Blanche Lincoln not only voted against the public option amendments, but she was the only Dem to not

[jsamuel]

say why today. Both Baucus and Conrad at least said why they were voting against Schumer's amendment. Baucus said it was "because it can't get 60 votes," which is nonsense. Do we only vote for what we think will win? What are we, fair weather sports fans? Conrad said it was because he preferred co-ops like other countries. The problem with that several of the counties he used as examples actually have government run systems like the public option already in place as well. He also compared the public option to the British system which is a complete straw man argument since the British system has the government run the hospitals and the doctors are employed by the government.

So why couldn't she at least say why she was against it? Is that so hard when every other Democrat managed to say why?

Update: Called her office, they said that her reason is the same as Baucus' reason or "because it can't get 60 votes".

So if every Dem who is voting against this public option is voting against it "because it can't get 60 votes", isn't that rather circular reasoning?