Kyrsten Sinema's Support Plummets After $15/h Downvote

[WhoIsNumberNone]

OK, she looks hot in those kinky boots of hers, and she made Mike Pence uncomfortable when she brought her girlfriend to her swearing in, but it's been all downhill from there. Kyrsten Sinema is a prime example of people just voting for the (D) without really considering the person whose name it's next to.

[hlthe2b]

1. Childish stunts in opposition to a living wage, preceded by bringing cake...

I guess such Marie Antoinette moments only go over well with Republicans, Senator...

[NurseJackie]

2. Despite the unnecessary "theatrics" it was the correct vote.

The MW didn't belong in a reconciliation bill. Trying to do so would have resulted in an overall delay of the rest of the other aspects.

[NoRethugFriends]

3. Her vote "yes" would not have delayed anything

She's just a jerk

[NurseJackie]

6. Correct, because her "one vote" wouldn't have made a difference.

It was still the correct vote to make.

[vsrazdem]

10. Apparently not to the voters of AZ, and it wasn't so much about the actual vote

as t was the way she did it. Many AZ voters took he actions as an insult to John McCain.

[NurseJackie]

11. Her cutsie-pootsie theatrics were a mistake. The vote was correct.

[vsrazdem]

12. So IYO the majority of our party got their vote wrong. I disagree.

[NurseJackie]

13. Yes. It went against the rules of what's allowed in reconciliation bills.

So IYO the majority of our party got their vote wrong.

Yes. It went against the rules of what's allowed in reconciliation bills.

I disagree.

Okay.

[LenaBaby61]

27. "Many AZ voters took he actions as an insult to John McCain."

I've retired friends living in and around the Kingman and Flagstaff area who are retired military/retired police officers--both Dems and Old-Style Republican--who voted for Sinema, and ALL of them that I speak to on the regular were pissed off at what they called her "school-girl antics" one said, and one other friend flat out said, direct quote, that "She looked like a fucking fool standing up there dressed like a Raggedy Ann Doll." He's 89, an Eisenhower Republican who served in the Korean and Vietnam wars, is still sharp as a tack mentally, and he has NO filter for these pols now-a-days, and always tells me what he wished he could to TO tRump because "I served this country, retired with honors," and he gives not one damn any longer, and he's pretty conservative. I agree with him about Sinema. She looked like a cross between Rainbow Brite (A doll I bought my 39 year old nice for Christmas in the early-to mid 1980's) and a Raggedy Ann Doll standing there, as her little stunt didn't go down well with many in the middle-aged range group and much older sets there in Arizona that I speak to on the regular, who are very active in politics.

[hlthe2b]

4. She has STATED she is in opposition to increasing the minimum wage. There was NO honor in this vote

despite attempts to hide behind it as a mere "procedural" vote. Please don't be bamboozled by her attempts to explain-- after-the-fact-- when her little stunt so badly backfired.

[NurseJackie]

5. Regardless of her reasons, and her stunt... it was the correct vote.

That hasn't changed.

[hlthe2b]

7. You believe her little stunt and the cake to show her contempt for those suffering was the "correct"

vote and have no issue with her, apparently. I am saddened to see you defend such abysmal behavior by one of ours. I think of those suffering and am deeply offended.

[NurseJackie]

9. LOL! You know perfectly well that I never said such a thing. I said the VOTE was correct...

... nothing more. Did you miss it? Please show me where I said anything otherwise. Please show me where I "defended her abysmal behavior". --- Go ahead. I'll wait.

Star Member hlthe2b (84,754 posts)
7. You believe her little stunt and the cake to show her contempt for those suffering was the "correct"

vote and have no issue with her, apparently. I am saddened to see you defend such abysmal behavior by one of ours. I think of those suffering and am deeply offended.

[hlthe2b]

14. You ignore the fact that she had come out against the minimum wage prior and referred to her stunt

as merely a "procedural" vote--as though it reflected some honorable attempt on her part. That her stunt was as contemptuous of her constituents that overwhelmingly support the minimum wage (even R's) and NOT merely a procedural vote is what is causing her the deserved backlash. That is clear white-washing in defense of her actions as far as I'm concerned.

I'd no more defend that kind of desperate attention-grabbing, contemptuous stunt in one of ours than I'd defend the two women in Congress-- on the other side-- who make a habit of deplorable antics.

[NurseJackie]

18. I did no such thing. I also never characterized it as being "honorable". That's your imagination...

... so don't try to pin that shit on me. I said it was the correct vote. I also indicated that the cutesy theatrics were unnecessary.

I've been very clear from the beginning. I said what I meant and I meant what I said. Any efforts that anyone makes to lie about me and attribute words to me that were never spoken (or written) is beneath contempt. (Something about a "straw man" or "scarecrow" applies here.)

You ignore the fact that she had come out against the minimum wage

That's a interesting way to characterize it. I do not believe she's "against the minimum wage".

In a statement defending her vote Friday, Sinema pointed out that she backed minimum wage increases in her state in 2006 and 2016 but added, “The Senate should hold an open debate and amendment process on raising the minimum wage, separate from the COVID-focused reconciliation bill.”

“I understand what it is like to face tough choices while working to meet your family’s most basic needs. I also know the difference better wages can make,” she added. “I will keep working with colleagues in both parties to ensure Americans can access good-paying jobs, quality education, and skills training to build more economically secure lives for themselves and their families.”

[hlthe2b]

19. You stated it was "the correct vote," said nothing in critique of her behavior so.. yeah, white-wash

The media has stated she opposes the minimum wage before this vote. Now she has felt the backlash and has endeavored to change that narrative to suggest she has "always supported minimum wage increase" (hint, she has not, depending on the audience). She is playing both sides and you are enabling her to do so.

She may grow up or at least learn to be sufficiently pragmatic to actually try to support the occasional critical issue for her voters. But, I'd not blame a single constituent for not trusting her now.

[NurseJackie]

22. That's simply not true, and you know it.

You stated it was "the correct vote,"...

That's true. She made the correct vote.

...said nothing in critique of her behavior so.. yeah, white-wash

That's simply not true, and you know it!

In fact, I noted the following:

-- unnecessary "theatrics"
-- Her cutsie-pootsie theatrics were a mistake.
-- her stunt
-- the cutesy theatrics were unnecessary

I guess you overlooked that part, huh? It's just easier to ignore what I actually said because that makes it easier to accuse me of things that are untrue.

Because you never bothered to show me where I had said the things you accused me of saying, I decided it would probably be best for me to go ahead and provide direct links to the things I'm being accused of ignoring.

She is playing both sides and you are enabling her to do so.

No I'm not. I do not make her decisions for her. She doesn't seek my advice. This is yet another ridiculous attack on me. I haven't attacked you, why would anyone think it's okay to attack me.

[hlthe2b]

23. Omission matters too. (and YOU know it)

If she were truly in support of a minimum wage increase and had only opposed the procedural aspect, she would not have engaged in such a childish stunt, including bringing symbolic cake to underscore her total disregard for those badly needing that minimum age. You know that.

[NurseJackie]

24. Yet another false attack on me.

Omission matters too. (and YOU know it)

Yet another false attack on me. You know perfectly well that I've omitted nothing (see links above).

You've accused me of saying things that I never said. You've accused me of NOT saying things (or "omitting" saying things) which I actually did.

What good purpose does it serve? Why try to smear and denigrate me with attacks and lies? I haven't done anything like that to you. Why do you think it's okay do do that to me?

[hlthe2b]

25. Quite the opposite and you know it.

Some of us believe in holding our own to account and do not defend indefensible behavior. Supporting Dems does not mean turning a blind eye. But disagreeing with you is not an attack. That you misconstrue that as such is going to cause you considerable hardburn.

[NurseJackie]

26. No... you made false statements ABOUT me. That's more than "disagreeing" with me.

But disagreeing with you is not an attack.

No... you made false statements ABOUT me. That's more than "disagreeing" with me. When someone accuses me of saying things I did not say, that's an attack. When someone accuses me of NOT saying things (which I clearly and demonstrably did say) then that's an attack too.

That you misconstrue that as such is going to cause you considerable hardburn.

I have no idea what hardburn is. But I can assure you that I've "misconstrued" nothing. It's all right there for anyone to read.

[hlthe2b]

28. I'm not taking your bait.

But go on if it makes you feel justified in defending the indefensible, feel free to go on and on and on.

Childish behavior that hurts our side deserves to be called out and NOT DEFENDED.

[NurseJackie]

29. I did not defend her behavior. And... her vote was correct.

Childish behavior that hurts our side deserves to be called out and NOT DEFENDED.

I did not defend her behavior. Again, show me where I "defended her behavior". --- I'll wait. (Tick tock!)

But go on if it makes you feel justified in defending the indefensible,

Her vote was correct. There are no two ways about it. The rules are the rules. She was voting FOR following the rules, not on the merits of the amendment.

I'm not taking your bait.

Lulz!

[hlthe2b]

30. You just did.

[NurseJackie]

32. That's completely false. I did not. I have not "defended her behavior".

You just did.

That's completely false. I did not. I have not "defended her behavior". In fact, I called it out at least four times.

-- 1. unnecessary "theatrics"
-- 2. Her cutsie-pootsie theatrics were a mistake.
-- 3. her stunt
-- 4. the cutesy theatrics were unnecessary

Her vote against going against the rules and including the amendment as part of the reconciliation bill was absolutely correct.

The vote itself was correct. She did the RIGHT thing. I wouldn't have voted to include it either. Why put the entire bill at risk of failing? That type of grandstanding and showboating was doomed to failure.

And if the bill had "passed" with the MW amendment included, it would actually delay the implementation of the entire bill (while people suffered) to allow the legal challenges to move forward with regard to whether it was appropriate to include it in the first place. It's unclear if the courts would have allowed that part to be stripped out without nullifying the entire bill, or if it would have to be sent back to square one. --- Either way, the delays would be devastating and risks totally unnecessary.

Besides, everyone knows that the amendment was always going to fail anyway. Try again later.

[hlthe2b]

35. Thank you for clarifying...

BTW, I did not engage on your thread/poll yesterday because I had to go to work, but I believe you actually were attacked there by a few posters who conflated what you were trying to discuss with something far more malign thereby causing the thread to go off the rails.

[Budi]

47. #DontTakeTheBait

[marble falls]

15. That is so on the money. A living wage is not an emergency appropriation!

[hlthe2b]

16. It isn't the procedural vote that is causing the backlash and you should not fall in that trap

of suggesting that is what is at play. She could have voted no, explained it, and that would have been that, EXCEPT she'd already been reported to have said she did not support the minimum wage. That she was on record and THEN she pulled her little stunt is what is causing her the most deserved criticism. To suggest otherwise is to be very disingenuous. No one gives a flying whit about a procedural vote alone.

Despite another poster implying DUers are merely too uninformed to know about the decision delivered by the Senate Parliamentarian's finding of the technical inclusion of the provision in the larger package under reconciliation, that is not what is causing the backlash. It IS what Senator Sinema is HIDING behind, however, despite her prior statements and her rude, condescending, and incredibly disrespectful stunt.

I hope for her sake she goes back to her district, talks to her constituents, and reformulates her positions, in keeping with those she represents. I hope even more that she GROWS UP!

[marble falls]

20. Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely dismayed with Sinema. But we need to get off ...

... 'minimum wage' and replace it with 'living wage'.

I agree with you, by her stunts Sinema showed she has no concern for the working poor; but I agree with Nurse Judy who points out while she does not care for Sinema, she does agree with Sinema's alleged reason for down voting: "Minimum wage" is an issue that needs to be front-doored.

My concern is slipping it into an emergency legislation is the possibility that it begins to look like an emergency program that can be undone when the emergency is over.


"Minimum wage" always implied the worker got it whether he deserved it or not, without considering whether it was enough or not, period.

Living wage, clears the minimum wage false assumptions. A living wage requirement can be documented as to what it's supposed to be.

[LiberalLovinLug]

33. Technically, you and NJ may be correct. But politics is not a techy job.

Many times optics play just as crucial a role as all the hard work behind the scenes.

I'll bet many Arizonians did not even know about "procedual" and what is a "reconciliation bill" and what is or what is not allowed at what time or what kind of bill. Or even can go along with her logic of...this is not the right way to do it, even if she is right about that.

All the majority of them know is that they want a raise in the minimum wage. And after more than one Democratic candidate pushed for an increase, and they are the only party that folks could look to that would do that, all they saw was a privileged woman, who was already on record of opposing the min. wage increase, in childish clothing dance up with a piece of cake and mockingly vote NO on an a minimum wage increase for THEM!

And the but but but but it was "procedural".... "it didn't belong in the bill".... means absolutely nothing to them. And will make more than one say...well if even Democrats won't help me, why should I vote at all?

[marble falls]

36. I think most Democrats wouldn't toss the baby out with the bath water.

[LiberalLovinLug]

39. I could probably use that analogy as well.

optics

[George II]

43. Precisely. Of course the $15 minimum wage is important and necessary, but it would be....

...inappropriate (a play on words?) in that appropriation bill.

I don't understand why those Senators (and Representatives in the House) who advocate for it don't just introduce the bill on it's own and walk it through the process to get it passed.

Is it because it's too much work, too complicated, it won't pass? No matter what, it should be introduced on it's own and get all legislators on record with respect to their position.

[George II]

42. Yes. Unfortunately some people are misunderstanding or misrepresenting what the vote was....

....for or against. The vote was NOT for or against the $15 minimum wage itself (regardless of her position on the issue), it was for or against inclusion in the reconciliation bill. It was an amendment to that bill. She was voting against improperly including it the reconciliation bill. Her position, and obviously that of other Democrats, was that it didn't belong in that bill. The amendment failed 58-42.

Now, had that been included in the reconciliation bill the WHOLE $1.9T bill would have failed. That would have meant that the 100 million people would not have received their $1400/2800 checks, unemployment benefits wouldn't have been extended, child benefits wouldn't be paid, etc., etc., etc.

The $15 minimum wage deserved it's own bill, not some gimmick to sneak it into a spending bill.

[LittleGirl]

8. As an AZ voter living abroad

I am ready to replace her. McSally was her opponent and we are happy that Mark Kelly replaced her but Sinema needs to knock it off. I think I’ll write her this week and find out why she did that.

[BradAllison]

17. She's a political weathervane

She's gone from green party lefty to fiscal libertarian in a dozen years. People who change their beliefs that quickly should never be trusted.

[NoRethugFriends]

21. She's a twerp

[LenaBaby61]

31. "I am ready to replace her."

So are all of my senior-citizen friends of differing political stripes living in the Kingman, Flagstaff and surrounding areas there in Arizona. Many of them are Old-Style Eisenhower Republicans/Kennedy Dems, and all of them told me that hey held their noses and voted for Sinema, because they didn't want to vote for McSally (That dishonorable clown, as one Korean War Vet described her). Also like you, they are happy with their choice of Mark Kelly as one of Arizona's Senators.

Now, whether she goes out the next time around, we'll see 🤔

[NurseJackie]

34. Incumbents typically have an advantage over Republican challengers.

Who are the strong Democrats who could defeat her in a primary and also defeat a Republican challenger. Also, incumbents who have been unsuccessfully primaried (and who have been bloodied, kneecapped, dragged through the dirt) are easier for Republicans to defeat.

Perhaps the best solution would be to leave her in place for now but to make her irrelevant by working our asses off to get ADDITIONAL DEMOCRATIC SENATE SEATS.

I like that idea better.

[marble falls]

37. That seems clear to me, too.

[LenaBaby61]

38. Kyrsten Sinema .....

"Perhaps the best solution would be to leave her in place for now but to make her irrelevant by working our asses off to get ADDITIONAL DEMOCRATIC SENATE SEATS.

I like that idea better."

[NurseJackie]

40. Stealing this gif...

... for later. That's fantastic.

[LenaBaby61]

41. Stealing this gif...

[LittleGirl]

45. Good to hear they are on board too eom

[George II]

44. Replace her with whom? Are there any Democrats in Arizona that are moderate enough to win?

[LittleGirl]

46. Many of AZ residents came from CA

And turned AZ blue in 2020. I’ll take it.

[kimbutgar]

48. And she doesn't realize that the repuke will throw the kitchen sink at her when she runs

For re election because she has a D by her name. By voting for the we the people act her job might be saved. I wish someone would set her down and enlighten her.