Can anyone tell me why so many Dems voted against the jobs bill?

[Sugarcoated]

It wasn't just Conservadems, so I'm baffled. Is the bill not sweeping enough? Are they fighting for something stronger? Is there some strategy to it? Is Reid going to get a set and force the nays to filibuster?

[Jennicut]

1. It was 57 Dems. Who didn't vote for it? Nelson and Lieberman (not a Dem anyway).

Not a lot of Dems, two.

[babylonsister]

2. And I thought Lieberman changed his vote. nt

[Jennicut]

10. You are right. Lieberman did switch his vote.

It was Nelson only.

[Sugarcoated]

5. Shoot.

Someone posted a link to the vote, it had about ten Democrats as nays. Maybe I misunderstood.

[Llewlladdwr]

3. My understanding is that there were concerns as to how the bill would be paid for. NT

[babylonsister]

6. And that's a lot of crap. The rethugs (and Nelson) just

didn't want to vote for it. It has more to do with politics than anything else.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8628486


Stabenow: Republicans in ‘Cynical Game’ to Crater Economy by Stopping Jobs Bill

snip//


On Republican obstruction:

It’s an extremely maddening and concerning time right now, and frankly we need your help. We’re in a situation where, after spending at least eight weeks on the floor trying to pass this jobs bill, which focuses on creating jobs as well as helping people … not one Republican is willing to help us stop this Republican filibuster.

We’ve spent a tremendous amount of time and discussions to get just one person to join us. And we don’t have that. So, we will be voting again today to stop the filibuster and we have every anticipation that we won’t have the votes.

It is very clear that the Republicans in the Senate want this economy to fail. They see that things are beginning to turn around. You know the numbers. When this president took office, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month. … Now we are gaining jobs. … Unfortunately, and cynically {on their part}, in cynical political terms, it doesn’t serve them in terms of their elections if things are beginning to turn around.

I believe when you look at this bill, which is all paid for — we raised revenues to pay for it — the one piece that is technically not paid for that is done in a way that we have always done it, … {those are} always categorized as an emergency. And, frankly, if 15 million people without jobs is not an emergency, I don’t know what is.

[NHLrocks]

13. everything is washington has to do with Politics.

[napi21]

4. I may e wrong, but I thought the only Dem thatvoted nay was Nelson.

I haven't heard of any others. As for Nelson, I don't know why but he seems to vote against a lot of Dem bills, at least in the first few votes.

[Sugarcoated]

7. And whatsup with that bad rug he wears on his head?

Life is full of mysteries.

[skipos]

8. I wouldn't define "two" as "so many." Plus those two are pretty mediocre democrats. nt

[Sugarcoated]

9. I misunderstood a link someone posted.

My bad.

[Sugarcoated]

11. Sorry

:blush:

[Bitwit1234]

12. It was 57 for and (41 against) But

they needed 60 to get it to the floor.