AZ-SEN Class 1: Kelli or not-Kelli?

[Webnicz]

Sinema would lead the entire GOP delegation in a statewide race, they all pretty much suck and don't have the name rec Sinema does bc they don't campaign hard in elections bc PHX area republicans are in districts with high R PVI's so they choose not to campaign, Cinema does boosting her name rec in the valley by a lot.the GOP should look at local office holders, they should look for a young, energetic neocon establishment type. Those types do well in Arizona(not the primary tho but in the general). Im watching J.D. Mesnard, Speaker of the State house.

For the people saying Arizona is too ted to vote for a Democrat, I suggest you check out the countywide races under the Maricopa County Clerk/Recorder's office.

this

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

IIRC, in 2002 it was with a liberal third-party candidate making Napolitano’s win even more impressive.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

Clinton got 46% (rounded) in 2016....

[Nyvin]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

This is cherry picking data.   It completely ignores the GOP's margin in Arizona dropped from 9.03% for Romney in 2012 to 3.57% for Trump in 2016.  

Third Party candidates are the main reason the Dem's total percentage didn't go up much in 2016, not the GOP.

[Young Conservative]

[/quote]

 

Third Party candidates are the main reason the Dem's total percentage didn't go up much in 2016, not the GOP.
[/quote]
Third parties hurt Trump's margin in Arizona more than Clinton's.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

This is cherry picking data.   It completely ignores the GOP's margin in Arizona dropped from 9.03% for Romney in 2012 to 3.57% for Trump in 2016.  

Third Party candidates are the main reason the Dem's total percentage didn't go up much in 2016, not the GOP.

Oh really, this ~45% ceiling was discussed, during the 2016 election.

Evan McMullin and Gary Johnson combined got almost 5% of the vote. 4.75 to be exact. Four years prior, Johnson got just 1% or so.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

Clinton got 46% (rounded) in 2016....

When you insert ~ before a number, it means "about".

Carmona got 46% against Flake as well.

[Nyvin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Third parties hurt Trump's margin in Arizona more than Clinton's.
[/quote]

Clinton gained 135,935 votes over Obama from 2012 to 2016

Trump gained 18,747 votes over Romney from 2012 to 2016

What I mean is that without the increase in third party votes, the total percentage between the two main parties would've gone up for the Democrats and down for the Republicans.   The other poster was trying to frame it like the Democrats aren't gaining any ground on Republicans, that's clearly not the case.

The debate of who loses more votes from third parties always ends up being a dark rabbit hole of topics, so not going there.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

Clinton got 46% (rounded) in 2016....

When you insert ~ before a number, it means "about".

Carmona got 46% against Flake as well.

I was referring to this part:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MT Treasurer]

Republicans could very well hold this seat in 2018 (narrowly, though), but they'll almost certainly lose it in 2024. The Class III seat is going to be incredibly tough to defend as well, even if a Democrat wins in 2022. You'll probably see a similar story in GA with Isakson's seat, I believe AZ/GA are more likely to flip than WI/PA in 2022.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just like Flake, whose lack of a competitive race in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (old lines) during the 2000's, proved to be a hindrance in the 2012 general election.


I never said Democrats cannot win in AZ. I said that Democrats have struggled statewide and have not gotten above ~45% or so in any race for President or Senate in the past 20 years. Even in 2016, with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate, and a massive pro-Democratic Trend in AZ-07 (urban hispanics and young voters), and the defection of close to 8% of the traditional vote to third party candidates or to Clinton in the heavily Republican AZ-06 (current lines), still did not get Clinton above 44% of the vote statewide. The exact same percentage that Obama got against Mitt Romney, who I would point out was a far better fit for AZ then Trump.

There have been times where Democrats have broken through. Clinton in the 1990's and Napolitano in 2002, which were the result of vote splits with third party candidates. In local races yes, including the most prominent one for sheriff, where the Republican was under indictment I would point out. Winning a county wide race is one thing were local issues matter more, but that is a different matter than putting a Democrat in the US Senate. Could it happen? Certainly! I would just say that it is not a certainty.

Clinton got 46% (rounded) in 2016....

When you insert ~ before a number, it means "about".

Carmona got 46% against Flake as well.

I was referring to this part:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was going by Atlas numbers:
Hillary Clinton   Timothy Kaine   Democratic   1,161,167   44.58%

[Gass3268]

Looks like McSally is clearing the field (minus Chemtrail Kelli of course):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[windjammer]

Looks like McSally is clearing the field (minus Chemtrail Kelli of course):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Called it!

[windjammer]

And Mcsally is highly overrated, defeating a 1 term incumbent in a republican seat by 0.1 point in a republican year is              H-A-R-D-L-Y an accomplishment.

[Gass3268]

Also McSally leaving the 2nd makes it a prime pick up opportunity for Kirkpatrick.

[BuckeyeNut]

Also McSally leaving the 2nd makes it a prime pick up opportunity for Kirkpatrick.

Yeah, D+1 downticket.

[Webnicz]

Looks like McSally is clearing the field (minus Chemtrail Kelli of course):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Careful, she's taking more time to decide,but she could still back out. I've been hearing lots of talk about Dewitt in the local rounds. He'd have support of trump.
Paul Ryan wouldn't be happy she's leaving the house, helps Dems get one seat closer to control, they're likely telling her this and adding the fact that McCain wants her to fill his seat. Big decision for her. I think she should go the McCain route, would be win win for the GOP.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

McSally will lose to Sinema.

[Webnicz]

McSally will lose to Sinema.

This is exactly why she should wait for mccain's seat

[Heisenberg]

McSally will lose to Sinema.

This is exactly why she should wait for mccain's seat

I think that's what she wants. I also think that only DeWit can beat Sinema. McSally also would have trouble in a primary, the Trumpists aren't going to like a moderate, McCain-loving warmonger. But she may announce just so donors know she's running for Senate, and switch to the other seat once McCain croaks (nobody will admit to it now, but I'm almost certain hell croak pretty soon). I also think that Stanton is planning to run for that seat, but announced for AZ-09 so he could create a federal account.

[Nyvin]

I doubt the national GOP would want McSally to abandon AZ-2 considering the dems have a top tier recruit and Clinton won it by five points last year.

Then again...maybe McSally considers a statewide race an "easier" goal than running in AZ-2 against Kirkpatrick.

[Webnicz]

I doubt the national GOP would want McSally to abandon AZ-2 considering the dems have a top tier recruit and Clinton won it by five points last year.

Then again...maybe McSally considers a statewide race an "easier" goal than running in AZ-2 against Kirkpatrick.

McSally vs Kirky would be similar to McSally's '16 performance. Kirky's name has been dragged through the mud real good and her fundraising isn't great this time around compared to in the past, which is probably because of the reason above.

[Oryxslayer]

Looks like McSally is clearing the field (minus Chemtrail Kelli of course):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Careful, she's taking more time to decide,but she could still back out. I've been hearing lots of talk about Dewitt in the local rounds. He'd have support of trump.
Paul Ryan wouldn't be happy she's leaving the house, helps Dems get one seat closer to control, they're likely telling her this and adding the fact that McCain wants her to fill his seat. Big decision for her. I think she should go the McCain route, would be win win for the GOP.

I tend to agree. If you look at her fundraising numbers, she was clearly planning on running for something higher then senate over the past couple of months. Over that period, Flake was in thesenate race - she was obviously preparing for the McCain retirement. It's even posdible she and McCain have a deal for her to seamlessly step into his shoes at the end of 2017/18. It is not a question of whether or not she wants to run for Senate, its a question of whether the McCain route or the Flake route is better for her. The only reason she would pick the open seat against Sinema in my mind is because she fears defeat in AZ-02 before McCain retires. 

[Webnicz]

DROP WHAT YOU ARE DOING

while this seems weird, this actually happened.

Dewit and Brnovich had a coin toss, Dewit's tweet suggest Brnovich won

https://twitter.com/JeffDeWitAZ/status/923618821801250816