets elected. Gallego has zero chance of winning a general in AZ in a three way race. >


Gallego has zero chance of winning a general in AZ in a three way race.

I mean, that's the intuitive response.  But that being said?  At least one poll from last month indicates otherwise.
A more recent poll has Lake at +4,, but FiveThirtyEight hasn't given that pollster a grade. >

Her going to Davis proves it to me. Sinema will get a spot on a few corporate boards. She will make $500,000 a year for basically going on several all expenses paid meetings a year. Where her only job is to rubber stamp boards decisions with a predetermined answer. >

She's going to run as a spoiler and fuck us all up. >

That would be a concern if anyone liked her. She's spectacularly unpopular with democrats, republicans and independents. >

She doesn't want to be a senator she wants to keep Gallego from becoming one. >

She's obviously got her choice of cushy jobs lined up when she's no longer a senator. Would her stock decrease if she left the Senate because of election loss? And if so, would she quit to avoid that and go out on her own terms, or is she in it to the bitter end? >

She doesnt want be re-elected. She’s got all her post politics donors lined up >

good. she sucks. >

It’s all fun and games until she gets 5% of the vote and we get senator gosar >

Her net worth was almost nothing when she took office. 
She’s worth millions now. 
If you can get rich like that in Congress, it says everything wrong with our system. She betrayed her voters, and is only there to enrich herself. I would call her a piece of shit, but shit can be useful as a fertilizer…she’s more of a used tampon. >

b-b-but I’m a #b-bossbabe! They said being g-g-gay was a way of being an inclusive and untouchable!
Praise me you peons! >

Good. May the door hit her in the ass on the way out too. >

That idiot could have held that seat until she was old and gray. A young, gay, colorful Democrat from a purple trending blue state? She could have went anywhere with that bio. Now all she'll be a footnote, and a has been.  
All she had to do was listen to her constituents. But she was too narcissistic to do even that. Weird how Kelly ran in AZ and votes like a Democrat but had no problem winning. Bring on Sen. Gallego. >

Good, Hedge Fund Heather needs to go. >

Her evilness is making her look tired and old. >

She is aging like shit lol >

I doubt many Arizonans will vote for her again I certainly won’t. >

Let’s hope she doesn’t split the vote and give the seat to the other side >

Sinema is the other side. She just can't quite call herself Republican yet because no one has caught her. >

Anyone who votes for that woman is a monster. >

Bye Felicia! >

Little Miss Analytics won’t even run when the numbers come in. She had no choice though, painted herself right into a corner. Was fabulous to watch. >

Fucking GOODBYE! >

Brought to you by Ruben Gallego’s rollout team.  I like him better than her…