Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, a former member of the Democratic Party, altered the political landscape on Friday. Despite continuing to caucus with Democrats in the Senate, the Democratic caucus now consists of 48 Democrats and three independents, instead of the initial 49 Democrats and two.
This shift introduces complexities for both Democrats and Sinema moving forward. With Sinema's interests no longer strictly aligned with those of the Democratic Party in the upcoming Congress, the party faces potential challenges. Additionally, the already intricate 2024 Senate map for Democrats has become even more convoluted as a result of Sinema's decision.
Throughout her tenure in Congress, Sinema has been a point of contention for Democrats. Over the past two years, Democratic legislation and nominations often relied on Sinema's support to pass, given the party's slim majority in the Senate. In a chamber of 100 seats, numerous bills and nominations were never put to a vote without the backing of Sinema and Senator Joe Manchin.
From her first term in Congress in 2013 until 2020, Sinema's voting record deviated from that of her Democratic colleagues more frequently than almost any other member of Congress. She aligned with her party about 69% of the time on votes where at least half of the Democrats voted differently than half of Republicans. The average Democrat voted with their party approximately 90% of the time on these votes. It's plausible that Sinema's adherence to the party may decrease now that she is an independent.
One notable precedent for this scenario is former Senator Joe Lieberman, who won reelection as a third-party candidate in 2006 following his loss in the Democratic primary to a more liberal challenger, current moderate Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont. The behavior of a Senate independent relative to the average Democrat can vary significantly.
Independent Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema has seen a decrease of 10 points in voting with her former Democratic party since her shift in political affiliation. This trend mirrors that of West Virginia's Joe Manchin, the most conservative member of the Democratic caucus. Given this shift in Sinema's voting pattern, she may lean further towards conservatism.
The altered incentive structure for Sinema is significant as she prepares for a 2024 reelection campaign. No longer bound by the requirements of a Democratic primary, Sinema now faces the challenge of crafting a coalition that includes Democrats, independents, and Republicans. Such an alliance would be more challenging to establish if perceived as too liberal.
The move towards independence was primarily driven by the difficulty Sinema would have faced in winning a Democratic primary. In a CES poll conducted in autumn 2022, her approval rating among Arizona Democrats stood at just 25%. Several Democratic representatives, such as Ruben Gallego and Greg Stanton, had already expressed interest in challenging Sinema in a primary election. The question now arises whether some of these Democrats will reconsider their plans due to Sinema's new political status.
The strategy is intriguing given historical precedents. Typically, Democratic parties do not field candidates against independent senators like Bernie Sanders in Vermont or Angus King in Maine. The lack of success for challengers in these cases suggests that Sinema's approach might not yield immediate results. However, it's crucial to note that the electoral mathematics in these situations are significantly different. In Arizona, a liberal challenger could potentially split the Democratic vote, allowing a Republican candidate to win in a purple state.
Sinema's decision to become an independent after the primary process is reminiscent of Joe Lieberman's third-party candidacy, though the circumstances are distinct. Lieberman's shift occurred post-primary elections, and his situation did not attract a left-wing Democratic challenger due to his moderate political stance.
In a turn of events, Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema, a moderate Democrat from a non-deeply blue or red state, has announced her intention to register as an independent. This decision comes amidst low approval ratings and mounting challenges within her party.
Sinema's move echoes the strategy adopted by Connecticut's Joe Lieberman, an ardent supporter of the Iraq War, who was chosen by Republicans in a deeply Democratic state due to the lack of a prominent challenger. However, unlike Lieberman, Sinema's popularity is questionable.
According to a recent CES poll, Sinema's approval rating stands at 25%, significantly below her disapproval rating among Democrats, independents, and Republicans in Arizona. While other polling results are less severe, they collectively paint a picture of Sinema being more unpopular than popular.
This shift in party affiliation could potentially discourage potential challengers from both sides, given her current standing. Moreover, it raises concerns for the Democratic Party, as it could complicate electoral math not only in Arizona but also nationally. Having two individuals who would likely caucus with the Democratic Party could make it more challenging for the Democrats to secure a win.
One potential worrisome precedent for Democrats in a purple state is the 2010 Florida Senate race. Then Republican Governor Charlie Crist, after facing defeat in a Republican primary, decided to run as an independent. Although he announced his intention to caucus with the Democratic Party, his independent status may have contributed to the eventual victory of the more conservative candidate, Marco Rubio.
The implications of Sinema's decision remain unclear at this stage, but it is certain that it adds a layer of complexity to Arizona's political landscape and potentially national politics as well.
In the summary, Florida Senator Marco Rubio secured a victory in 2010's Senate election due to a divided Democratic vote with Representative Kendrick Meek. Historically, this has not always been a determinant of electoral success for the Republican candidate, as demonstrated by Mike Gravel's win in the 1968 Alaska Senate race, despite Richard Nixon's victory in the state.
Moving forward to 2024, Arizona Republicans could nominate an extreme candidate who may struggle to secure a win, given their party's poor performance in major statewide races in 2022. Additionally, there is a possibility that Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema could secure victory similar to Harry Byrd in the 1970 Virginia Senate election, where both parties nominated candidates. However, Sinema's independent registration and potential lack of party backing could lead to her downfall, as experienced by then-Senator Ernest Gruening in 1968 and Sen. Jacob Javits in the 1980 New York Senate race.
Despite these uncertainties, Democrats face a challenging path in the 2024 Senate elections, with 23 of the 34 senators up for reelection caucusing with the Democratic party. Seven of these represent states won by former President Donald Trump at least once, including Arizona following Sinema's break from the Democratic party. Consequently, the road to maintaining a Senate majority becomes more complex for the Democrats. If they win the presidency and have a vice president who can break ties in the Senate, they can afford to lose zero to one Senate seats while retaining control of the chamber.
Source: Read Original Article