Kyrsten Sinema just confirmed for anyone still "unsure" that she is a narcissistic opportunist drunk on her own sense of "power"

 

No Packer game this week, so the Aaron Rodgers rehabilitation project is on hold for the time being. Unfortunately it seems that Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is not only making no effort to “rehabilitate” her image, but this raging narcissist is completely tanking whatever credibility she has left by announcing she is leaving the Democratic Party and registering as an “independent.” After Raphael Warnock won in the Georgia run-off, many in media were calling this "centrist" obstructionist "irrelevant," and so the vindictive and cynical Sinema took her "revenge" on the Democrats. She claims she will still caucus with the Democrats, but if she gets "mad" and ends-up choosing to join the Republicans, so long as Joe Manchin remains in the party, Sinema would lose the “power” and publicity she so obviously craves.

Sinema angered many Democrats in Arizona by refusing to campaign for Democratic candidates; in fact her statement that people should just let the election process “play out” seemed intended to placate election deniers—aimed particularly at supporters of Kari Lake. Sinema’s decision to continue to be an obstructionist flew in the face of Sen. Mark Kelly’s reelection, even thought he was mostly fully in support of Joe Biden’s agenda—making Sinema’s claims that only a center-right candidate could win election to federal office in Arizona a farce. Voters respect people who have clear beliefs, not people who are in the pockets of big business—which the people who voted for Sinema in 2018 did not know she was. 

There are other suspicions about the “switch.” Having boxed herself into a corner where Arizona Democrats no longer trust her after having been made suckers by her thirst for power and fame and her willingness to kowtow to those who were bankrolling her, and thus abandoning any pretense to actually believing in anything but herself,  it appeared likely that Sinema would be “primaried” and lose big, with Rep. Ruben Gallego being pushed to challenger her; the switch to “independent” is thus clearly an effort to avoid this probability. 

What this also shows us is that the cowardly Sinema is an opportunist who believes in nothing; as Mother Jones noted, her ideological metamorphosis from being a “radical” anti-war activist to Democrat to “centrist”  suggests that she would do anything to make herself “stand out” from the field. While Manchin at least put forth policy proposals he could “support,” what made Sinema “stand out” was that it was almost impossible to nail down what exactly she would support. Even Biden’s personal interventions were arrogantly rebuffed by Sinema.

In Tim Murphy's 2021 profile in the progressive publication Jones (which I found a bit too “forgiving” on her devolution of principle), we learn that she was a “talented actor” who early on described herself as a “libertarian” who apparently “loves shoes.” She doesn’t like doing “what she’s supposed to.” While almost everyone was on board for the “War on Terror” that was underway after 9-11, Sinema joined a radical group opposed to war called the Arizona Alliance for Peaceful Justice (AAPJ). Why? In retrospect we can see that it was opportunity to “stand out” among the “sheep” who followed orders.

She helped organize protests with slogans like “Bombing for Peace Is Like Fucking for Virginity” and “Real Patriots Drive Hybrids,” and drew attention to herself by bellowing through a bullhorn wearing a pink tutu. She claimed that these protests would keep up until “war was over.” But her commitment to the cause, predictably, didn’t last long. After a protest march in Florida saw the group easily overcome by police, Simema quit the "cause" because she was upset about how easily it was “defeated” by the “system.”

Did she become more radicalized after that? Only in the sense of her megalomania. After losing a city council race in 2001, she ran for the state legislature as an “independent” in 2002. The Democratic Party establishment called her too “extreme for central Phoenix” and so she blamed the party for her defeat, which is apparently is a grudge she still holds. But ever the opportunist, Simema didn’t let “grudges” get in the way of her self-advancement. “Tired of being “irrelevant,” she quit being on the “fringe,” went to law school and ran as a Democrat for the state legislature , winning a seat in 2004.

But what had changed? Nothing; she was still the glory-seeking opportunist still finding her "way": “’Operating outside the two-party system just wasn’t getting her anywhere,” according to Jones. “And for her first few months on the job, operating inside didn’t either. Sinema was, as then–Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano later put it, ‘a gadfly’—an ‘unconventional’ and ‘starry-eyed idealist’ who was ‘suspicious of those who disagreed with her’” who “gave blistering floor speeches but accomplished nothing.”

In her version of Mein Kampf, Unite and Conquer, Simema was dismissive of “identity politics" and the “mantle of victimhood,” yet she obviously not only sees herself as a “victim” of the “system.” but can still work within that “system” if it helps her personally. Being bi-sexual, she could thus support groups opposed to Arizona’s Proposition 107—not because it would eliminate equal rights protections in the state constitution in general, but simply because it would ban same-sex marriage, since she sees herself as part of the LGBTQ community. The proposition would pass easily in the state despite her opposition.

Sinema then became a poser for immigrant rights, which she would abandon as well. Why? Because it’s a “loser,” and she doesn’t like “losing.” Although she opposed the anti-immigrant Prop 1070, she refused to attack its sponsor, state senate president Russell Pearce, because she had become “buddies” with the “boss.” She revealed her self-serving hypocrisy by working with Pearce on an “anti-trafficking” bill that was simply a cover for the anti-immigrant Republican agenda. For Sinema, it was all about being “relevant.”

Today, Sinema takes “credit” for bills like the infrastructure package and $1400 checks, but only because those bills had a modicum of “bi-partisan” support that she had nothing to do with. When it came to the Build Back Better and voting rights bills, she was nowhere to be found. According to Jones

That is what’s driving Arizona progressives crazy right now—the possibility that after finally acquiring power, Sinema simply won’t let Democrats use it. Russell Pearce isn’t her boss anymore. For the first time in her career, Sinema doesn’t have to choose between playing nice and protesting; she can simply agree to change the rules so the Senate works like it’s supposed to.

In this video it is discusses how Sinema is completely full of shit, conned voters by using Democratic talking points to win election in 2018—including on minimum wage and drug prescription prices –before becoming big business’ “million dollar woman”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=R_isv35NQY0

This graphic displays that rather than "bringing people" together, most people in her state do not trust her—especially Hispanics who feel especially betrayed by her…

 

Another poll showed Sinema with a 19 percent favorable rating in Arizona, compared to Gallego's 58 percent. This graphic shows that instead of “bringing all sides together,” Sinema is delusional, as the reality is that while the Democrats have barely moved the needle ideologically, Republicans have become much more extreme in their rightward tilt:

 

In a CNN interview after the switch in which she is asked about the view that she is an “enigma,” she responds by the claiming she is “very direct”—yet in the next instance when she is asked specifically what her agenda is going forward, those are a “secret.”

This video covers her metamorphosis from radical left to radical “centrist"…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI5Z7Zg64YM

...while this one provides the view from the progressive angle:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blzVZGHbQJs

There are even those discussing her “fashion” statements, which obviously is meant to attract “attention,” underline her “nonconformity”—or as most people believe, to distract from people discussing her  self-obsessions and total lack of principle:

 

 

If anyone dares to question the fact that she doesn’t care about anyone but herself, Sinema has a message for you:

 

This is the problem Democrats will face in 2024. Whether they place a candidate on the Arizona Democratic ticket in 2024 or not doesn't matter. Hardly anyone trusts Sinema, so it is unlikely she will be re-elected even if "unopposed" by a Democrat, but then again if a Democrat runs against both her and a Republican, the latter is likely to win (as if she cares at this point). The only thing that can "save" the situation is if Sinema decides to run for president, as if this flake thinks the whole country can be conned too.