Who Is Kyrsten Sinema Telling to F— Off?
Her style has overtaken her substance.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema spent her Sunday sipping sangria in a pink newsboy cap and a ring that says “Fuck Off.” The Arizona Democrat got someone to take a photo of her, ring proudly displayed in the foreground. Then, she posted the image to her Instagram stories.
Sinema’s outfit, which also included oversized fuchsia glasses and gigantic earrings containing a charm of what appears to be a skull and butterfly, is right in line with her sartorial M.O. The former Congresswoman and first-term senator has long been the flashiest dresser in the Capitol, and during the pandemic, her wardrobe has gotten even weirder.* She’s worn several highlighter-hued wigs on the Senate floor to hide her grown-out dye job as she stayed home from the salon. (According to her spokesperson, the wigs were a reminder to constituents to practice COVID-19 precautions.) In February, she wore a pink sweater emblazoned with the phrase “Dangerous Creature,” a nod to a line from one of romance novelist Lisa Kleypas’ books: “A well-read woman is a dangerous creature.”
I’ve always been a fan of Sinema’s flamboyant getups, which have gotten more daring over the course of her tenure—not because I particularly like the clothes she wears, but simply because they make Congressional fashion a lot more interesting. Her eschewal of the traditional array of solid neutrals and jewel tones, sheath dresses, and conservative pumps would seem to suggest a healthy disregard for fusty, outdated customs—both explicit and implicit—of political dress, which were devised with a certain race, class, and gender of politician in mind. That’s probably the exact interpretation Sinema intended: It supports her self-presentation as an independent-minded outsider, beholden to no party or standard of Congressional dress. One would be forgiven for assuming that a neon-wigged, go-go boot–clad, “Dangerous Creature”–wearing senator was a hippie-dippie liberal, but one would be wrong. Sinema’s weirdo wardrobe isn’t an outgrowth of some anything-goes progressive ideology, but rather a matching complement to her weirdo politics, which have drastically changed over the years and don’t seem to coalesce into any discernible, deeply-held ideology at all.
But Sinema’s “Fuck Off” ring marks a new phase of her wardrobe still. The cheeky display is maybe the clearest indication we’ve received of how Sinema views her own role in the Senate this term, especially since she rarely speaks to the national press. Since the Democrats took control of all three branches of government in January, Sinema has relished her new role as one of just a few Democrats standing in the way of an ambitious progressive wish list. While Sen. Joe Manchin has received a possibly outsized share of the attention (and blame) for his near-singlehanded ability to thwart the Democrats’ plans, Sinema’s relatively moderate politics and obsessive fixation on bipartisanship is equally limiting to her own party’s ability to implement its agenda. That includes a voting rights bill that could counter some of the partisan Republican attacks on the franchise, which would stand no chance of passage in the 50-50 Senate without filibuster reform—a step Sinema has repeatedly said she will not consider.
In this context, Sinema’s ring oozes contempt. When elected officials adopt a posture of mockery toward their critics or constituents, they lose their claim to an image of thoughtful, measured leadership. Sinema is behaving like a drama-seeking celebrity caught in a cycle of clap-backs, not like a senator who has the power to block, or implement, policies that would improve the lives of millions. Her style, in other words, has overtaken her substance.
Some people, invested with the power of a Sinema or a Manchin, would develop a solemn understanding of their own responsibility and seek to convey that to the people who elected them. Sinema, however, has been flaunting her power in highly visible and unseemly ways.
> When she voted against including a $15 minimum wage mandate in the most recent pandemic relief bill, she made a spectacle of it, popping her hip and giving an exaggerated thumbs-down to the vote counters. The moment, viewed by progressives as a vindictive show of indifference toward the poor, became a meme. Sinema wasn’t the only Senate Democrat who voted against the provision; seven of her colleagues joined her. But none of them made themselves the focus of the story the way Sinema did. Whatever plausible reason she might have offered for her position, such as protecting small businesses, was subsumed by her smugness. . .
A saucy put-down is the last missive Sinema should be sending at the height of her legislative power, especially as she prepares to build support among colleagues and constituents for her $11 minimum wage bill. There is a very “cry more, lib” vibe to the sangria photo, a suggestion that Sinema is as motivated by spite and ego as her most insufferable Republican counterparts. There are plenty of norms of political self-presentation worth breaking. A veneer of compassion isn’t one of them.
========================================================================
RELATED CONTENT ON THE BLOG
1 February 2021 (excerpt)
The most influential Democrat you never hear from
Kyrsten Sinema's defense of the Senate’s age-old rules is likely to frustrate progressives eager to use every tool at their disposal to advance their priorities.
Despite being one of the youngest members of the chamber, Kyrsten Sinema holds views that can be as old-school as any of the Senate’s long-timers'.
Kyrsten Sinema doesn’t often make big policy pronouncements. But when she does, Democrats had better listen.
“What’s important is whether or not it’s directly related to short-term Covid relief. And if it’s not, then I am not going to support it in this legislation,” Sinema said in a telephone interview this week. “The minimum wage provision is not appropriate for the reconciliation process. It is not a budget item. And it shouldn’t be in there.”
Sinema’s opposition is a blow to Democrats’ hopes of bumping up the federal minimum wage through budget reconciliation to avoid a GOP filibuster, complicating follow-through on a campaign promise from Democrats and President Joe Biden. And her defense of the Senate’s age-old rulesis likely to frustrate progressives eager to use every tool at their disposal to advance their priorities in a Senate where one wayward Democrat can mean the difference between a policy breakthrough and utter failure.
Her breaks with her liberal colleagues are both a reflection of her state, which she won by a narrow margin in 2018, and her temperament. But the former state legislator, House member and now first-term senator has literally never served in the majority before — so she feels the minority’s pain.
It’s just one of the things that makes the 44-year-old Democrat one of the most quirky and interesting members of the stodgy Senate. . .
“She’s not someone who cares about convention and the way things were,” said Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), a friend and ally.
“She recognizes the real tradition of a Republic, which is that we are elected not to put our finger in the air to determine the direction of the wind.”
Despite being one of the youngest, and let’s face it, hippest members of the chamber, Sinema holds views that can be as old-school as any of the Senate’s long-timers'.
Not only does she want to keep the filibuster, she wants to rebuild it. And the end-around idea of overruling the parliamentarian to jam whatever Democrats want to in a budget reconciliation bill is not going to happen on Sinema’s watch either. . .
Sinema’s stance largely aligns with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), another senator who has narrowed Democrats’ ambitions since they won the Senate last month. Their styles diverge from there. . .
When Vice President Kamala Harris appeared in Manchin’s home state on TV pushing the coronavirus relief bill, Manchin retorted: “That’s not a way of working together.” Sinema was similarly unhappy, according to people that spoke with her afterward.
She decided to deal with it privately.She explained that people in her state “don't really want me to spend my time weighing in on controversies or palace intrigue. They don't care about that.”
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
And attempts at trying to force Sinema’s hand will not go anywhere, she insists.
. . .As one of a handful of moderates in a caucus that may need lockstep unity to move Biden’s agenda, there’s plenty of political pressure on Sinema even if she chooses to ignore it. She and Manchin may have to be the deciding votes on Neera Tanden, Biden’s nominee to be White House budget chief and perhaps the toughest confirmation the new president will have to steer through the Senate in his first 100 days. . . "
Steve Phillips writing in The Nation two days ago identified Senate seats 'up for grabs'.
Of the 23 Republican-controlled Senate seats up for election this year, there are currently 13 seats in 12 states that offer plausible prospects for Democrats to defeat their Republican opponent.
Factoring in four key criteria: past electoral results, demographic developments, existing civic engagement infrastructure, and incumbent favorability ratings, he produced a score that illustrates their respective winnability.
(Read a complete description of the methodology and underlying data incorporated in the ratings here.)
________________________________________________________________________
ARIZONA:
Kyrsten Sinema won the Arizona US Senate race in 2018—the first Democrat to win an open seat in that state since 1976.
Conventional wisdom attributes Sinema’s success to popularity with “moderate” voters, generally code for white swing voters; but she actually lost the white vote to her opponent.
While her white vote share was admittedly higher than many Democrats receive, it was her 70% of the Latino vote that propelled her to victory, by just 56,000 votes.
And there could be a whole lot more where that came from: More than 600,000 eligible Latinos did not vote in 2018.
Burgeoning Latino civic engagement infrastructure is the progressive secret weapon in Arizona. Ever since the state’s government passed the 2010 anti-immigrant legislation often referred to as the “show me your papers” law, a strong, sustained and effective cohort of organizations and leaders have worked together to build political power and darken the complexion of the Arizona electorate.
makes this one of the most winnable Senate seats in the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment