NYT: Sinema's Defection Gives Democrats More Heartburn Over the 2024 Senate Map

[Celerity]

A potential mess in Arizona was an unwelcome surprise for Democrats while they were still savoring their victories in 2022.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/us/politics/sinema-democrats-senate-2024.html

https://archive.ph/dDSrF

Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia sounded intrigued by Senator Kyrsten Sinema’s decision to become an independent, though he said he had “no intention of doing anything right now.”

When Senator Kyrsten Sinema left the Democratic Party last week, she didn’t just momentarily drive up antacid sales on Capitol Hill. She also raised the pressure on three especially vulnerable Democratic senators who are up for re-election in 2024, and are defending seats in states that have turned a shade of deep crimson since they were first elected to Congress.

The 2024 map is daunting for Senate Democrats, and it will take all the political dexterity and luck they can muster to keep their 51-ish-seat majority — and then some. Twenty-three of the 33 seats up for grabs are held by Democrats or left-leaning independents. That list includes Montana, Ohio and West Virginia, where Donald Trump won in 2020 by 16, 8 and 29 percentage points.

But daunting is not the same thing as impossible. Faced with steep odds in the past, Democrats have managed to find local causes to champion — remember Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin’s crusade against almond milk? — as they looked for ways to differentiate themselves from the national party. And their incumbents have proved doubters wrong in the past. “From 30,000 feet, it looks brutal, but as you get closer to the ground, I feel more optimistic about it,” said Jim Kessler, vice president for policy at Third Way, a center-left think tank. “If it’s mainstream versus extreme, we have a great shot.”

For now, Democratic strategists are still poring over the results of the recent midterm elections, trying to gain a deeper understanding of what moved voters. One consensus viewpoint so far, at least among those I’ve spoken with: Democratic candidates earned just enough credit for trying to address inflation through moves like capping insulin prices to dull Republicans’ advantage on the economy. And they say that while abortion may not matter quite as much in the next election, the issue is not going away in 2024.

snip




related

The 2024 Dem seats that are in play or could be (some would take unlikely scenarios to put them in play, but I am being as expansive as possible):

the following 6 are not 'safe' seats

WV (especially if Justice runs, and Manchin may run for Governor if that happens)
MT (Tester is the only Dem who can win there, but MT is now so Red, love Tester, so hope he wins)
OH (Brown (close to my favourite Senator) is the only Dem who can win there, but OH is now so Red)
NV (especially if Sandoval runs)
AZ (could be all sorts of chaos due to Sinema, and if Ducey runs it will be even harder)
WI (most likely Dem win of these 6, Baldwin is a strong Senator, but WI just re-elected an open traitor and Russian stooge, so I hesitate to put this in the next category)


then we have the 4 substantially more likely Dem wins, but still not 100% locks, especially if non MAGAt Rethugs run

MI
MN
PA
VA


then we have 3 states where ONLY IF super popular Rethug Govs run, then there could be a remote chance of danger (VT is also dependent on Sanders retiring to make it not 100% a lock for us)

MD (only if Hogan runs)
MA (only if Baker runs)
VT (only if Sanders retires and only IF Phil Scott then runs)


then the least likely (scenario-wise) loss as there is no very popular Rethug Governor to potentially stir things up by running (like MD, MA, and VT have), and it is also dependent on a retirement to put it into play

ME (only if King retires is it in any sort of remote danger, which I so hope he does not)


and finally a wild card

NJ (Menendez is underwater and now is once again under another federal corruption investigation. IF he is indicted again and goes to trial again, and IF he still insists on running, we might have a problem, if he is cleared, we win this easily IMHO)


The Rethugs only have to defend 10 seats TOTAL, and all are in deep Red states, other than Florida (Scott) which is now becoming deep Red. I would not put much hope in flipping any of the 10 seats, maybe, maybe Scott, but that is a real stretch, despite the fact he is a RW monster bellend. Florida is a nightmare for us atm, and not just because both Rump and DeathSentence are there.

[Yavin4]

1. NY Times just loves their "Democrats in Disarray" stories.

It's an addiction.

[brooklynite]

10. "Despite Trump's Lobbying, McCarthy's Speaker Bid Remains Imperiled on the Right"

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/us/politics/trump-mccarthy-speaker-republicans-freedom-caucus.html

NY Times just loves their "Republicans in Disarray" stories. It's an addition.

Or maybe they just report on politics.

[Yavin4]

13. Don't you think that there's a difference between a contentious election that's

a few weeks away and multiple senate elections that are 2 years away?

[brooklynite]

14. O, not particularly

Sinema’s change of Party has increased the risk of holding a +1 majority.

[Fiendish Thingy]

2. 2024 was always going to be difficult for Dems to keep control of the senate

But instead of Sinema’s defection giving Dems “heartburn”, it should be seen as liberating.

Dems are now free to run their best candidate for the seat, rather than settling for an unpredictable, chaotic and obstructive “maverick”.

With Sinema now an Independent, 2024 presents the unique opportunity to ensure the end of her Senate career, regardless of the risk of losing the seat.

I look forward to a Gallego-Sinema-Biggs race…

I hope she comes in 4th place, after the libertarian candidate.

[W_HAMILTON]

3. That's a very much glass-half-empty view of things.

Honestly, more of a "one or two swigs and the glass is as dry as the desert" sort of view of things.

I know it will be a challenge, but if you are going to put forth hypotheticals and worst-case scenarios for just about every single Senate seat we have up for reelection, you should be doing the same for Republicans as well. Odds are we won't win many of those deep red Senate seats, but you never know, especially if Trump runs for their presidential nomination and wins it, since we learned from this past midterm that he and his acolytes are hated by a sizable, but minority, of Republican voters.

Case in point, the Republican incumbent in Indiana is retiring, and when incumbents retire, races usually tighten. We had a Democratic Senator in that same seat before him. Now, are we likely to win there? Probably not. But are Republicans -- even popular ones -- likely to win Senate races in Massachusetts, Vermont, etc.? No, probably not. But, again, if you are going to bring up worst-case scenario for Democrats, it's only fair to bring up worst-case scenario for Republicans.

[Celerity]

5. I discussed the Rethugs, and as for Indiana, the odds of us winning that ruby red state are far less

than our chances in any of the Dem incumbent races, even WV (as long as Manchins runs, if no Manchin, kiss WV good-bye, IF no Manchin, then I will agree that we have a better shot at IN than WV, but that will be the only state I will say that for), OH (we have a decent because of Brown), and MT (we have a decent because of Tester).

In 2018, Donnelly was a moderate incumbent who lost despite a massive Blue Wave and a relatively weak opponent. He won in 2012 because Mourdock was considered a RWNJ (for his 'even a rape pregnancy is God intended' batshittery) by enough Rethugs to give him the win. Mourdock would likely be considered a normal Rethug now in that state by the IN Rethug voters. Eric Holcomb, the current Rethug Governor, who won by almost 25 points in 2020, has said he is likely to run. I simply do not think he have any realistic shot at flipping IN, which went for Trump by 19 and 16 points in 2016 and 2020.

I only listed 6 Dem seats as being in significant danger, 5 if you slide Baldwin into the next category of substantially more likely holds (MI, VA, MN, PA).

I simply listed out every other scenario (after the first 10 states listed) that could put normally safe seats into play. It was only 5 more, and I stressed they all involved a lot of moving parts to put them into play, and that even then it was very unlikely we would lose.

I do not see those type of possible moving parts in those deep Red states, and I did mention Scott as being a possible pick-off, although I am not convinced to any great degree that we have a good chance, as FL is becoming deep Red itself.

[W_HAMILTON]

8. Odds are, especially if Trump wins the nomination, we will be seeing a lot of...

...RWNJs as Senate candidates. That's why I said, if you are gonna put forth the most negative situations for us, you should also realize that there are similar worst-case scenario situations for Republicans as well. Maybe none are likely, but it's also highly unlikely we lose seats in Massachusetts, Vermont, etc.

[Celerity]

9. 3 of the 5 other states (MA, MD, VT) all depended on (to get to even a remote chance) on popular

REthugs Governors running (Baker, Hogan, and Scott) and VT would also require Sanders to retire). The 4th state would require King to retire and it is even more unlikely to flip because there is no popular Rethug Gov to run.

The last one (NJ) of the other 5 would require Menendez to be involved in another federal trial (as stated before he is under another federal investigation) and for him to still run despite that. Again, remote.

In terms of the other 9 Rethugs deep deep state states (I already said that Scott would be the most vulnerable of the 10 total they have to defend) I can think of no (at the present, something could pop up out of the blue) similar circumstances like those 5 Dem defends that would open up at least similar odds IF any or all of the 5 worst case scenarios occured for us. A Baker (extremely high approval ratings) v Warren MA race, for example, would be tighter than a race in the 9 deep red states, and probably (I can extend to maybe, if that makes you feel I am being more 'fair') more so than a Scott FL race.

To sum it up, if King doesn't retire, nor does Sanders, if Menendez is not involved in a federal trial, and if none of the 3 popular Rethug Govs chose to run, all 5 of those Dem defends go instantly into 100% lock mode for us.

[frogmarch]

4. At first glance, I read "defecation"

instead of "defection," but hey, that works too.

defecation:
the discharge of feces from the body.

[bobnicewander]

6. Texts With 34 Members Of Congress

Developments from investigations into the following could change the balance of membership in Congress before the 024 elections.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/feature/mark-meadows-exchanged-texts-with-34-members-of-congress-about-plans-to-overturn-the-2020-election

Texts With 34 Members Of Congress About Plans To Overturn The 2020 Election

[Celerity]

7. How would they be removed? The votes are simply not there for expulsion.

Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."

[bobnicewander]

11. other high Crimes and Misdemeanors

Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

'Other high Crimes and Misdemeanors' may be determined through ongoing and/or yet to come investigations of congressional members.

The possibility of some removals from office exits.

[Celerity]

12. see post 7, there is no way we have 2/3rds of either the House or the Senate to remove members

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217462906#post7