5 Reasons Why Sinema Won Arizona

 

Outsiders think of Arizona as one of the reddest states. From Barry Goldwater to anti-immigration hawks like Sheriff Joe Arpaio, our most famous politicians tend to be Republicans. But traditionally, Arizona is rather purple and regularly features tight statewide elections.

In the past 45 years, Democrats have held the governorship as often as the Republicans. But in the last decade, the GOP consolidated their hold on power due to the unprecedented organization of the Tea Party and the Left’s hyperbolic anti-Arizona rhetoric in the wake of the illegal immigration debates. (“Vote for us, you dumb racists!” wasn’t the winning message Democrats expected.) Last Tuesday, the pendulum finally swung back to the center.

Many non-Arizonans wonder how decorated fighter pilot Martha McSally could have lost to a  progressive-turned-moderate like Kyrsten Sinema. Excuses like “Trump lost the suburbs” and “Democrats cheat” miss the point. Instead, here are five local reasons this race turned out as it did.

McSally’s Prevent Defense

McSally is no stranger to razor-thin votes. She lost the 2012 congressional race by less than 2,500 votes and won the 2014 rematch by just 167. A major reason for this is her campaigning style.

The Pima County Republican is very cautious. Very cautious. Instead of barnstorming the map and mixing it up with all comers, she carefully issues press releases and attends controlled events. She wouldn’t even agree to a debate with Sinema for months and then only participated in one.

Her style is reminiscent of the much-derided “prevent defense” in the NFL. A football team wants to protect a lead, so they stop trying to score and merely attempt to prevent the other team from scoring. It backfires so often, it’s often parodied as the “prevent-you-from-winning defense.” It definitely backfired for McSally.

Negative Ad Burnout

Most Arizonans would agree that the 2018 Senate race was the most negative statewide campaign they had ever seen. Traditionally, candidates buy a mix of positive and negative ads, a proven strategy that Sinema held to. But McSally and the outside groups supporting her were nearly all-negative, all-the-time. Focusing on the Republican’s remarkable achievements in the military and also in politics would have gone a long way to define a woman few in the state knew much about. Sure, there were a few ads like that, but not nearly enough to match Sinema’s seeming optimism.

McSally hails from Pima County, home to Tucson, while Sinema is from Maricopa County, home to Phoenix. More than half the state’s population lives in the latter, so they didn’t know much about the Tucson-based candidate. She needed to spend a lot more time defining herself since Sinema was already defined to a big chunk of Arizonans.

The McCain/Flake Hangover

Arizona conservatives have been frustrated with their Republican senators for many years. Jeff Flake and John McCain campaigned as rock-ribbed right-wingers every six years only to vote with Democrats in DC on crucial issues.

Since McSally had been very friendly with McCain, many conservative Republicans were turned off from the start. Late in the campaign, McSally embraced Trump, so moderate Republicans were turned off. To much of the GOP, a vote for McSally seemed like a requirement but was nothing to get excited about.

The Left Was Motivated — and Organized

The Right in Arizona had been well-organized for the past decade, but the Left finally caught up. What began as a grassroots effort to increase teacher pay in early 2018 was quickly professionalized by the state Democratic party and outside groups. Through social media and text messages, the movement activated hundreds of thousands of Arizonans and resulted in a 20 percent salary increase.

What do you do with all that contact info? Keep promoting Democratic causes of course. Tom Steyer’s NextGen America was notable in this case, flooding info to the young, while other players flooded everyone else.

Sinema Ran a Great Campaign

Whether its genuine or an act, Sinema has focused on cultivating her moderate bona fides for years. In the House and now in the Senate campaign, her mailers and ads are nothing but waving flags and smiling veterans. She barely mentions her party but stresses her “independence” and willingness to work with “literally anyone” on conservative issues.

She is also well liked on both sides, cultivating working relationship and friendships with political opponents for years.

All That Said…

As frustrating as it was to watch McSally’s weak campaign, I thought Arizona remained a bit redder than it actually was. At the start of the year, I predicted she and Sinema would win their respective primaries and McSally would prevail in a squeaker. But instead of the R winning by a point, the D did.

Gov. Doug Ducey defeated his Democratic challenger by double digits, but his appeal wasn’t matched in other statewide races. If the GOP wants to win in the Grand Canyon State, they can’t rest on their party registration advantage and old trends. Instead, great candidates need to run great campaigns and, at the very least, keep up with Democratic GOTV innovations.

Published in Elections
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 174 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Good job Jon Gabriel by being included in Real Clear Politics!  You’ve made us proud!

    • #61
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    I have to say I’m mystified by this thread. Jon Gabriel is usually rational about Trump, but I read this post as deflecting Trump’s responsibility for this loss and proposing some three ball bank shot rejection of McCain and Flake by 200,000 Republican leaning voters.

    I’m mystified by a couple of posters who continue to beat the “Trump is responsible” drum based 9on mere speculation, not that those persons could be persuaded otherwise. If 200,000 (or fewer) Arizonans aren’t capable of figuring out that a vote for a Democrat is the proverbial nose cutting to spite the party’s face, that’s purely on them.

    But . . . but Orange Man Bad! : (

    As with many political theories the “Trump bad hurts (R)’s” works nearly as often as it doesn’t.

    It had been 10 years since the Democrats had won a statewide office.   This year they won four.  ETTD.

     

    • #62
  3. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):
    In his last run for governor in 1990 George Wallace got 90% of the Black vote, in 2014 Tim Scott got 7% in his race for the Senate.

    Wallace was an extremely gifted hands on populist politician who conveyed that he liked being with his people (not even though they were poor, sweaty, smelly ones; as a good populist he communicated the conviction that he enjoyed being with hard working people, and that the hard working people he’s talking to don’t stink as far as he was concerned.) As a segregationist, he was violent and confrontational, but he made a deep, warm, human connection to his white voters.

    After he publicly announced that he had been born again in Christ, he followed that up by public apologies to black Americans in general and Civil Rights movement leaders in particular. At least in Alabama in 1990, that kind of naked repentance was compelling – particularly coming from a pain-wracked man in a wheelchair who told them that he knew that his being in that chair was because of the sins he was now repenting. He followed that up by embracing his black constituents, clearly conveying that he was still a populist (and while the content of the rhetoric differed between white and black populists, the style of Southern white and black populists of that era was almost identical) but that his people now included them.

    His white voters had always felt that Wallace heard them, felt he was speaking to their hearts, and were persuaded that he would work hard for their interests. His new black prospective voters now felt the same, and that for the sake of his own soul he would work as hard for them as he had worked against them when he was serving the Devil.

    That’s how he got 90% of the black vote.

    I agree with everything you said, I just wish Republican populism could be that inclusive too, instead of being defined by Birtherism, Charlottesville and meanness of spirit.

    I could live with populism if it were limited to “I really, really care about everyone.” Trump’s Birtherism, Charlottesville, and meanness of spirit are disqualifying.  

    I really love how George Wallace humbled himself to those he had persecuted, not unlike St. Paul.

    • #63
  4. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    • #64
  5. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Django (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Could you explain how Birtherism was “masterful”? I see it as an unforced error, just as I do Charlottesville and a lot of the unnecessary slurs on immigrants.

    Trump screwed the pooch on Birtherism. He should have pointed out that Obama is willing to lie when it’s to his advantage, and then asked, “Were you lying when you said you were born in Kenya, or are you lying now when you claim you weren’t?” Then, let it drop.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/promotional-booklet/

    Of course, Obama can always claim he didn’t proof-read the cover. Why not? The book was likely ghost-written anyway.

    Yes!  Trump keeping beat the drum on Birtherism after Obama produced his long form birth certificate was disqualifying.

    • #65
  6. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Image result for STop it. Get help

    • #66
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I could live with populism if it were limited to

    Why would people want the government to steal for them? Why would they be sick of cultural marxism? 

    • #67
  8. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Image result for STop it. Get help

    I guess they vote with their feelings. Maybe there is help? 

    • #68
  9. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    As an outsider(not from AZ) looking in it seems like the best plan to retain the (R) seat …. not to mention placing in the Senate a military veteran woman as the face of the (R) Party going into the 2020 election cycle.

    But maybe some AZ residents have a better plan.

    As an outsider as well, my problem is that I don’t know who else other than her is there to do the job? The only other AZ politicians I know is Chem Trail lady and the Sheriff guy. I assume there are other’s there but I don’t know them.

    Sheriff guy is 86 years old, so if he were selected to the McCain/Kyl Senate seat, at least McSally would still have a reasonable chance of still being selected to fill out the remainder of the McCain/Kyl/Arpaio Senate seat.

     

    • #69
  10. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    How can you say that? I thought she was now disqualified because she “embraced Trump”?

    Can you perhaps try for consistency?

     

    • #70
  11. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    I have to say I’m mystified by this thread. Jon Gabriel is usually rational about Trump, but I read this post as deflecting Trump’s responsibility for this loss and proposing some three ball bank shot rejection of McCain and Flake by 200,000 Republican leaning voters.

    I’m mystified by a couple of posters who continue to beat the “Trump is responsible” drum based 9on mere speculation, not that those persons could be persuaded otherwise. If 200,000 (or fewer) Arizonans aren’t capable of figuring out that a vote for a Democrat is the proverbial nose cutting to spite the party’s face, that’s purely on them.

    But . . . but Orange Man Bad! : (

    As with many political theories the “Trump bad hurts (R)’s” works nearly as often as it doesn’t.

    It had been 10 years since the Democrats had won a statewide office. This year they won four. ETTD.

    ETTD except all the (R) offices that were not lost of course, and those (R) seats that were picked up, but other than that ETTD.

    • #71
  12. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1062406541410816000

    • #72
  13. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    How can you say that? I thought she was now disqualified because she “embraced Trump”?

    Can you perhaps try for consistency?

    Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds!

    • #73
  14. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    How can you say that? I thought she was now disqualified because she “embraced Trump”?

    Can you perhaps try for consistency?

    Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds!

    Quote the whole thing and see if you like the flavor more… or less:

    A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — ‘Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.’ — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.

     

    • #74
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    How can you say that? I thought she was now disqualified because she “embraced Trump”?

    Can you perhaps try for consistency?

    Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds!

    Quote the whole thing and see if you like the flavor more… or less:

    A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — ‘Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.’ — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.

    Thank you so much.  Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.  

     

     

    • #75
  16. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    I think it is likely that several factors played the critical part in the loss.  It doesn’t have to be one thing or the other as Jon pointed out.

    As of today, Gov Ducey has 182,000 more votes than McSally.  If only 20,000 of those had voted for McSally instead of Sinema she would have won.

    It could be 20,000 who preferred Sinema’s positive ads over McSally’s negativity.

    It could be 20,000 who thought Sinema more moderate than Ducey’s full throated progressive opponent (yes, I know about Sinema’s nutty past but, more recently, she had an actual track record of relatively moderate voting while in Congress).

    It could be 20,000 who thought Sinema cared more about their healthcare (a big part of her advertising).

    It could be 20,000 who didn’t like Trump.

    It could be 20,000 who didn’t like McSally because she didn’t like Trump enough.

    It could be 4,000 from each of the above categories.

    The reality is McSally lost on all of those choices.

    • #76
  17. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Great post Gumby. 

    The GOP was so stupid to not get tactical and strategic about the ACA. I mean this stuff scares the crap out of people, for good reason, and Obama has given away a ton of free goodies in this thing.

    • #77
  18. Petty Boozswha Inactive
    Petty Boozswha
    @PettyBoozswha

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    Wallace was never that committed to segregation from the start, in the earliest stage of his career he had been on the board of the Tuskegee Institute, but later decided he’d never be “out-n***rd” again when he lost a race to a fire breather.

    Edit: Apparently this got attached to the wrong note, but you guys can figure it out.

    • #78
  19. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Wallace’s running mate was Curtis LeMay. LOL 

    • #79
  20. Petty Boozswha Inactive
    Petty Boozswha
    @PettyBoozswha

    Thank you so much. Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.

    You did better than that – you changed parties twice in one day.

    • #80
  21. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Great post Gumby.

    The GOP was so stupid to not get tactical and strategic about the ACA. I mean this stuff scares the crap out of people, for good reason, and Obama has given away a ton of free goodies in this thing.

    Yep, opposing it was good enough for the 2010 elections, but once the GOP controlled Congress and the WH they needed to step up (and not just repeal Obamacare).  With 8 years to plan for that, I thought they would be prepared, but no.  Reminds me of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  I assumed the Bush Administration had a coherent plan what to do there once the invasion was over, but no.

    • #81
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Great post Gumby.

    The GOP was so stupid to not get tactical and strategic about the ACA. I mean this stuff scares the crap out of people, for good reason, and Obama has given away a ton of free goodies in this thing.

    Yep, opposing it was good enough for the 2010 elections, but once the GOP controlled Congress and the WH they needed to step up (and not just repeal Obamacare). With 8 years to plan for that, I thought they would be prepared, but no. Reminds me of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. I assumed the Bush Administration had a coherent plan what to do there once the invasion was over, but no.

    This is also dead on. I forget who it was, maybe it was the British ambassador, but he went back to Tony what’s his name and said the exact same thing before the invasion. I mean my god, what is Mises.org ever wrong about? Why is the health insurance system screwed up? Government policy in World War II, and then they never adjusted. It just fed back on itself, over and over. Then LBJ passed Medicaid. The actuarial’s were only off A HUNDRED TIMES. Then they started the CBO because Medicare was such a disaster. It never would’ve passed of course. Next they stuck a ringer in CBO to pass Obamacare, Peter Orzag. Now look where we are.

    Good luck  arguing with any of that.

    • #82
  23. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Thank you so much. Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.

    You did better than that – you changed parties twice in one day.

    Perhaps Churchill was like Reagan. Reagan said he didn’t leave the party; the party left him.  ( I think it was Reagan who said that. )

    • #83
  24. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Thank you so much. Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.

    You did better than that – you changed parties twice in one day.

    Touche!

    • #84
  25. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Django (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Thank you so much. Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.

    You did better than that – you changed parties twice in one day.

    Perhaps Churchill was like Reagan. Reagan said he didn’t leave the party; the party left him. ( I think it was Reagan who said that. )

    Yes, Reagan famously said that.

    • #85
  26. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    I think it is likely that several factors played the critical part in the loss. It doesn’t have to be one thing or the other as Jon pointed out.

    As of today, Gov Ducey has 182,000 more votes than McSally. If only 20,000 of those had voted for McSally instead of Sinema she would have won.

    It could be 20,000 who preferred Sinema’s positive ads over McSally’s negativity.

    It could be 20,000 who thought Sinema more moderate than Ducey’s full throated progressive opponent (yes, I know about Sinema’s nutty past but, more recently, she had an actual track record of relatively moderate voting while in Congress).

    It could be 20,000 who thought Sinema cared more about their healthcare (a big part of her advertising).

    It could be 20,000 who didn’t like Trump.

    It could be 20,000 who didn’t like McSally because she didn’t like Trump enough.

    It could be 4,000 from each of the above categories.

    The reality is McSally lost on all of those choices.

    Agreed, which is why there’s no basis for firmly picking any one or couple of the above.  As is being done here in a few instances.  The one thing we do know is that a substantial number of people who voted for Ducey did not vote for McSally.  That’s their choice and their responsibility.

     

    • #86
  27. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Great post Gumby.

    The GOP was so stupid to not get tactical and strategic about the ACA. I mean this stuff scares the crap out of people, for good reason, and Obama has given away a ton of free goodies in this thing.

    Yep, opposing it was good enough for the 2010 elections, but once the GOP controlled Congress and the WH they needed to step up (and not just repeal Obamacare). With 8 years to plan for that, I thought they would be prepared, but no. Reminds me of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. I assumed the Bush Administration had a coherent plan what to do there once the invasion was over, but no.

    I like this. I’m going to steal it.

    The ACA repeal was the Iraq War of legislative failures. It links two of the greatest GOP failures of possibly anyone’s lifetime together.

    • #87
  28. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    So with all of this analysis let me ask my question from yesterday’s thread. Is it worth putting her in McCain’s old Senate Seat so she can run as an incumbent in 2020?

    Yes!

    How can you say that? I thought she was now disqualified because she “embraced Trump”?

    Can you perhaps try for consistency?

    Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds!

    Quote the whole thing and see if you like the flavor more… or less:

    A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — ‘Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.’ — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.

    Thank you so much. Sir Winston Churchill changed parties, not once but twice in his career.

    Churchill was channeling his American mother and quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson – and was expert at post hoc self promoting rhetoric.

    Emerson drew heavily on the German Romantics, whom I have come to regard as good for music and terrible for civilization as a whole. Emerson attempted to port their thinking to America, and while he was a talented essayist was similarly destructive despite, or perhaps because, of being highly inspirational to many.

    Michael Doran’s lecture and essay on the theological roots of US foreign policy actually have broader implications; he locates much of US thinking on nationhood on a theological disagreement between fundamentalist and modernist Protestants. Emerson was probably towards the “left” end of the modernists.

    He also gave an interesting interview for the Tikvah Fund’s podcast.

    • #88
  29. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Wallace’s running mate was Curtis LeMay. LOL

    https://www.azquotes.com/author/8601-Curtis_LeMay

    There are some doozies.

    • #89
  30. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I would add another reason why Sinema won.  Massive Democratic Party turnout.

    According to the Arizona Secretary of State’s website, there are 3,716,161 registered voters in Arizona.  Final figures are not yet available, but according to the Arizona Republic, there have been over 2,200,000 ballots counted, and there are another 271,000 ballots yet to count, for a total of at least 2,471,000 ballots.  That is a midterm turnout of 66.5%, shattering the old record of 60.5% turnout in the 2006 election, the last time Democrats rose up to send a message to an unpopular Republican President.

    I am 66 years old.  I have never seen Democrats more angry, and motivated in my 46 years of voting.  (The 26th Amendment for voting at age 18 was ratified in 1971.  My first major vote was in 1972.  For George McGovern.  I was young.  I never voted for a Democrat for President since then.)

    Why are Democrats so damn energized?  Donald J. Trump.  In my opinion, Democrats’ hatred of Trump far surpasses their hatred of Nixon, Reagan or W.  It is incandescent.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.