Yesterday, the President spoke at American University on the need for the Iran Nuclear Deal. Prior to the speech, the President had received some good news that three Democratic Senators, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Bill Nelson of Florida and Barbara Boxer of California, all considered possible no votes, all said they would vote yes on the deal. Thus, the math now looks increasingly difficult for the deal’s opponents.
Greg Sargent explains why these yes votes are important to how the vote will play out:
Kaine and Nelson are both quite significant. They are both genuinely moderate; previously, the only ones who had come out for the deal were liberals or were always all but certain to do so: Dianne Feinstein; Martin Heinrich, Tom Udall, and Dick Durbin, who is rounding up support for the accord inside the Dem caucus.
What’s more, both Kaine and Nelson were early supporters of the original bill creating an oversight mechanism for Congress on the Iran deal, a group that was seen as skeptical early on. Kaine subsequently played a lead role in brokering the final compromise on that oversight bill. He’s widely seen as knowledgeable on foreign policy. He’s a serious vice presidential contender from a major swing state. So while most people thought he’d probably back the deal in the end, having it official represents a boost to the deal’s chances.
Taken together, Nelson and Kaine are key because they reduce the size of the pool of Dems thought to be gettable by the opposition. The group of around eight or nine Democrats who backed the original oversight bill have long been seen as the most likely to oppose the accord. In addition to Nelson and Kaine, those include: Chuck Schumer, Heidi Heitkamp, Richard Blumenthal, Joe Donnelly, Michael Bennet, Robert Menendez, and Angus King (an independent who caucuses with Dems).
Take Nelson and Kaine out of that pool, and you’re left with around seven Senate Dems who seem like they could genuinely still vote No. Seven others who are thought to be undecided, or at least who can’t be ruled out as No votes: Harry Reid, Chris Coons, Benjamin Cardin, Joe Manchin, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Tom Carper. If all of them vote No, that’s 14 Senate Dems opposing the deal. Opponents need 13 in order to get 67 Senators to override Obama’s veto of a measure blocking the accord.
Thus, Delaware’s two Senators hold the key. If they both vote yes, the greatest diplomatic breakthrough in 50 years is achieved and Iran doesn’t get the bomb. If one of them votes no, it is likely the deal is dead, America is despised throughout all the world, even by our allies in Europe and Canada, war with Iran would be days away, and Iran would have the bomb.
Thankfully, Tom Carper is leaning yes.
Unthankfully, Chris Coons, supposedly the smart one, is leaning no.
Sen. Chris Coons, who was personally lobbied by President Barack Obama and national security adviser Susan Rice to back the deal during a trip to Africa in July, said the view of the accord was about evenly split in his home state of Delaware in the first few days after the announcement. But the Democrat now says telephone calls against the deal outnumber those in favor by 10-to-1 in his state, an avalanche of opposition he has no choice but to listen to.
“I am a Democrat, and I would like to be able to support this agreement,” Coons said. “But I have serious reservations about it.”
Let me make some things crystal clear for the Senator.
If you vote no, you are not a Democrat.
If you vote no, you want and desire immediate war.
The day after you vote no, you and I can meet at Elaine Manlove’s office, and I will help you fill out the forms to change your registration to the Republican Party.
Your next election is not until 2020, but I will make it my life’s work to deny you renomination and reelection. You will be the Joe Lieberman of Delaware. You think we hold Tom Carper in disdain for his moderation at times, just wait to see what we do to you.
I can give two shits about conservative astro-turf phone calls to your office. This is one of those issues where you substitute your own judgment and your knowledge for the people’s rather than just being a conduit of what an unintelligent Sussex County teabagger thinks.
And if you genuinely have reservations about this deal, let me tell you something: everyone has reservations about this deal. This is a deal with an adversary. An enemy. Someone and something we do not trust. If you did not have reservations about this deal, you would be an idiot. I have reservations about this deal. We have to see whether Iran sticks to it. That is my reservation. And if they do not, guess what Senator… WE CAN BOMB THEM THEN. WE CAN REIMPOSE SANCTIONS THEN. WE CAN GO TO WAR THEN.
To vote no now means you unequivocally want war now. It means you do not want to even give peace and inspections a chance. It means you have no brain. It means you are a Republican.
If you are really taking into account the phone calls of those who do nothing all day but sit at home and watch Fox News, please remember, they voted for Christine O’Donnell. They never voted for you. They never will. And besides, your next election is in 2020. Chances are they will be dead by then anyway.
Seriously though, to base a vote of this importance on feedback your office receives makes me question your suitability and ability to perform your job. It also makes me think you are a coward. Whether you fear the voters or you fear your donors, or both, you are still acting out of fear.
DL readers, since it appears the so wise Senator places great value on the calls he gets, take a moment and call 202-224-5042, say you are a Democrat, say that he will support the Iran Deal or he will not be the Democratic nominee in 2020. Say all that.
It’s time to clobber our mealy mouthed federal representation over the head.