Democratic Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Sinema’s Defection Gives Democrats More Heartburn Over the 2024 Senate Map

      by

      A potential mess in Arizona was an unwelcome surprise for Democrats while they were still savoring their victories in 2022.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.Another lesson is crystal clear: Trump has become even more toxic to swing voters during his two years in exile. The latest evidence? A USA Today/Suffolk University poll shows Trump losing a hypothetical matchup with President Biden by nearly eight points.On the other hand, there are no signs that any of these three states have grown less difficult for Democrats over the last six years. It’s easy to forget that Barack Obama won Ohio twice, or that Montana had a Democratic governor as recently as 2021. Today, that feels like ancient history.Once Democrats turn to 2024 in earnest, their first and most important task will be ensuring that their incumbents run again. As for Republicans, they are still debating what went wrong this year, with much of the discussion centering on the mechanics of campaigns, like mail voting and ballot harvesting — rather than thornier issues, like abortion. At the same time, as G.O.P. candidates begin declaring their intentions, many are still treading cautiously when it comes to Trump.“Some of the primary noise on their side suggests they haven’t learned too much yet,” said J.B. Poersch, the president of Senate Majority PAC, a group closely associated with Senator Chuck Schumer. “There’s plenty of things for them to be nervous about.”The Democrats’ red-state defendersSo far, of the Democratic incumbents in those three states above, only Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio has definitively said he’s in. Brown has demonstrated a unique knack for winning working-class voters, even as cultural factors start to outweigh economics. He won his race by nearly seven points in 2018, while Representative Tim Ryan lost to J.D. Vance this year by roughly the same margin — far less than other statewide candidates in Ohio, but hardly encouraging for Democrats.Republicans are lining up to take on Brown, notably State Senator Matt Dolan, who finished third in this year’s Senate primary behind Vance and Josh Mandel — both of whom aggressively courted Trump and his base.Dolan, whose family owns the Cleveland Guardians, is already exploring the boundaries of what constitutes acceptable criticism of Trump. “What we witnessed nationally should convince us the country is ready for substantive candidates, not personalities and election deniers,” he wrote in a recent email to Republican county chairs in Ohio. But he said he would support Trump if he were the nominee.Then there’s Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who sounds intrigued by Sinema’s decision to become an independent. “I don’t know how you get more independent than I am,” Manchin told reporters at the Capitol on Monday. “I look at all of these things, I’ve always looked at all of these things. But I have no intention of doing anything right now.”Like most things Manchin, that answer was neither a yes nor a no. He added, “I’m not a Washington Democrat.”Manchin already has an official Republican challenger: Representative Alex Mooney, who has telegraphed his line of attack in an anti-Manchin ad that ran four months ago. At least two others have shown interest: Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who ran against Manchin in 2018, and Gov. Jim Justice, who is term-limited.Montana is only slightly less intimidating terrain for Democrats. They lost both House races this year, while Republicans won a supermajority in the State Legislature.Senator Jon Tester of Montana is skilled at finding locally resonant issues to champion.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesSenator Jon Tester has said he will make a decision about running again after the holidays, though he has told reporters he feels “very positively about my chances.” Tester, who heads home to his farm most weekends, is skilled at finding locally resonant issues to champion, such as federal support for rural hospitals or floodplain mapping.Tester allies point to an emerging dynamic on the Republican side that resembles what happened in many primaries in 2022: a race to the right.One possible contender is Representative Matt Rosendale, whom Tester defeated in 2018 and who is staking out a position as one of the holdouts to Representative Kevin McCarthy’s bid to become House speaker. Another is Representative Ryan Zinke, who resigned as Trump’s interior secretary amid a flurry of investigations into his conduct. He will return to Congress early next year after winning by just three points against Monica Tranel, a political novice, despite outspending her by two to one.The rest of the mapAt the moment, Democrats appear to have just two pickup opportunities, and neither looks especially promising: Florida and Texas.And even the seemingly more comfortable seats they hold, like Nevada and Pennsylvania, are not all that comfortable. Nevada was the closest of all the big Senate races this year, with Senator Catherine Cortez Masto winning by fewer than 8,000 votes.In Pennsylvania, Republicans are hoping that David McCormick, who lost narrowly to Dr. Mehmet Oz in the primary this year, will challenge Senator Bob Casey in 2024. Democrats saw McCormick, a former hedge fund executive with deep pockets and roots in Pittsburgh, as the more formidable potential opponent, and subtly tried to help Oz. McCormick is planning to release a book in March, “Superpower in Peril: A Battle Plan to Renew America,” that appears aimed at positioning him more squarely as a China hawk, shoring up a point of vulnerability that hurt him this year.“I’d be shocked at this point if he doesn’t run,” said Josh Novotney, a former aide to Senator Pat Toomey and a partner at SBL Strategies, a lobbying firm in Pennsylvania. But Novotney cautioned that if Trump were the nominee, it could doom Republicans’ chances of defeating Casey. In the 2022 Senate race, Oz was weighed down by Trump and by Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor, whose hard-line stances on abortion and embrace of election denialism repelled swing voters.Democratic senators are also up for re-election in Michigan and Wisconsin, where their chances look brighter. In 2018, Baldwin crushed her Republican opponent, Leah Vukmir, by nearly 11 points, while in Michigan, Senator Debbie Stabenow cruised to victory over John James, who opted to run for a House seat rather than face Stabenow again. This year, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer won re-election easily, while Democrats took full control of the State Legislature for the first time in 40 years.Sinema’s defection undeniably makes Democrats’ path more complicated. She has not said she is running, though many political observers suspect her decision to switch parties had to do with worries she would lose a Democratic primary. Neither of the two most prominent Democrats weighing a run, Representatives Ruben Gallego and Greg Stanton, has officially entered the race, however.Republicans in Arizona could nominate someone on the far right, such as Sheriff Mark Lamb, or a moderate like Karrin Taylor Robson, a lawyer who lost to Kari Lake in this year’s primary for governor. So although most analysts assume that a three-way race would help Republicans, there are too many variables to draw any firm conclusions — including whether there will even be a three-way race.For now, Democrats are philosophical about the 2024 landscape. “Every election,” Poersch said, “you’re testing: Have the rules changed, or are we playing by the same old rules?”What to readDespite modest improvements for Republicans in 2022, Democrats largely held onto their gains among suburban voters, particularly in battleground states, Trip Gabriel reports.Donald Trump’s family business lost a criminal contempt trial that was held in secret last fall, according to a newly unsealed court document and several people with knowledge of the matter. Jonah Bromwich, William Rashbaum and Ben Protess explain.President Biden signed a bill mandating federal recognition for same-sex marriages and capped his evolution toward embracing gay rights over a four-decade political career. Michael D. Shear has the details.Inflation slowed more sharply than expected in November, Jeanna Smialek reports. It was an encouraging sign for both Federal Reserve officials and consumers and raised hopes for a “soft landing,” or one in which the economy slows gradually and without a painful recession.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Despite Modest GOP Gains, Democrats Maintain Grasp on Suburbs

      by

      MARIETTA, Ga. — Suburban voters famously rejected Donald J. Trump twice, first by handing Democrats a congressional majority in 2018, then by largely paving the road to the White House for President Biden in 2020.Heading into this November, a key question was whether suburbanites would remain in the Democratic camp again, or snap back to favor Republicans, delivering the kind of sharp rebuke that presidents have come to expect in their first midterm election.The answer: Despite a small swing of the pendulum back toward the G.O.P. in 2022, Democrats largely held onto their gains among suburban voters, particularly in battleground states.How the suburban vote shifted between electionsDemocrats made big gains in the suburbs between 2016 and 2020. Republicans made up some ground in 2022, but in most areas those gains were smaller than the Democratic shift in previous elections. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Kyrsten Sinema’s Exit From the Democratic Party

      by

      More from our inbox:As History Shows, Incumbents Have the EdgeBlack HomeownershipAn Opera Fan’s DreamAlone, and FreeKyrsten Sinema, the Arizona senator, plans to keep her committee posts.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Leaving Party, Sinema Rattles a Race in 2024” (front page, Dec. 10):Senator Kyrsten Sinema is being deceitful in justifying her decision to leave the Democratic Party in favor of being an independent. This isn’t a principled decision. It’s a self-serving and strategic move on her part.Ms. Sinema is unpopular with Democrats in her home state, many of whom feel betrayed by her failure to support the progressive agenda she led them to believe she was committed to. In fact, she’s been a self-absorbed political opportunist primarily serving special interests and not the good of average citizens whom she pretends to care so much about.She claims that she wants to escape the partisanship and extremism that afflicts Congress, creating a false equivalency between the two parties. Reality check: It’s only the Republican Party under the thumb of Donald Trump that has sunk into corruption, hyperpartisan conduct and extremism.Ms. Sinema has been an obstacle to even the most widely popular and beneficial legislation, playing games with the Senate leadership and trying to position herself as someone needing to be courted for her support again and again.If she cared half as much about the citizens she represents as she cares about her wardrobe styling and need for attention, she might be more credible in declaring herself an independent.T.R. JahnsHemet, Calif.To the Editor:Senator Kyrsten Sinema officially ditched the Democratic Party and announced that she has registered as an independent. The move wasn’t entirely a shocker, yet it was still a gut punch for Arizona Democrats who worked hard to send a Democrat to Washington.I understand that she is ditching the Democratic Party because she knows that she can’t win a primary as a Democrat. Her past behavior suggest she’s adept at ditching anyone or anything no longer useful to her.She began her public life as a Green Party activist. She ran for the State Legislature as an independent, which didn’t work. Her big break came when she became a Democrat. In that role she created all sorts of drama and attention-grabbing stunts such as her thumbs-down vote on raising the minimum wage for hardworking Americans.Her antics were guaranteed to garner attention and annoy. For example, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday ripped into Ms. Sinema: “Not once in this long soliloquy does Sinema offer a single concrete value or policy she believes in. She lays out no goals for Arizonans, no vision, no commitments.”Kyrsten Sinema appears to be the wrong person at the wrong place at the wrong time.Richard A. FrenchPasadena, Calif.To the Editor:Kyrsten Sinema’s decision to go independent may be a healthy sign for U.S. politics. The Australian federal election in May saw a decline in the vote for both major parties, and a historic wave of votes for independents who were capable, professional women. Their presence is injecting new vigor and accountability into our Parliament.Ray EdmondsonKambah, AustraliaTo the Editor:The only politician more self-centered, selfish and self-aggrandizing than Kyrsten Sinema is Donald Trump.Michael K. CantwellDelray Beach, Fla.As History Shows, Incumbents Have the Edge Kriston Jae Bethel for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Strong Election Showing Eases Democrats’ Fears of Biden ’24,” by Katie Glueck (Political Memo, front page, Nov. 28):A key reason that Democrats should support President Biden for re-election is that history shows that a sitting president has the best chance of winning. Several recent Democrats have run again despite low approval ratings halfway through their first terms, including Harry Truman in 1948, Bill Clinton in 1996 and Barack Obama in 2012. Each was re-elected.In contrast, incumbent presidents who voluntarily give up the White House or are subject to a primary challenge are almost always a political disaster for the party in power. L.B.J.’s 1968 decision not to run left the nation in political turmoil, resulting in a Nixon presidency that undermined Americans’ faith in government. Jimmy Carter faced a primary challenge from Ted Kennedy in 1980 and never recovered. George H.W. Bush was weakened by Pat Buchanan in 1992, then lost to Bill Clinton.In any event, America needs Mr. Biden to deal with a series of problems, including an increasingly authoritarian Republican Party, a delicate U.S. economy, Russia’s war on Ukraine and the growing climate crisis — problems that he has proved well qualified to address.As long as Mr. Biden remains healthy and able to perform as president, Democrats would be crazy to nominate anyone else.Paul BledsoeWashingtonThe writer is a lecturer at American University’s School of Public Affairs and served as a staff member for the Senate Finance Committee and Clinton White House.Black HomeownershipNearly 45 percent of Black households own their homes, compared with more than 74 percent of white households, a new report has found.Tony Cenicola/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “The Racial Gap Begins at the Mortgage Application” (Real Estate, Dec. 4):It’s encouraging to see The Times cover the continuing racial discrimination in homeownership. As your headline aptly states, our unacceptable disparities result from discrimination in every aspect of home buying for Black people — from loan approval to interest rates to home appraisals.In New Jersey, like across the U.S., this problem stubbornly persists. About four in 10 Black families in the state own their homes, compared with more than three-quarters of white families. High-income Black families are more likely to be denied a loan than low-income white applicants.Appraisal discrimination, one piece of the puzzle, is finally getting due attention in the Garden State with the Legislature poised to pass a bill to combat it early next year.If there’s one thing we’ve learned in the past few years, it’s that racism is baked into our policies. It’s time for the federal government, as well as states like New Jersey, to step up and design policies that root out ongoing barriers to homeownership and other drivers of wealth for Black and other households of color.Laura SullivanNewark, N.J.The writer is director of the economic justice program at the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice.An Opera Fan’s Dream Sinna Nasseri for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Reviewing the Opera? Nah, I’m in It” (Arts, Dec. 8):I send my deepest gratitude to the critic Joshua Barone for the immersive and entertaining account of his experience as an extra in the Metropolitan Opera’s extravagant production of “Aida.”Some little kids dream of being an astronaut, a U.S. president, a famous movie star. But since first being brought to the opera at age 4 to see “Tosca,” and staying awake through its entirety, I’ve had the fantasy dream of somehow being on the Metropolitan Opera’s stage (or, alternately, in the orchestra pit).I’ve been a lifelong operagoer since then, and now, well past middle age, I found myself in a state of complete vicarious joy reading Mr. Barone’s “inside scoop.” Bravo!Jane Garfield FrankQueensAlone, and Free Ben WisemanTo the Editor:Re “I Live Alone. Really, I’m Not That Pathetic,” by Frank Bruni (Opinion, nytimes.com, Dec. 9):I am someone who grew up with seven siblings. My own “alone home,” for me, represents freedom and euphoria.To cope with societal expectations, we one-member households need to remember: The most important thing about living alone is that it’s not your job to worry about what other people think.Ted GallagherNew York More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Meet Kyrsten Sinema, Former Democrat of Arizona

      by

      Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. I hope I’ve succeeded in turning you into a World Cup fan. In the meantime, any choice words about, or for, Kyrsten Sinema, former Democrat of Arizona?Gail Collins: Well, Bret, you’ve at least turned me into a fan of the Times coverage of World Cup … activities. I also sorta like times like this when there are a billion different games on TV — not just soccer — and for a while every day, people don’t feel obliged to think about the rest of the world.Bret: Such as …Gail: Such as Kyrsten Sinema. Not a fan of hers from the get-go. Always seemed as if her compulsive effort to prove she wasn’t really a loyal Democrat was less about political independence and more about making wealthy donors happy.Bret: And this is on the theory that other politicians don’t care for what their wealthy donors think?Gail: But her official spin is that the two-party system is broken, and virtue lies in standing outside as an independent. I hate that kind of thinking.Bret: Whereas I love it. To me, the choice these days between Republicans and Democrats is about as appealing as a dinner invitation from Hannibal Lecter: Either you get your heart cut out or your brain removed, and both get served with a side of fava beans and a nice Chianti.Seriously, you don’t see any virtue to wanting to break this awful political duopoly?Gail: Virtue, for me, lies in fighting to make the two parties better. Pick the one that’s closest to your beliefs and get busy. Fight for the good local leaders and nominees.It’s way easier to just announce you’re superior to both of them and start your own group. The new gang probably won’t last long, and even if it does, its big achievement will most likely be to draw votes away from the major party candidates you most agree with.Never recovered from Ralph Nader’s Green Party candidacy for president in 2000 — a noble quest on the issues front that wound up costing Al Gore the job.Bret: A few years ago I would have agreed with you. But the Republican Party is pretty much irredeemable, while the Democrats are … just not the team I’m ever going to bat for.Gail: Come on in. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are waiting with open arms …Bret: Not so sure the Dems would ever want me in the first place: I heart Texas not taxes.As for Sinema, having her join someone like Maine’s Angus King as an independent shows it’s at least possible to have an alternative. I realize she has some very self-interested political reasons for doing so, since the move will spare her a primary challenge from the left if she runs for re-election in 2024. But it also reminds the party establishments that they shouldn’t take their centrist voters for granted. Now I wish a few sane-minded Republicans might go ahead and join her. Lisa Murkowski, hello?Gail: Hey, weird that of the two of us, I’m the one who thinks somebody should try to save the Republican Party.Bret: Raising the dead is beyond our powers, Gail.Gail: You know I don’t do foreign affairs, but I do feel obliged to ask you about Brittney Griner. Do you think Joe Biden did the right thing in making the trade that got her out of prison in Russia?Bret: Well, obviously I’m happy for Griner and her family that she’s back after her 10-month ordeal. And it says everything about the moral difference between the United States and Russia that they will take a harmless person hostage so they can trade her for one of their most notorious gangsters.On the other hand, I don’t understand why we didn’t prioritize the release of Paul Whelan, an American who has been wrongfully detained in a Russian prison for four years but doesn’t have the benefit of Griner’s celebrity. Nor should we forget Marc Fogel, a 61-year-old American teacher trapped in one of Putin’s prisons. My advice to the Biden administration is to tell Russia that $1 billion of its foreign reserves will be seized for every additional day these two stay in prison.Gail: Hope they’re listening.Bret: Oh, and speaking of dealing with gangsters — your thoughts on the current crop of legal cases against the former guy?Gail: I’ve never thought — and still don’t — that a former president is going to go to jail, even for stealing federal documents or rousing violent crowds to march on the Capitol.Bret: Agree. Alas.Gail: But I’ve always had a yearning that he might wind up bankrupt and, say, living in a Motel 6. Knew that was impossible — told myself to remember all the money he can make just on speaking tours or hosting parties at Mar-a-Lago.Bret: Pretty depressing how American culture has descended from “My Dinner With Andre” to that dinner with Kanye.Gail: Now, though, I’m sort of wondering. Is there going to be a market for this guy — chooser of terrible Senate candidates and breaker of bread with neo-Nazis — even just as a celebrity?Bret: I had nearly lost hope that the day would ever come, but I think we are finally watching Trump self-destruct before our eyes even faster than anyone else can destroy him. The midterm results seem to have persuaded a critical mass of Republican voters and politicians that he’s toxic for their chances. Dinner with his antisemitic pals seems to have been the icing on the cake — or whatever the exact opposite of “icing on the cake” is. Toxic algae in the cesspool?Gail: Rotting rutabaga in the refuse? Sorry, that doesn’t actually make much sense. I was seduced by all the R’s.Bret: Gail, would you mind if I rant for a minute?Gail: Bret, I love it when you rant. Even when I hate it.Bret: There’s a special place in hell for the Paul Ryan Republicans — let’s call them PRR’s. What I mean is a certain type of well-heeled, intellectually minded conservative who never liked Trump’s person or politics and who occasionally tut-tutted at his vilest excesses, but who consistently made excuses for him and his presidency while heaping scorn on Never Trumpers as a bunch of virtue-signaling prigs. These Trump-appeasing PRR’s were prepared to defend and vote for him again until the day after the midterms, when they finally realized that he was a titanic political liability.Gail: Well, I truly do love this rant. Go on.Bret: To adapt something Winston Churchill purportedly said to Neville Chamberlain after Munich in 1938: In 2016 conservatives were given the choice between electoral defeat and personal dishonor. They chose dishonor. In the end, they still got defeated.Gail: You know I’m going to ask who’s a Churchillian pick in the Republican world. For instance, Ron DeSantis was never a huge Trump pal, but I think that was only because he was eyeing his job.Bret: So, weirdly, I have much less of a moral objection to those Republicans like DeSantis who liked Trump to begin with, whether because they agreed with most of his policies or appreciated his thumb-in-the-eye personality, or both. At least they came about their support for Trump honestly, without convoluted rationalizations and self-exculpations and various suspensions of disbelief. Of course I don’t agree with them, but I long ago stopped disdaining them.Speaking of disdain, any views on all of these disclosures about Twitter’s speech policies?Gail: Is there any way we can make it illegal for the richest man in the world to own one of the largest social networks? Guess not, huh?Bret: Probably not, though I doubt Musk will profit from the acquisition.Gail: Definitely felt sorry for the Twitter workers who discovered that Musk was putting beds in their work space. And his wild political seesawing would ruin the influence of anybody who wasn’t closing in on a quarter of a trillion dollars.But here we are, and I don’t have any great strategy for making him behave in a more responsible way when it comes to things like … keeping violent hatemongers off his platform. Do you have one?Bret: Violent hatemongers aside, I thought it was pretty appalling to see the lengths to which pre-Musk Twitter went to ban legitimate news stories, like The New York Post’s scoop about Hunter Biden’s laptop, and to downplay views that went against conventional wisdom, like the Stanford professor of medicine who warned about the ill-effects of lockdowns, and to coordinate its decisions with the Biden team — and then mislead the public about what it was doing. Even progressives like Ro Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley in Congress, warned Twitter about its anti-free speech attitude, which is entirely to his credit and not at all to theirs.Gail: Bret scores …Bret: I guess the point is, we don’t want giant corporations banning political speech, whether it comes from the left or the right, and that goes especially for companies whose entire business model relies on the principle of free speech. For exposing this, I have to give Musk credit.Gail: We’ll pick this up again, Bret. Somehow I suspect Elon Musk will follow us into the new year.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Gretchen Whitmer Rejected False Choices. All Democrats Should.

      by

      For years, the so-called Blue Wall states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — have been not just politically but also emotionally important for Democrats. With the party poised to enact a new primary lineup that includes Michigan in an early slot, the state has grown even more important for Democrats.In many ways, Michigan offers a microcosm of American politics. It includes a diverse population of over 10 million people and a mix of big, medium and smaller urban areas, along with diverse suburbs and rural areas.For Democrats, much of the debate about running in and winning big northern industrial states is that we have to choose a style of campaign. Either we talk to blue-collar voters about issues like economics and manufacturing, or we talk to suburban women about abortion. Either we use progressive issues to turn out our base, or we take moderate positions on issues to persuade people in the middle.There is a model for running an effective campaign in Michigan and states like it — and it involves rejecting many of these false choices.Gretchen Whitmer illustrated that model in Michigan this year. With her midterm victory, she has now had two decisive general-election wins in a critical Blue Wall state. Last month, she won by 10.6 points (a margin bested by only two Democratic presidential candidates in the last 50 years, Barack Obama in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1996).She ran on economics and abortion, increased Democratic turnout and persuaded swing voters, all while connecting with the party’s largest base: Black voters. She embodied the way smart campaigns in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and around the country operated this cycle, and she gave a blueprint for Democrats in 2024.The first lesson of Ms. Whitmer’s campaign is that economic good news and development — especially building things — really make a difference. Democrats should run on American manufacturing: Whether it was a new semiconductor plant (to help ease the chip shortage facing the auto industry) or generational-level investments from G.M. in electric-vehicle battery plants (to make sure the critical supply chains for electric cars will be based in Michigan, not China, where many E.V. batteries are currently built), Ms. Whitmer fought to bring them to Michigan.In in multiple TV ads, she told voters, “I can’t solve the inflation problem, but we’re doing things — right now — to help.” She listed tangible benefits that she proposed or got done, like more affordable community college, insurance refunds and tax cuts for seniors. She passed four balanced, bipartisan budgets with no tax increases, and she let voters know about that.A lot of Democrats talked about economics across the country, but few did so as consistently and effectively as Ms. Whitmer. And it wasn’t just talk: When businesses opened, she was often there to celebrate them.This was paired with a pocketbook attack. Her opponent, Tudor Dixon, took millions of dollars from the wildly unpopular (in Michigan) billionaire Betsy DeVos and her family. For months her campaign highlighted Ms. Dixon’s connections to Ms. DeVos and how Ms. Dixon’s tax plan would benefit Ms. DeVos and hurt the middle class — working-class tax hikes, cuts to schools and the like. Ms. Whitmer also highlighted abortion rights as a vote-deciding issue for swing voters. Again, this was not just talk. Through a ballot initiative, Michigan voters faced the decision on whether to place abortion protections in the state Constitution. Voters approved changing the state Constitution with strong support (57 percent).Months before the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and could have effectively banned abortion in Michigan (because of a dormant law from the 1930s), Ms. Whitmer sued and got courts to block enforcement of that law. No doubt the issue helped Michigan Democrats and progressives to catalyze turnout. Estimates from the U.S. Elections Project show overall turnout in 2022 was down about 6 percent from the 2018 midterm, but in Michigan, turnout was up nearly 5 percent.Ms. Whitmer also developed a deep connection with Black voters well before she picked as her running mate and governing partner the state’s first Black lieutenant governor, Garlin Gilchrist. After winning Black voters decisively with high turnout in 2018, she deepened that connection. The “Big Gretch” song (“We ain’t even about to stress/we got Big Gretch”) and memes that came out of Black Michigan spoke to a deep appreciation Black voters had for her decisiveness in the pandemic to keep people safe.This was on top of a lot of other work to help Black voters, things like bringing the first new auto plant to Detroit in 30 years and making sure Detroiters had a first crack at the plant’s jobs.This did not come at the expense of talking to white voters: She won Macomb County, ground zero for voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama, then switched to Donald Trump, by about 60 percent more in 2022 from 2018.What Ms. Whitmer has done in Michigan can be done by Democrats across the country. We can talk about economics and abortion, we can invest in turnout and persuasion, and we can strengthen our appeal to voters of color while winning over white voters.Brian Stryker (@BrianStryker) is a partner at Impact Research and a strategist for Gretchen Whitmer, Tim Ryan and Mandela Barnes, among others.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Want to Know Why Democrats Lose Rural America?

      by

      STORM LAKE, Iowa — Democrats are getting their derrières handed to them by the kickers and the Busch Light drinkers from out here on the edge of the Great Plains all the way to Appalachia, where the Republicans roam.So what do the Democrats do?Dump the Iowa caucuses into the ditch. At the hand of President Biden, no less. He decreed that South Carolina’s primary should go first on the presidential nominating calendar, displacing Iowa. The Democratic National Committee seems happy to oblige.We get it. Let someone else take a turn up front. But discarding Iowa is not a great way to mend fences in rural America — where the Democratic brand has become virtually unmarketable. The Democratic big shots hated Iowa’s pride of place since the caucuses rose to prominence a half-century ago because money couldn’t control the outcome. Jimmy Carter broke through from Plains, Ga., with nothing but a toothy smile and an honest streak. Candidates were forced to meet actual voters in village diners across the state. We took our vetting role seriously — you had better be ready to analyze Social Security’s actuarial prospects.Candidates weren’t crazy about it. The media hated Storm Lake ice in January. We did a decent, if imperfect, job of winnowing the field. Along with New Hampshire, we set things up so South Carolina could often become definitive, which it will be no longer.Iowa has its problems. We are too white. The caucuses are complicated, confusing and clunky. The evening gatherings in homes, school gyms and libraries are not fully accessible and not as convenient as a primary for people with jobs and kids at home.But diversity did have a chance here. Barack Obama was vaulted to the White House. Iowa actively encouraged Black candidates to challenge the white establishment. Mr. Obama beat Hillary Clinton here. Iowa had no problem giving a gay man, Pete Buttigieg, and a Jewish democratic socialist, Bernie Sanders, the two top tickets out to New Hampshire last cycle. Black, white or Latino, it’s organization that matters in Iowa. You have to herd your people to the caucus and keep them in your pen for an hour while other campaigns try to poach them. It’s town hall democracy. Mr. Obama won with it. Candidates who ran feeble campaigns have to blame something. Latinos in Storm Lake overwhelmingly caucused for Mr. Sanders. Julián Castro can complain all he wants.The talking heads say Iowa messed up by not reporting the results quickly. The problem was that a cellphone app suggested to the Iowa Democratic Party by the Democratic National Committee crashed. The democratic process worked — the app didn’t.Anyone looking for an excuse to excise Iowa and further alienate rural voters could find one. The time was ripe.Mr. Biden doesn’t owe Iowa a thing. He finished fourth in the caucuses. He did owe Representative James Clyburn, the dean of South Carolina Democrats, big time for an endorsement just ahead of the Palmetto State primary, where Black voters put Mr. Biden over the top. It was sweet payback. We get that, too.Actually, the caucuses haven’t been the best thing for Iowa. The TV ads never stop. It puts you in a bad mood to think everything is going wrong all the time. We asked good questions, and the candidates gave good answers, then forgot about it all. Despite all the attention, nothing really happened to stop the long decline as the state’s Main Streets withered, farmers disappeared, and the undocumented dwell in the shadows. Republican or Democrat, the outcome was pretty much the same. At least the Republicans will cut your taxes.So it’s OK that South Carolina goes first. Iowa can do without the bother. The Republicans are sticking with Iowa, the Democrats consider it a lost cause. No Democratic state senator lives in a sizable part of western Iowa. Republicans control the governor’s office, the Legislature and soon the entire congressional delegation. Nobody organized the thousands of registered Latino voters in meatpacking towns like Storm Lake. Democrats are barely trying. The results show it.The old brick factory haunts along the mighty Mississippi River are dark, thanks to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton and everyone else who sold us out for “free trade.” Keokuk, the gate city to the river, was once a bustling industrial and shipping hub but recently lost its hospital. Your best hope in rural Jefferson was to land a casino to save the town. You essentially can’t haul a load of hogs to the packinghouse in a pickup anymore — you need a contract and a semi. The sale barn and open markets are quaint memories. John Deere tractor cabs will be made in Mexico, not Waterloo. Our rivers are rank with manure. It tends to frustrate those left behind, and the resentment builds to the point of insurrection when it is apparent that the government is not here to help you.It’s hard to feel from 30,000 feet. So Donald Trump landed in Sioux City on the eve of the midterm election to claim his stake before a large crowd buffeted by the gales out of Nebraska. “The Iowa way of life is under siege,” Mr. Trump bellowed. “We are a nation in decline. We are a failing nation.”They loved him. The Democrats view the crowd as deplorable, and told Iowa to get lost.Art Cullen is the editor of The Storm Lake Times and author of “Storm Lake: A Chronicle of Change, Resilience, and Hope from a Heartland Newspaper.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      What Are the Politics of Elon Musk? It’s Complicated.

      by

      Elon Musk has tweeted about political topics regularly since taking over Twitter, often belittling some liberal causes. But what he stands for remains largely unclear.He has called himself an independent and a centrist, yet “economically right of center, maybe.” He has said he was until recently a supporter of only Democrats and voted for President Biden. He’s encouraged people to vote Republican, which he said he did for the first time this year. Last year, he once even declared himself indifferent about politics, saying he’d rather stay out of it altogether.Elon Musk, ever a bundle of contradictions and inconsistencies, has long made his politics tricky to pin down. To many of his critics, though, his relentless flurry of tweets in the six weeks since he took over Twitter has exposed his true conservative bent, and intensified their fears that he would make the social network more susceptible to right-wing misinformation.And at times, he’s made it hard to argue with that. He has said he’d welcome former President Donald J. Trump back on Twitter; suggested that Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband was lying about the attack at their home that left him hospitalized; and reinstated accounts that have trafficked in offensive ethnic stereotypes and bigotry, including for the artist formerly known as Kanye West. (Mr. Musk later suspended Mr. West’s account again after the rapper-entrepreneur posted an image of a swastika.)His copious tweeting has generated huge amounts of attention. In a 24-hour period late this week, he tweeted more than 40 times, often with little rhyme or reason. He criticized the Biden administration’s deal with Russia that freed Brittney Griner, the Women’s National Basketball Association star. He asked Elton John to clarify his complaint about misinformation flourishing unchecked on Twitter. At times, Mr. Musk was acting like Twitter’s in-house customer service representative, boasting about new features and improved functions.And maybe that is a big part of the point — improving the image of his new $44 billion property, which he has said repeatedly is in dire financial straits.Yet Mr. Musk, who did not respond to a request for comment, continues to defy easy political categorization. His views have been described as libertarian, though these days his politics seem more contrarian than anything else. He is more clear about what he is against than what he is for.It’s true Mr. Musk certainly sounds a lot like a Republican — and, sometimes, a lot like Mr. Trump — with his missives on Twitter against “woke” politics and Covid restrictions, his attacks on “elite” media and his efforts to draw attention to allegations that Hunter Biden profited from his father’s political clout.More on Elon Musk’s Twitter TakeoverAn Established Pattern: Firing people. Talking of bankruptcy. Telling workers to be “hard core.” Twitter isn’t the first company that witnessed Elon Musk use those tactics.Rivals Emerge: Sensing an opportunity, new start-ups and other social platforms are racing to dethrone Twitter and capitalize on the chaos of its new ownership under Mr. Musk.The ‘Twitter Files’: Mr. Musk and Matt Taibbi, an independent journalist, set off an intense debate with a release of internal Twitter documents regarding a 2020 decision to restrict posts linking to a report in the New York Post about Hunter Biden.Hard Fork: The Times podcast looks at Mr. Musk’s two-day clash with Apple, which he had accused of trying to sabotage Twitter before saying the “misunderstanding” had been resolved.But where Mr. Musk has seemed most in line with the G.O.P. of Mr. Trump is in the tenor of his political commentary, which if anything seems more spiritedly anti-left than ideologically pro-right. While he has not been shy about sharing his disdain for many Democrats, his enthusiasm for Republicans has been more muted. He has stressed repeatedly that his problems are with extremists on both ends of the political spectrum.“To be clear, my historical party affiliation has been Independent, with an actual voting history of entirely Democrat until this year,” he wrote on Twitter the day before the midterm election. “And I’m open to the idea of voting Democrat again in the future.”As with many people who describe themselves as politically independent now, the hostility Mr. Musk harbors toward Democrats appears to have drawn him closer to the Republican Party over the last few years. He considers himself as part of the “center 80% of people, who wish to learn, laugh & engage in reasoned debate.”He has eagerly encouraged his followers to weigh in with their views on the country’s culture wars and traded tweets with some of the right’s favorite punching bags, like Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. When she criticized his plan to charge Twitter users $8 a month to have a verified account with one of the social media service’s signature blue check marks — “Lmao at a billionaire earnestly trying to sell people on the idea that ‘free speech’ is actually a $8/mo subscription plan,” she wrote — he dismissed her.“Your feedback is appreciated, now pay $8,” Mr. Musk shot back.Many of his recent tweets have had that kind of “own the libs” tone, the shorthand on the right for when conservatives think they’ve deftly, often sarcastically, swatted down a liberal. A couple of weeks ago, he posted video on Twitter of a closet full of T-shirts with the slogan “#stay woke” that he said he had found at the social media company’s headquarters. Then he followed up with a tweet that linked to a Justice Department report that undercut one of the central narratives of the mass protests against police brutality: that Michael Brown, a Black teenager killed by the police in Ferguson, Mo., had his hands raised when a white officer shot him.On occasion, his remarks have raised concerns that he has planted himself firmly among right-wing conspiracy theorists. When he tweeted about the attack on Ms. Pelosi’s husband, he shared the unfounded claim that there was “a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye.” He later deleted the tweet, which linked to an article from a fringe website.He also said he would support Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida for president in 2024, though his endorsement was not especially resounding. He merely replied “Yes” when someone on Twitter asked him. Mr. DeSantis, a hard-line conservative, would be an odd choice for someone who professes to want centrist governance in Washington.Mr. Musk has always claimed his concerns with Twitter’s previous management were about the ability of a small group of the company’s employees whom he described as “far left” to censor content. And over the past week, he has cheered on tweets about internal communications before he took over. The communications, which were given to two writers who have posted their findings on Twitter, calling them the Twitter Files, showed how the company went about deciding what information got suppressed.It’s been a mixed bag of revelations. Some showed how Twitter employees made it harder to see tweets from a Stanford University professor who warned about how Covid lockdowns could harm children — a view many public health experts have come around to accept well after the fact. Other documents show how more conventional, conspiracy-theory-embracing conservatives were shut down, like Dan Bongino, the radio host who was one of the biggest amplifiers of lies about the 2020 election.Mr. Musk has not professed to have any profound attachment to Republican policies, though, which is consistent with his posture before taking over Twitter.He has been highly critical of climate change deniers and said he’s proud of how Tesla forced the rest of the automobile industry to embrace electric vehicles. In 2020, he revealed that he’d spoken to Mr. Trump numerous times about the importance of developing sustainable energy, which the former president dismissed in favor of traditional fossil fuel-based sources. And Mr. Musk quit Mr. Trump’s business councils after the administration pulled out of the Paris climate accord.In an interview with The New York Times in 2020, he described his politics as “middle-of-the-road.” “I’m socially very liberal. And then economically right of center, maybe, or center. I don’t know. I’m obviously not a communist.”His political giving supports that claim. According to the Federal Election Commission, which reports spending in federal but not state races, he has donated just shy of $1 million since 2003 to candidates as conservative as former President George W. Bush and as liberal as Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat. More recently, in 2020, he donated to senators of both political parties — including Chris Coons and Gary Peters, both Democrats, and Susan Collins and John Cornyn, both Republicans.Often, it seems, his posts are motivated by personal pique, not political philosophy. He’s criticized the Biden administration, for instance, as “not the friendliest” and for excluding Tesla, the world’s largest electric vehicle maker, from a White House summit on zero-emission vehicles in August 2021. His speculation on the reason for the exclusion: General Motors and the other car companies invited are union companies; Tesla is not. “Seems to be controlled by unions,” he complained at the time.Many of the views he has espoused on Twitter over the last two years have become popular in today’s Republican Party but are hardly exclusive to card-carrying Republicans. His criticism of progressives he views as overly censorious and sanctimonious is a sentiment many on the left have expressed. And his public condemnation of strict Covid containment measures in 2020 channeled what would become a growing skepticism of widespread public health restrictions. Though he was more exercised about them than most. “Fascist,” he once declared.Often, his tweets can seem to imply he leans in one direction when it’s just as likely that he is trying to court controversy. How to interpret, for instance, a post last week of what he said was an image of his bedside table? It had a revolver on it and a musket in a wooden case decorated with an image of George Washington crossing the Delaware River during the Revolutionary War.“Greetings, I’m Musket, Elon Musket,” he wrote.A few days later, he sounded pleased with himself as he remarked on the way Twitter had changed since his purchase was completed in October. “So many interesting posts on Twitter these days!” More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Sinema Adds Intrigue and Democratic Fury to Arizona’s 2024 Senate Race

      by

      Senator Kyrsten Sinema’s announcement that she would become an independent left Democrats in her state, many of whom have long wanted to defeat her in a primary, facing a new political calculus.The one constant in Senator Kyrsten Sinema’s political career, from her start as a left-wing rabble rouser and Ralph Nader aide to her announcement on Friday that she was leaving the Democratic Party to become an independent, is her boundless ability to draw attention to herself.Less than 72 hours after Democrats celebrated winning Georgia’s Senate race and the presumed 51st vote in the chamber, Ms. Sinema yanked the focus of the political world in Washington and Arizona back to her.This time, it was not another agenda-stymieing disagreement with the party that spent millions electing her to office, but instead a declaration that she was breaking with Democrats entirely, at least in name.“I’m going to be the same person I’ve always been. That’s who I am,” Ms. Sinema said in a two-minute video on Twitter on Friday morning, adding, “Nothing is going to change for me.”Democrats believe — or hope — that little will change in Congress, where Ms. Sinema will keep her Democratic committee assignments and where her defection will not change her former party’s control of the Senate.But in Arizona’s Democratic circles, distaste for the senator runs deep, and her announcement immediately shifted the spotlight to the 2024 race for her Senate seat.Democrats in the state have long presumed that she would run for re-election and that she was all but certain to face a difficult primary challenge, possibly from Representative Ruben Gallego, who has regularly criticized her over the past two years, or from Representative Greg Stanton, who signaled his interest on Friday. Ms. Sinema, however, left her potential rivals guessing, batting away questions about future bids for office.Hannah Hurley, a spokeswoman for Ms. Sinema, suggested that the senator had long promised to be an independent voice for the state, citing an ad from her 2018 campaign that emphasized a “fiercely independent record” and a “reputation for working across the aisle.”“Independent, just like Arizona,” the spot said.“She is not focused at all on campaign politics,” Ms. Hurley said of Ms. Sinema, who declined an interview on Friday afternoon.Democrats in Arizona signaled on Friday that they still planned to support a candidate against Ms. Sinema, whether it ends up being Mr. Gallego, Mr. Stanton or someone else. National Democratic leaders were cagey on Friday about how they would approach the 2024 race or a potential independent Sinema campaign. One main worry for Democrats is that running a strong candidate against Ms. Sinema in the general election might inadvertently help elect a Republican.Representatives for Senate Democrats’ campaign arm and for Senate Majority PAC, the leading Democratic super PAC devoted to Senate races, declined to comment on Friday afternoon about Ms. Sinema’s move. Senator Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat and majority leader, said that Ms. Sinema would keep her committee positions. “Kyrsten is independent,” he said in a statement. “That’s how she’s always been.”And the White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, said in a statement that President Biden expected to “continue to work successfully” with Ms. Sinema but did not address her 2024 prospects.Ms. Sinema was elected to the Senate in 2018, filling the seat of another party apostate, Senator Jeff Flake, a Republican who declined to seek re-election after breaking with President Donald J. Trump. He is now Mr. Biden’s ambassador to Turkey.The working assumption in Arizona political circles has long been that progressive anger at Ms. Sinema was concentrated among Democratic political activists, and that she could survive a primary from her left. But recent polling suggests that she has lost the confidence of many Arizona voters outside the center-right Chamber of Commerce types whom she has cultivated with the latest iteration of her political identity.A Civiqs survey conducted shortly before Election Day found she had an approval rating of just 7 percent among the state’s Democrats, 27 percent among Republicans and 29 percent among independents.Moderate Republicans uncomfortable with Mr. Trump’s politics have turned Arizona from a red state into a political battleground, swinging to Mr. Biden in 2020 and helping Democrats triumph in statewide elections last month against a Trump-backed slate of candidates. Ms. Sinema’s calculation in leaving the Democratic Party is that those voters can lift her to victory on their own.The Trumpian makeover of the Arizona Republican Party has also alarmed Democrats who want their candidates to be a forceful opposition — not present themselves as ideologically ambiguous.“Everything she’s done has been in the service of Kyrsten Sinema,” said Ian Danley, a progressive political consultant in Phoenix. “There’s really no other way to describe the decisions she makes. She cares about attention. She cares about setting herself up for the next thing.”The Democratic grumbling has Mr. Gallego and Mr. Stanton leaving little pretense about their ambitions to challenge Ms. Sinema in 2024. Mr. Gallego, a Harvard graduate and Marine veteran, has been a regular presence on cable news whenever Ms. Sinema alienates the party base, and his lively and occasionally profane Twitter feed often criticizes her. On Friday, he called her decision a “betrayal” of volunteers who knocked on doors in triple-digit heat to elect her as a Democrat.Ms. Sinema won election with the help of left-leaning groups in Arizona, but many of them quickly soured on her.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesMr. Stanton, a former Phoenix mayor who holds Ms. Sinema’s old House seat, on Friday tweeted what appeared to be a snapshot of a poll showing him leading Ms. Sinema by 40 percentage points in a hypothetical matchup.Her decision, he wrote, “isn’t about a post-partisan epiphany. It’s about political preservation.”Arizona’s progressive organizations and officials were already wary of Ms. Sinema during her 2018 run for Senate, but at the time no Democrat in the state had won election to the chamber in three decades. They collectively held their noses to turn out the vote for her in hopes that she would reciprocate their support once in office.Once Ms. Sinema became the linchpin of Senate Democrats’ narrow governing majority in 2021, those groups began publicly fuming at Ms. Sinema, whom they accused of abandoning her promises on immigration, health care and the environment. Ms. Sinema dismissed their complaints, echoing her general practice of dodging journalists in Washington and Arizona.When she theatrically turned a thumbs-down on a Senate vote in March 2021 to increase the minimum wage to $15 per hour, it was the last straw for her party’s base. When she skipped votes to participate in Ironman triathlons or spent weeks as an intern at a Sonoma County winery, it served only to cement her reputation among progressives that she had removed herself from the concerns of working-class Arizonans.In the fall of 2021, activists from LUCHA, one of the groups that worked to elect Ms. Sinema, confronted her at Arizona State University. Activists followed Ms. Sinema into a bathroom and demanded that she explain why she had not done more to push for a pathway to citizenship for about eight million undocumented immigrants. The protesters said they had taken the drastic action only because Ms. Sinema did not hold town-hall meetings or answer calls from constituents. Protesters have also chased her through airports and followed her into a high-priced fund-raising event at an upscale resort.“We are not surprised that she would once again center herself,” said Alejandra Gomez, the executive director of LUCHA. “This is another unfortunate, selfish act. It is yet another betrayal — there have been a slew of betrayals, but this is one of the ultimates, because voters elected her as Democrat, and she turned her back on those voters.”But some of Ms. Sinema’s allies argue that she has been consistently clear about having an independent streak.“I love that she’s going to be even freer now to just do the right thing,” said Tammy Caputi, a Scottsdale City Council member who is herself a political independent, adding that Ms. Sinema had long been leery of being “straitjacketed by partisan politics.”She went on, “I’m hoping that Kyrsten’s decision to become an independent will spark other people to think long and hard about being overly attached to one party.”But for many Arizonans and Ms. Sinema’s fellow senators, the big question is whether or not she will run again in 2024, which she neglected to clarify in her video announcement, an op-ed article in The Arizona Republic or news media interviews that were released on Friday morning. Because she keeps a tight political circle of advisers and speaks little to the news media, there has long been far more speculation than explanation about her motivations.“Anybody that underestimates Senator Sinema is being foolish,” said Representative Raúl Grijalva, a liberal Arizona Democrat who said he planned to support Mr. Gallego if he ran. “She’s going to be formidable if she decides to run.”Ms. Sinema and a bipartisan group of senators discussing infrastructure legislation last year. She does not hold town-hall meetings with constituents, and rarely speaks with the news media.Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesA person familiar with Mr. Stanton’s deliberations confirmed that he was considering running for Senate in Arizona in 2024 as a Democrat. The person confirmed that the image from a poll that Mr. Stanton tweeted on Friday was from a statewide survey in which he had tested his potential candidacy for Senate.In an interview on Friday, Mr. Gallego said Ms. Sinema’s rush to announce her party switch soon after the outcome of the Georgia race fit neatly into her career trajectory.“I wish she would have waited for the Democrats at least to enjoy a couple more days after the victory,” he said. “But, you know, she’s not known really for thinking of others.”Mr. Gallego said he would make a decision about what office to seek in 2024 in the new year. He had just gotten off the phone with his mother, who was catching up on the news.“She said: ‘I heard Sinema is not running. Make sure to talk to me before you do anything,’” Mr. Gallego said. More