Kirsten-Kyrsten 2020

[heatcharger]

Assuming Sinema is able to win a Senate seat next year...

Pros:

Young
Fresh faces
Easy on the eyes (just saying)
High-energy
Will energize Democratic base
Puts Arizona seriously in play
Good fundraising potential
May be able to successfully triangulate on guns
Moderate hero stances on certain fiscal issues will keep Romney-Clinton voters in the fold
Extremely similar names opens up massive amounts of marketing/campaigning ploys

Cons:

Two women scares off many, many voters
Gillibrand may not be great debating Trump
Too easy to draw comparisons to HRC
Pretty inexperienced on foreign policy
Sinema's weird "prada socialist" thing


All in all, wow! I'm in. Someone should make a timeline about this.

[RedPrometheus]

Great ticket!

The only question is: do Americans rather want a fascist or a woman as president? It seems to be a difficult decision

[TheLeftwardTide]

Ew.

You also forgot, or conveniently left out, a huge con; poor minority and progressive turnout, one of the largest factors in Hillary's defeat.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Black voters will stay home.

[Kamala]

This kind of ticket would work great on a TV show but not in real life.

[Webnicz]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

Maybe they would be okay with Sinema, but Gillibrand comes off as the quintessential "mainstream," "corporate," "establishment," etc. Democrat. I don't think picking Sinema as her running mate would be enough to nullify that.

[GoTfan]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

Maybe they would be okay with Sinema, but Gillibrand comes off as the quintessential "mainstream," "corporate," "establishment," etc. Democrat. I don't think picking Sinema as her running mate would be enough to nullify that.

Alos, voting against Pelosi doesn't automatically mean unconditional support from the Sanders wing. Does she support single-payer? A $15 minimum wage? A nationwide infrastructure build? Ending the war on drugs?

[BudgieForce]

An openly atheist single bisexual woman may not be the safest pick for vice-president on the democratic ticket. Maybe pick someone a bit more vanilla.

[McGovernForPrez]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

On a different note this is a horrible ticket idea. If you're gonna pick two women godforbid don't choose Sinema. She's a democrat who supports removing the estate tax. You'd be better off taking Harris or Klobuchar.

[Suburbia]

Black voters will stay home.

Why? Won't some of their policies be appealing to some black voters?

[TheLeftwardTide]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

She voted to repeal the estate tax. I don't understand how a Berniecrat could support that.

Which reminds me, both Kirsten and Kyrsten have one major thing in common: opportunism. Both are some of the biggest opportunists in the Democratic party today. Kirsten was a blue dog in the House who shifted left when joining the Senate. Kyrsten did the exact opposite; shifting right to get (and stay) elected in a very competitive district.

Then again, when Sinema wins the Senate nomination, I really want her to beat Flake/Ward. That means that by-and-large, whatever Berniecrats live in Arizona should at least vote for her reluctantly. If they actually like her over there in Arizona, I see that as a positive when the general election rolls around.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

And you see that there is no such thing as a President Hillary Clinton or Former President John Kerry. Black voters are more important to securing a Democratic victory in post-Obama America, no? Sure, they will get 90 percent of the black vote but the turnout will be pitiful.

The only Dems to get more than 60 percent turnout for blacks in the past 30 years are Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Black voters are not running to vote for a ticket that has a bi-sexual atheist on it. And Hillary Clinton BLED black male support from Obama 2012. More will defect to the Republican ticket just on misogyny alone.

[Liberalrocks]

If we want a ticket that's "easy on the eyes": Newsom/Gabbard

Love Newsom, but no Gabbard please. Sinema is easy on the eyes too, pair her with Newsom.

[McGovernForPrez]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

And you see that there is no such thing as a President Hillary Clinton or Former President John Kerry. Black voters are more important to securing a Democratic victory in post-Obama America, no? Sure, they will get 90 percent of the black vote but the turnout will be pitiful.

The only Dems to get more than 60 percent turnout for blacks in the past 30 years are Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Black voters are not running to vote for a ticket that has a bi-sexual atheist on it. And Hillary Clinton BLED black male support from Obama 2012. More will defect to the Republican ticket just on misogyny alone.

I don't completely disagree with you here. This ticket is fairly awful. I don't see any particular demographic group turning out en masse for it.

As for importance of the black vote itself electorally I'm not so sure. By all means it is fairly important. It can certainly make the difference in plenty of Midwestern states. That doesn't mean it's tantamount though. If appealing to black voters hurts support amongst white voters that can cause a problem. It's a tough balance to maintain. Democrats really need to find a way to recreate Obama's success with both groups.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

And you see that there is no such thing as a President Hillary Clinton or Former President John Kerry. Black voters are more important to securing a Democratic victory in post-Obama America, no? Sure, they will get 90 percent of the black vote but the turnout will be pitiful.

The only Dems to get more than 60 percent turnout for blacks in the past 30 years are Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Black voters are not running to vote for a ticket that has a bi-sexual atheist on it. And Hillary Clinton BLED black male support from Obama 2012. More will defect to the Republican ticket just on misogyny alone.

I don't completely disagree with you here. This ticket is fairly awful. I don't see any particular demographic group turning out en masse for it.

As for importance of the black vote itself electorally I'm not so sure. By all means it is fairly important. It can certainly make the difference in plenty of Midwestern states. That doesn't mean it's tantamount though. If appealing to black voters hurts support amongst white voters that can cause a problem. It's a tough balance to maintain. Democrats really need to find a way to recreate Obama's success with both groups.

As the days go by I feel less and less confident that he is running but maybe Biden? I don't know. Hillary's black support was largely tied to her wrapping herself up in Obama's legacy (she practically had Obama BEGGING black people to vote for her) and that failed. So I doubt it works for Biden but maybe being a male and less of a polarizing figure would help him? It will be interesting how the 2020 nominee decides to tackle this balancing act.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Terrible ticket. An atheist blue dog is a terrible choice for VP and will alienate both sides.

[McGovernForPrez]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

And you see that there is no such thing as a President Hillary Clinton or Former President John Kerry. Black voters are more important to securing a Democratic victory in post-Obama America, no? Sure, they will get 90 percent of the black vote but the turnout will be pitiful.

The only Dems to get more than 60 percent turnout for blacks in the past 30 years are Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Black voters are not running to vote for a ticket that has a bi-sexual atheist on it. And Hillary Clinton BLED black male support from Obama 2012. More will defect to the Republican ticket just on misogyny alone.

I don't completely disagree with you here. This ticket is fairly awful. I don't see any particular demographic group turning out en masse for it.

As for importance of the black vote itself electorally I'm not so sure. By all means it is fairly important. It can certainly make the difference in plenty of Midwestern states. That doesn't mean it's tantamount though. If appealing to black voters hurts support amongst white voters that can cause a problem. It's a tough balance to maintain. Democrats really need to find a way to recreate Obama's success with both groups.

As the days go by I feel less and less confident that he is running but maybe Biden? I don't know. Hillary's black support was largely tied to her wrapping herself up in Obama's legacy (she practically had Obama BEGGING black people to vote for her) and that failed. So I doubt it works for Biden but maybe being a male and less of a polarizing figure would help him? It will be interesting how the 2020 nominee decides to tackle this balancing act.

If the nominee is a non-Biden white male then I think the VP ought to be one designed to drive black turnout. That's probably why X candidate/Harris tickets are so popular here on Atlas.

[Webnicz]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

She voted to repeal the estate tax. I don't understand how a Berniecrat could support that.

Which reminds me, both Kirsten and Kyrsten have one major thing in common: opportunism. Both are some of the biggest opportunists in the Democratic party today. Kirsten was a blue dog in the House who shifted left when joining the Senate. Kyrsten did the exact opposite; shifting right to get (and stay) elected in a very competitive district.

Then again, when Sinema wins the Senate nomination, I really want her to beat Flake/Ward. That means that by-and-large, whatever Berniecrats live in Arizona should at least vote for her reluctantly. If they actually like her over there in Arizona, I see that as a positive when the general election rolls around.

Berniecrats have in a way blurred the line between what it means to be a progressive and just anti establishment. Why do you think they idolize Tulsi Gabbard So much? someone who is not a progressive, but because she is so ant establishment she is praised. In a way they put more value into someone who is anti establishment than someone who is progressive. Look what happened to Liz Warren, Someone who is progressive, but since she is "establishment" she has been shunned by that group.

In this scenario, Gilibrand would put Sinema on her ticket to appease the Berniecrats.

[Webnicz]

Black voters will stay home.

When you keep saying this what do you mean? Turnout as compared to what? Obviously this ticket won't get Obama numbers but I could easily see it getting Clinton/Kerry levels of Black turnout.

And you see that there is no such thing as a President Hillary Clinton or Former President John Kerry. Black voters are more important to securing a Democratic victory in post-Obama America, no? Sure, they will get 90 percent of the black vote but the turnout will be pitiful.

The only Dems to get more than 60 percent turnout for blacks in the past 30 years are Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Black voters are not running to vote for a ticket that has a bi-sexual atheist on it. And Hillary Clinton BLED black male support from Obama 2012. More will defect to the Republican ticket just on misogyny alone.

It seems the Dems will have problems keeping black turnout high while they try to make inroads with whites. But I think we can all agree that the dems need to do some white outreach.

[McGovernForPrez]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

She voted to repeal the estate tax. I don't understand how a Berniecrat could support that.

Which reminds me, both Kirsten and Kyrsten have one major thing in common: opportunism. Both are some of the biggest opportunists in the Democratic party today. Kirsten was a blue dog in the House who shifted left when joining the Senate. Kyrsten did the exact opposite; shifting right to get (and stay) elected in a very competitive district.

Then again, when Sinema wins the Senate nomination, I really want her to beat Flake/Ward. That means that by-and-large, whatever Berniecrats live in Arizona should at least vote for her reluctantly. If they actually like her over there in Arizona, I see that as a positive when the general election rolls around.

Berniecrats have in a way blurred the line between what it means to be a progressive and just anti establishment. Why do you think they idolize Tulsi Gabbard So much? someone who is not a progressive, but because she is so ant establishment she is praised. In a way they put more value into someone who is anti establishment than someone who is progressive. Look what happened to Liz Warren, Someone who is progressive, but since she is "establishment" she has been shunned by that group.

In this scenario, Gilibrand would put Sinema on her ticket to appease the Berniecrats.

Tulsi Gabbard wasn't praised for being anti-establishment she was praised for endorsing Bernie. Tulsi has bled support from a lot of Berniecrats such as myself who see her for the fraud she is. Sinema certainly never endorsed Bernie so the idea that Berniecrats would support her is asinine. By your logic Joe Manchin should be loved by Berniecrats, but he's absolutely hated by them.

[Webnicz]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

She voted to repeal the estate tax. I don't understand how a Berniecrat could support that.

Which reminds me, both Kirsten and Kyrsten have one major thing in common: opportunism. Both are some of the biggest opportunists in the Democratic party today. Kirsten was a blue dog in the House who shifted left when joining the Senate. Kyrsten did the exact opposite; shifting right to get (and stay) elected in a very competitive district.

Then again, when Sinema wins the Senate nomination, I really want her to beat Flake/Ward. That means that by-and-large, whatever Berniecrats live in Arizona should at least vote for her reluctantly. If they actually like her over there in Arizona, I see that as a positive when the general election rolls around.

Berniecrats have in a way blurred the line between what it means to be a progressive and just anti establishment. Why do you think they idolize Tulsi Gabbard So much? someone who is not a progressive, but because she is so ant establishment she is praised. In a way they put more value into someone who is anti establishment than someone who is progressive. Look what happened to Liz Warren, Someone who is progressive, but since she is "establishment" she has been shunned by that group.

In this scenario, Gilibrand would put Sinema on her ticket to appease the Berniecrats.

Tulsi Gabbard wasn't praised for being anti-establishment she was praised for endorsing Bernie. Tulsi has bled support from a lot of Berniecrats such as myself who see her for the fraud she is. Sinema certainly never endorsed Bernie so the idea that Berniecrats would support her is asinine. By your logic Joe Manchin should be loved by Berniecrats, but he's absolutely hated by them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgMNbBZkDlE&t=21s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl-Lr1M-ld4&t=503s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r32w1miP0Hw

The pro-bernie media sings praises to Gabbard largely based on her conflicts with top Dems.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's strange how some people are unable to distinguish between "deranged cultists on Reddit" and "Berniecrats".

[McGovernForPrez]

The Sanders wing won't be particularly impressed, for one.

And Sinema is just a pretty bizarre politician overall. Her policy stances are kinda all over the place, so I'm afraid that every voter is going to have at least one reason to question supporting her. Of course, it could end up working the other way, where that also means every voter might have some issue they can connect with her on. It would be interesting to see how she would be received by the general electorate.

The sanders wing will love how anti establishment Sinema is. She just so happens to have voted against Pelosi since her election. The funny thing is, in Arizona the sanders wing adores her while the more establishment Dems are "tired of hearing about her" as I read in a recent tweet.

She voted to repeal the estate tax. I don't understand how a Berniecrat could support that.

Which reminds me, both Kirsten and Kyrsten have one major thing in common: opportunism. Both are some of the biggest opportunists in the Democratic party today. Kirsten was a blue dog in the House who shifted left when joining the Senate. Kyrsten did the exact opposite; shifting right to get (and stay) elected in a very competitive district.

Then again, when Sinema wins the Senate nomination, I really want her to beat Flake/Ward. That means that by-and-large, whatever Berniecrats live in Arizona should at least vote for her reluctantly. If they actually like her over there in Arizona, I see that as a positive when the general election rolls around.

Berniecrats have in a way blurred the line between what it means to be a progressive and just anti establishment. Why do you think they idolize Tulsi Gabbard So much? someone who is not a progressive, but because she is so ant establishment she is praised. In a way they put more value into someone who is anti establishment than someone who is progressive. Look what happened to Liz Warren, Someone who is progressive, but since she is "establishment" she has been shunned by that group.

In this scenario, Gilibrand would put Sinema on her ticket to appease the Berniecrats.

Tulsi Gabbard wasn't praised for being anti-establishment she was praised for endorsing Bernie. Tulsi has bled support from a lot of Berniecrats such as myself who see her for the fraud she is. Sinema certainly never endorsed Bernie so the idea that Berniecrats would support her is asinine. By your logic Joe Manchin should be loved by Berniecrats, but he's absolutely hated by them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgMNbBZkDlE&t=21s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl-Lr1M-ld4&t=503s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r32w1miP0Hw

The pro-bernie media sings praises to Gabbard largely based on her conflicts with top Dems.

And her conflict with top Dems stems entirely from her support of Bernie during the primaries. Joe Manchin is "anti-establishment" in the same way Sinema is and he's absolutely hated by Berniecrats. It's almost as if the fact that she endorsed Bernie during the primaries endeared her to many of his supporters. Most Bernie supporters who like her legitimately think she's a progressive who cares about fighting corporations and bringing single payer healthcare. They're just dumb enough to believe this solely on the fact that she endorsed Bernie.