Friday, August 11, 2017

Schumer Wants The Worst Democrat In The House-- Literally, The Worst-- To Run For The Senate


Nevada's Dean Heller is the most vulnerable Republican senator up for reelection in 2018. The Democratic Party bosses-- Schumer and Reid-- picked the absolute worst opponent for him, conservative idiot Jacky Rosen. Could they out-do themselves in Arizona? Could they find someone worse than Rosen? Never underestimate the power of the DC Democratic Establishment to do everything wrong. In 2016, the table was uniquely set by fate for the Democrats to take back the Senate. Instead, Schumer, Reid and Tester handpicked the worst array of candidates imaginable and lost and lost and lost and lost. Patrick Murphy in Florida. Patty Judge in Iowa. Ted Strickland in Ohio. Katie McGinty in Pennsylvania. Ann Kirkpatrick in Arizona. All terrible candidates rammed down the throats of primary voters by the DC bosses running in must-win races. And each lost and left the Republicans in charge of the Senate.

2018 has a table set for the GOP, not the Democrats. Democrats have 9 vulnerable incumbents to defend in states Trump won: Bill Nelson (FL), Joe Donnelly (IN), Debbie Stabenow (MI), Claire McCaskill (MO), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Sherrod Brown (OH), Bob Casey (PA), Joe Manchin (WV) and Tammy Baldwin (WI). Blue America is helping to defend the good ones up for reelection here, by the way. Meanwhile there are only 3 GOP seats even remotely possible for red-to-blue flips: Nevada, Texas and Arizona.

Yes, Arizona again. Ann Kirkpatrick was bad enough-- a pointless anti-inspiring conservative loser who couldn't even hold her own House seat. So Schumer-- from Brooklyn-- decided she should run statewide last year. It wasn't close. McCain crushed her 1,089,324 (53.4%) to 839,542 (41.1%). Arizona elections are won (and lost) in Maricopa County. She couldn't even creep up to 40% there. And Sinema is even worse than Kirkpatrick-- and worse than Patrick Murphy, Patty Judge, Ted Strickland and Katie McGinty.

Let's start with her ProgressivePunch scores. Of course they rate her an "F." Her lifetime crucial vote score is 35.28. And this session her score is a breathtaking 19.44. That's not just the worst among the Democrats. She has a worse score than 7 Republicans. Justin Amash (R-MI) has a 47.22. Walter Jones (R-NC) has a 32.35. What about her 538 Trumpanzee adhesion score? 46.2%-- the second most pro-Trump voting score of any Democrat (after Henry Cuiellar of Texas, who hasn't been an actual Democrat in over a decade).

I've known Sinema for over a decade. I sat on a non-profit board with her for a couple of years before she ran for Congress. I noticed that she was always about Kyrsyen Sinema, never-- not for one second-- about the people she wanted to "represent." Her miserable, ugly, ugly political career started on the fringes of the whackadoodle anarchist movement, then she moved on to socialism, then to the Green Party, eventually finding the Democratic Party before settling comfortably into her true environment as the most disgusting right-wing and corrupt Blue Dog in all of Congress.

Corrupt? Well of course. She reeks of corruption and should be in prison, not running for the Senate. Sinema is all about taking bribes. It's what she lives for. She serves (herself) on the House Financial Services committee, where she votes with the Republicans-- and Wall Street-- against the interests of Arizona working families. Among current members of the House, only 11 took over a million dollars last year from the Financial Sector. At the top of the heap were Speaker Paul Ryan. GOP Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and corrupt Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee Ed Royce (CA), Patrick McHenry (NC), Jeb Hensarling (TX), Steve Stivers (OH) and Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO). These are the right-wing warriors tasked by the banksters with repealing the consumer financial protections instituted after the Great Recession. There are just two Democrats on that list, both notorious for having "For Sale" signs on their asses: New Dem Joe Crowley ($1,064,673) and, of course, Kyrsten Sinema ($1,003,940). Leave it to Schumer to select the most Wall Street-friendly/anti-consumer Democrat in the House to run for the Senate!

This morning, the CBS News affiliate in Phoenix, KPNX, broke the story from a local perspective-- and some of the Beltway journalist geniuses started kvelling.
Democratic Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema of Phoenix is planning a 2018 run for the U.S. Senate seat held by first-term Mesa Republican Jeff Flake, according to sources familiar with Sinema's plans.

At the same time, Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton, another Democrat who's been undecided about his political future, is telling supporters he's preparing to run for Sinema's vacant seat next fall, according to sources familiar with Stanton's calls.

Both moves would be long-awaited next steps by two of the leading Democratic officeholders in Arizona.

If they go ahead, formal announcements of their plans could come in the next few weeks.

Sinema, a three-term congresswoman who's nursed a reputation as an independent, was the subject of "will she or won't she" speculation regarding a run for the Senate in 2016, when Sen. John McCain was up for re-election, and again this year.

Sinema has locked down her swing district and proved to be a prolific fund-raiser, with $3.2 million in cash on hand as of June 30, a solid base for a Senate run in Arizona.

Sinema could not be reached for comment.

She told another supporter via email Thursday night that she was on a safari in South Africa with intermittent internet service.

Sinema would face civil rights attorney and political newcomer Deedra Abboud in the Democratic primary.

Flake is viewed as one of the two most vulnerable Republican senators in 2018.

Recent polling shows Flake with high disapproval ratings among Arizona voters, driven down in part by his recent votes for the Obamacare repeal.

In a book released last week, Flake torched President Donald Trump as "unpredictable" and "volatile," questioning why fellow Republicans remain loyal to him. Flake was Trump's staunchest Republican critic on Capitol Hill during the presidential campaign.

Trump hasn't formally endorsed a Flake opponent, but in recent days Trump allies have thrown their financial and organizational support behind Kelli Ward, a former state legislator who lost to McCain in the 2016 Republican primary.
KPNX is referring to Long Island predatory billionaires, the Mercers, who gave a Ward-connected SuperPAC $300,000 this week. Sinema has amassed $3.2 million in her warchest (slightly more than Flake, who will have to spend most of his money in the primary). She's the worst Democrat in the House. In the unlikely event she wins the Arizona Senate seat, she would immediately be the worst Democrat in the Senate. This is what Schumer and his Wall Street allies spend their days dreaming about.

Labels: , , , , ,


At 6:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Proof that the brand might change and the jingoism may change, but the democraps are forever the corrupt worthless pieces of shit they've been since the '80s.

Voters will either bury that shit party or they will end up losing the privilege to vote entirely when the orange utang or jesus h. pence ends up suspending the constitution permanently.

Lemme see... which war would be their excuse? NK? Iran? Venezuela? ISIS? all of the above?

At 7:02 PM, Blogger Cujo359 said...

Is there any amount of failure that will move the Democrats to change their leadership in Congress? They had huge majorities in 2008, and now they run neither house nor the White House. They failed to pick up the Senate last year, even though doing so ought to have been within their reach. Yet except for Reid, who retired, the people in charge have been in charge throughout, and Schumer's clearly not an improvement. Don't the caucus members ever get tired of being irrelevant?

I have my own theories about why they're OK with this, but I'm curious what other readers think. If I were a Democratic partisan I'd be livid about this state of affairs.

At 6:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cujo, if you are still a D partisan, it says more about you than them.

They cannot want majorities. When they had them, and a clear mandate, in 2008, they were forced to pick between the electoral mandate and the demands of their corporate/billionaire donors. The clear choice was donors (banking, torture, war, prisons, trade...) though they DID attempt to perform a charade of serving the mandate ONLY with ACA. Any objective perusal of ACA showed it to be an insurance bailout thinly disguised. Nothing to contain costs and all manner of poison pills for insurance to abandon so-called "markets" at their whim.

In 2018 they cannot have majorities or they'll have to act on the 115-cosponsored MFA. And "act" will be correct since insurance and phrma will spend billions to thwart it and the democraps will get out their rakes for that windfall -- and will ratfuck their mandate again.

The Ds know that could be the last straw for an electorate with their heads up their asses for 35 years and counting. But scummer, Pelosi et al won't give a flying fuck because they'll have their billions plus a lifetime of corporate gratitude to come.

At 5:51 PM, Blogger Dan Boyd said...

On the list of vulnerable Senate Democrats, the only one worth supporting is Sherrod Brown. Stabenow and Baldwin are neo-liberal jellyfish, and the rest are addition by subtraction.

Howie, if you are going to litmus test candidates regarding choice and LBGTQ matters, please litmus test them regarding income inequality as well.


Post a Comment

<< Home