The Coons Soaking the Spotlight for All Its Worth Announcement
I think Senator Chris Coons desires more war and thus he is a no on the Iran Deal. My evidence for this is that he is doing what fellow Senator Bob Menendez did: give a highly touted speech at a University to announce your decision. If he was a yes, he would just announce it in an interview or a press release like Tom Carper did, and like 30 other of his fellow Democratic Senators.
I hope I am wrong, and I will publicly say I was wrong here tomorrow if Coons surprises me, and makes a big show of voting yes. But, that is not the feel I am getting.
So if you feel like attending a speech to boo and heckle the Senator nonstop throughout his speech once he announces his no vote, here are the details.
NEWARK, Del. – Tomorrow, September 1, at 2 p.m., at the University of Delaware’s Institute for Global Studies, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, will announce his position on the upcoming Senate vote regarding the nuclear agreement reached between Iran, the United States, and our international partners known as the P5+1. The vote is expected to take place in early September when the Senate returns to session.
Since the deal was announced, Senator Coons has attended more than a dozen classified briefings and hearings regarding the deal and has been meeting with constituents up and down the state soliciting their input.
WHAT: United States Senator Chris Coons announces position on nuclear deal with Iran.
WHEN: Tuesday, September 1 at 2 p.m.
WHERE: University of Delaware, Institute for Global Studies, 44 Kent Way, Newark, DE 19716
CONTACT: Sean Coit (Coons) at sean_coit@coons.senate.gov or 202-224-0351 or 202-794-0670
LIVESTREAM: http://www.udel.edu/udlive
PARKING: Validation will be provided for the nearby Center for the Arts parking garage
The only thing that gives me pause in thinking that Coons will be a no is the fact that it is very clear to all concerned that Iran Deal will obtain the support of 34 Democratic Senators it needs to sustain the President’s veto. Indeed, the only real suspenseful question is whether the Democrats can obtain the 41 votes they need to filibuster the rejection from ever getting to the President’s desk.
The warmongering campaign that Iran Deal opponents launched failed, and everyone knows it:
Opponents of the Iran agreement — led by the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee, among others — are following through on pledges to spend $30 million-plus on a TV ad blitz and lobbying effort designed to whip up opposition to the measure. Republican leaders got a big lift from Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York when the Democratic leader-in-waiting came out against it. And opponents pounced when a secret deal with international inspectors that the GOP had long warned against was finally leaked, showing Iran could conduct its own inspections on a suspected military testing site.
The anti-deal side also enlisted prominent former lawmakers, like ex-Democratic Sens. Joe Lieberman and Mary Landrieu, to head up opposition groups, ginned up letters from retired military leaders and sent well-connected donors and activists to personally meet with Democrats still on the fence.
None of it has worked. Instead, a parade of House and Senate Democrats — even in red states — came out in favor of the deal. That eight-figure TV ad campaign has moved few, if any, Democratic lawmakers, and dovish groups like MoveOn.org are experiencing a surprising victory.
“Conventional wisdom seemed to be as this dragged through August the benefit would accrue to opponents of the deal,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn). “That has simply not been the case.”
A planned Sept. 9 rally against the deal featuring Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), meanwhile, threatens to drive wavering Democrats into the yes column. Cruz has questioned whether Democrats “value the lives and safety of millions of Americans more than they value partisan loyalty to the White House” — a message not likely to play well with undecided Democrats.
All nuclear experts agree: this is a good deal. So to say no to the deal at this point, with it being clear that the momentum is on the President’s and the Deal’s side, with it clear that your allies in this fight are such notables as Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and Joe Fucking Lieberman, would be a disaster for Chris Coons’ career. You will have marked yourself forever as a Neocon hawk. Perhaps you would enjoy a life of comfort as a Fox News Democrat, but you will never been taken seriously as a foreign policy mind again.
Maybe he wants to educate others on his position.
There might be a reason, that he is taking this POV and we are not privy to all of the documents.
Maybe, he doesn’t feel it necessary to give them all the money at once.
Maybe, he feels that the individuals being kept against their wills, should be released.
Just asking some questions.
Maybe you like to cause a problem and incite a disturbance. “So if you feel like attending a speech to boo and heckle the Senator nonstop throughout his speech once he announces his no vote, here are the details.”
Which is totally wrong! But, everyone has a right to voice their opinion.
Your questions are idiotic.
There might be a reason, that he is taking this POV and we are not privy to all of the documents.
the nuclear experts… EXPERTS have seen the same documents he has. So that’s dumb, and suspect a non-factor.
Maybe, he doesn’t feel it necessary to give them all the money at once.
..SO he wants to renegotiate this complex negotiation on the fly…just because. That’s stupid, I doubt that is a factor.
Maybe, he feels that the individuals being kept against their wills, should be released.
Idiotic. I guarantee you this this didn’t enter into his thinking. Bringing in extraneous demands into the negotiation would simply strengthen Iran’s bargaining position.
the nuclear experts… EXPERTS have seen the same documents he has. So that’s dumb, and suspect a non-factor.
Maybe he has been in-touch with experts of his own, saying something different. Did you ever think about that?
“Idiotic. I guarantee you this this didn’t enter into his thinking. Bringing in extraneous demands into the negotiation would simply strengthen Iran’s bargaining position.”
How do you know?? If you have spoken to him directly, say so.
Really, none of us knows what he is thinking, until he talks tomorrow. I was just posing some questions, Jason.
Tom Carper’s Op-Ed was refreshing in his admitting that he didn’t even read the deal until August. Thank You Tom Carper for finally getting some cards on the table. I am guessing Carney will follow that tack.
But I have a similar feeling to what DE DEM expressed: that Coons wouldn’t be going this ‘dramatic’ route unless he plans on committing us to war.
Well, today’s D-Day for Coons. I suppose some of you lot also received the bullshit pro-forma response from Coons’ office in reply to my letter urging support of the deal. My letter was based on one argument. The fact that one might have a “distrust” of Iran is completely irrelevant and somewhat childish. The idea that we can’t do diplomacy with governments we distrust is ridiculous and stupid. Then Coons’ office send me a letter saying the Senator distrusts the Iranians. I didn’t expect any response and considering the one I got I would have preferred none.
That’s shitty staff work, but not very surprising that a shitty Senator has shitty staffers producing shitty work.