Were some 'blue dogs' given permission to vote against the bill?

[itsrobert]

Doesn't the Democratic Leadership count votes before hand and give the okay for select Democrats to vote NAY (NO), if they know they all ready have the vote to pass? For that matter, was Dennis Kucinich given permission to vote no? If I was the leadership, I would have DK vote no, just so they can sell it as "not liberal".

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. That's what I've read in a few places - that Pelosi knew well prior to the vote

what the numbers would be, so she released some vulnerable Dems to vote "No". I don't like it, but that's politics, I guess...

[BrklynLiberal]

6. I read that too...

[greennina]

2. Anything but unity from the Party

is a big problem. I don't know why you think the Party would allow such things. Of course these peopel act on their own to hurt the Party.

[bbinacan]

3. Not that I've heard and

I'd be surprised if Pelosi "released" any votes.

[Aramchek]

4. yes

[Xipe Totec]

5. Yup

Those Blue Dogs who voted no better hope they read the political winds correctly.

Because they will ultimately have to explain those votes to their constituents.

[BREMPRO]

7. of course- the leadership counts the votes BEFORE the actual vote

so they know it will pass- once they've got the vote and margin of error, they stop the whip and allow the dems in conservative districts to vote no to help them with republican challenges and maintain a majority- such as it is. Politics

[TheWraith]

8. I'm sure they were.

It's not a coincidence that we had just enough votes to pass it.

[Yupster]

9. Agree Wraith

My bet is there was 10 more votes there if she needed them.

[LiberalFighter]

10. That is true. To what extent it happen here I don't know.

And as one poster pointed out... those Blue Dogs better be careful back in their own district. Cause just because they think their district is more conservative this may be an issue that is supported by their constituents and may be their downfall.

[Unvanguard]

11. Probably, yes, for politically vulnerable members. That's usually how it works on close bills.

There are people who will vote "yes" if they're absolutely necessary, but not otherwise.

[sandnsea]

12. Masssa voted no too

His vote was playing both ends against the middle, imo. But I'll use it to say the bill wasn't radical left, makes good political sense to me.