Sen. Martha McSally may get another Republican primary challenger

That depends on if the AZ GOP has primary runoffs or not.

It does not.

Both will win re-election handily... sorry if I don’t get excited about some poll 2-4 years away from either one face re-election.....

McSally is an odd one... still to this day not sure why the Governor appointed her after she lost an election... only reason I can think of is that the hopes that appointing her she is now the incumbent running rather than an open seat this time around....

Is there any effort in Utah to remove Romney or Lee?

No because there is no legal way. The senate and the Senate only determines the fitness to serve. Founders did not foresee the States losing the power to appoint Senators.

the Senate itself decided this when it dismissed impeachment proceedings against Senator Blount in 1799. It did not publicize its members’ reasoning for their constitutional interpretation, but Justice Story gave some plausible arguments in his Commentaries on the Constitution, § 791.

For one thing, the Constitution’s text says that impeachment may lie against the president, VP, and “all Civil Officers of the United States.” Story points out that the word “officer” or “office” is used in three other places in the Constitution, where context makes plain that a senator (or member of the House) is not an officer:
The president has power to commission “all the officers,” but the president certainly does not have a hand in appointing senators.
The clause “no person, holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either house during his continuance in office” would be nonsense if service in Congress were an “office under the United States.”
The clause “no senator or representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector” would be redundant if service in Congress were an “office of trust or profit under the United States.”
Story also claims that the Convention probably did not consider the possibility of impeaching senators, and he suggests, without elaboration, that it would be bad policy to permit impeachment of federal legislators.

I’d add a structural argument that the Senate got this right in 1799. The Constitution explicitly assigns each House the responsibility of disciplining its own members. Thus, impeachment would be almost duplicative; if the Senate wished to expel a member, it could do so by a 2/3 vote without the Representatives’ help.

The Senate’s precedent is conclusive on this. The Supreme Court has said very clearly that it considers issues of impeachment to be nonjusticiable.

(By the way, only certain states permit state officials to be recalled. I believe it’s fewer than half of them. Impeachment is a more widely available remedy.)

I always got the impression she would say or do anything to get elected. She also “McCain’d” us on a number of issues.. I forget which exactly, but it was pretty bad at the time.

She’s a likely loser in the general so there’s little downside in another candidate. The other candidate might actually win.

It’s amazing to me that this woman would accept the Senate seat right after an election that she lost by a good margin. One can go far without dignity, I think.

McSally is an odd one... still to this day not sure why the Governor appointed her after she lost an election... only reason I can think of is that the hopes that appointing her she is now the incumbent running rather than an open seat this time around....
**********************************************************
My guess is the Ducey appointed her because, as a DEMONSTRATED piss-poor campaigner, she’d likely manage to lose the 2020 special (to fill the McCain seat for the remaining 2 years of McCain’s 6-year term) election. Then Ducey would have a clear path in 2022 to secure the Republican nomination and run against whichever ‘RAT defeated McSally.

“Remove” how?

Neither is up for reelection. Romney just got there.

Lee is up in 2022.

I’m not sure she shouldn’t be renominated. At least when we’re talking about random nobodies running against her. Which of them is a strong candidate?

Still expect her to win reelection with Trump carrying AZ. Mr. Giffords is no Krysten Enema.

I’m at the AZ Republican Women’s Federation right next to one of her challengers.

The fact is, no one will seriously challenge her due to name recognition. I think we learned this lesson in MI with John James. I don’t care what your credentials are or how good a conservative you are, if people don’t know you they default to the incumbent (D or R). McSally will win the primary. Our job then is to make sure she wins the general.

She has voted for ALL of Trump’s judges, signed on the resolution denouncing impeachment, was one of those who DID side with Trump on the border when others defected. Her weakness is less ideology than general “meh-ness.” She’s just not exciting.