How many Senate Democrats will vote against the Iran deal?

[geek tragedy]

We're pretty much guaranteed a party-line vote-all 54 Republicans will eagerly vote against it. There's not even one who will consider voting for it.

But they need to pick up 13 Democrats to override a veto (assuming they get the votes in the House). How close will it be?

Leave guesses as to names in the comments.

2 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Zero--strict party line
	0 (0%)
	1-3
	2 (100%)
	4-6
	0 (0%)
	7-9
	0 (0%)
	10-12 (nail biter)
	0 (0%)
	13+ (we're f&cked)
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[PatrickforO]

1. The deal with Iran is a good thing.

But there will be several, those with heavy constituencies of MIC or military bases who will vote against, because for them a vote for peace is a vote against the people who pay for their campaigns.

That's what's wrong.

Too bad they can't all rise above that and actually do the right thing.

[geek tragedy]

3. That's pretty close to my thinking.

Hopefully we can hold the pro-war votes to under 60.

[geek tragedy]

2. I predict:

Bob Menendez plus 1-2 others, most likely Donnelly, Heitkamp, Warner or Cardin.

[Recursion]

11. King might bail too

His statement on the framework had some redlines that this deal probably doesn't meet.

[daleanime]

4. Too many....

but hopefully less the 13.

[geek tragedy]

5. Menendez is a confirmed no.

No other confirmed no votes from Senate Democrats.

A few confirmed no votes from the AIPAC clown car in the House however.

[geek tragedy]

6. Schumer is looking more and more like a 'no'

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/schumer-holding-back-discussing-iran-nuclear-deal-article-1.2296909

He's a neocon war pig at heart, so that's where he will wind up voting--for war with Iran.

[davidpdx]

7. I'm going with 7-9

I think there are going to be a fair amount of defections because of the pressure put on them to vote no. That would put the no's at 63 (if indeed all 54 Republicans vote no as well) which would be well short the number to override a veto.

[geek tragedy]

8. More than a few chickenshits who want one outcome while voting the other way

I see only one strong "no" at this point--Menendez.

But lots of probable no votes--Cardin, Coons, Schumer, Donnelly, Peter, Wyden (what an asshole he's proven himself between this and the TPP).

[davidpdx]

9. Wyden is my senator and if he votes against this one

You have my guarantee I won't vote for him the next time around. I didn't know he was one of the ones on the fence. It makes no fucking sense (I know preaching to the choir). I'll have to start writing him on that.

I wrote him a few times on TPA/TPP. Here is the response I got back a few weeks ago.

Dear xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me about the recently passed “fast-track” legislation for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

As you know, Congress recently voted to renew the expired Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), commonly known as “fast-track.” TPA has been around in some form since 1934 and allows the President to negotiate trade agreements and submit them to Congress for an up-or-down vote. TPA holds the President accountable during trade negotiations by setting out transparency and consultation requirements as well as Congressional objectives for trade agreements that the Administration must follow. TPA is not permanent, and Congress must periodically renew the President’s authority to implement trade agreements under the fast-track process.

I made sure that TPA legislation includes progressive values on labor rights, environmental protections, human rights, internet freedom, strong enforcement, and transparency. All told, the new TPA, passed by Congress and signed by the President in June, puts in place the most progressive trade policy in U.S. history. This TPA levels the playing field between American businesses and global competitors, and helps open foreign markets to domestic exports. The new TPA requires foreign countries to adopt and maintain core labor and environmental protections, ensuring the TPP pulls other nations up to our level of standards. This TPA makes it easier for American companies and workers to get relief from unfair trade by including robust new trade enforcement laws. This is the first TPA to promote human rights and state unequivocally that no trade agreement can override U.S. law. Only Congress can change U.S. law.

During my time in the Senate, I have fought for trade agreements that advance our national and regional interests and I believe those policies have, on the whole, benefitted our trade-dependent state. In fact, businesses in the State of Oregon exported $20.9 billion worth of goods in 2014, which supported more than 86,000 well-paying jobs through the state. Through international trade, Oregon exports like computer chips, wheat, and wine have become pillars of our economy and help promote and sustain the jobs our communities need to thrive. While I believe that opening foreign markets to Oregon goods and services is important for our economy, I believe that this must be done carefully so that new trade agreements support Oregon values.

Understandably, I have heard from Oregonians who express deep concerns about fast-tracking trade agreements and are also concerned with the lack of transparency in the TPP negotiations. To that end, I successfully included a provision that requires the TPP to be made public for two months before the president signs it, ensuring the public has several months to review the agreement before Congress has any votes. I believe Congress must continue to provide strong guidance to, and oversight of, the Administration in negotiating trade agreements and stay in control when it comes to passing legislation that implements those agreements. I encourage you to learn more about my views on TPA by visiting my website: http://www.wyden.senate.gov/priorities/trade-that-works-for-oregonians.

Again, thank you for keeping me apprised of issues that are important to you. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.



Sincerely,

Ron Wyden
United States Senator

[Recursion]

10. My amateur nose count: Schumer, Menendez, King, Heitkamp, Wyden (nt)

[hobbit709]

12. There's an easy half a dozen DINOs.

Instead of voting in the interest of the people, they will vote in the interest of their $pon$or$.