The following Republicans voted no on raising the debt ceiling:
Kelly Ayotte (NH), Dan Coats (IN), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Tom Coburn (OK), Jim DeMint (SC), Lindsay Graham (SC), Chuck Grassley (IA), Orrin Hatch (UT), James Inhofe (OK), Ron Johnson (WI), Dean Heller (NV), Mike Lee (UT), Jerry Moran (KS), Rand Paul (KY), Marco Rubio (FL), Jeff Sessions (AL), Richard Shelby (AL), Pat Toomey (PA), David Vitter (LA)
The following Democrats (including an independent) voted no on raising the debt ceiling:
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Tom Harkin (IA), Frank Lautenberg (NJ), Bob Menendez (NJ), Ben Nelson (NE),
Bernie Sanders (VT)
I don’t really consider there to be a right or wrong position on this vote. The debt ceiling had to be raised. Anyone who cast a deciding vote against it would be irresponsible. Since it passed easily, members were free to cast a protest vote. In an inverse of what happened in the House, a higher percentage of Republicans cast protest votes than Democrats. I don’t really care how people voted. It’s irrelevant. If you want to protest, that’s fine with me. If you want to help avert a global meltdown, that’s cool, too.
Now we move on to analyzing the bill.
If you needed a litmus test to sort out the divisions in the Senate, you could not have come up with a better one than this vote. Just read it as if the Senators really voted their consciences.
The problem is figuring out if pressed what you would have voted if you voted your conscience.
I read Ben Nelson’s vote as voting with the Republicans who voted No. That tells you something right there.
Gillibrand, Lautenberg, and Menendez are a surprise. So are Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse. It’s not like the Yes vote was close.
The House vote is equally interesting as a litmus test of the four de facto caucuses in the House.
Someone on the Twitter machine was suggesting that Gillibrand was looking to 2016. I don’t see it. Come 2016, people are going to be in no mood to elect another Senator, I believe. That’s why Feingold should run against Darth Walker. And it’s why the Democrats best chances in 2016 are either Feingold or Governor Schweitzer of Montana. Both are willing to do hand-to-hand combat, so to speak, against the Pukes.
Meh, if you say so. If Feingold runs, I’ll back him. In the mean time, I’m gunning for Gillibrand.
‘Gunning for’ doesn’t ordinarily sound like support.
Heh, funny that:
I’ve never seen/heard it used in the 2 sense. Must be some kind of regionalism or something. The imagery just doesn’t work, does it? Can you picture “gunning” for somebody in a positive way? I can’t.
Must be. I’ve actually never heard of it used in the negative sense shrug
Heh. He couldn’t even win his home state.
Yeah, never mind that he’s won election there 3 other times, with his first win doing so with ads coming from his god damn parking garage and a camcorder, and with another putting a cap on his own spending; in a state that’s historically and consistently close in elections.
But you know, don’t let your adoration of Obama get in the way.
What are you talking about? No one cares if their candidates were Senators or Governors or Mayors – Have some experience and/or know what you are talking about.
Feingold? Feingold lost his Senate seat to a right winger. He underestimated his opponent and the environment and you think he’d make a good presidential candidate? I hate to break it to you but he doesn’t have the name recognition or the personality. Schweitzer has personality but he doesn’t have the look, but there’s a first time for everything.
The controversy is as old as Kant’s Categorical Imperative. And as tired.
Lol at Ben Nelson voting against it for not being far-right enough. I’m gonna miss that crazy bastard. Here’s to the next Republican senator from the great state of Nebraska…
…As soon as it is actually written. I think the original TARP plan had more skeleton to it. Poor, poor appropriations and budget committee staffers.
Kirsten gets some of her money from the DKOS crowd so she wouldn’t be able to show her face if she voted on it and didn’t have to.
Kind of interesting that the “no” Reps are pretty much crazy wingnuts (with maybe one or 2 exceptions) while the Dems are about as spread across the board as far as you can get — from Sanders to Nelson. Damned if I can find any particular insight there, though.
Traitor!
Sell out!
PRIMARY FRANKEN!
He’s nothing more than a lying liar!
Remember when Tester was the DKos idol of front pagers.
I’m not sure if you can answer it.
But how is it some people get a pass on every bad vote.
Remember how everyone hated extending the Bush tax cuts? Guess who voted for it, Al Franken. And so did Dennis Kucinich (no, really, DK actually voted to extend the Bush tax cuts).
So now Franken voted for the Bush tax cuts and this austerity bill, yet he’ll never catch any heat for it.
So how is some people get to do what ever they want with impunity from the base?