General Discussion

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)

63. The answer is in junior-high-school civics.

Fri Jul 28, 2017, 03:28 PM

Jul 2017

A bill is put up for a vote. Members of Congress can vote Yes or No, but they can't vote "Yes on section 1 and No on section 2."

The Senators who vote for a bill might like all of it, or they might decide that the good to be done by the parts they like outweighs the harm to be done by the parts they dislike. Congress runs on compromises and dealmaking, so this kind of thing happens a lot.

In this specific instance, they might have thought that bill wouldn't greatly endanger the Iran deal, or that the goal of sanctioning Russia was so important that it justified endangering the Iran deal, or even that blowing up the Iran deal would be a good thing. Before being justified in calling "BULLSHIT", you'd have to research each individual Senator to find out what his or her reasoning was.

Incidentally, there are only 46 Democratic Senators, plus two independents (King and Sanders) who caucus with them.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

255 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why is Bernie Sanders voting to NOT put sanctions on Russia? [View all] Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 OP

he said he was worried it would scuttle the iran deal..nt. drray23 Jul 2017 #1

I don't agree with more sanctions on Iran, that is one more way to go after anything Obama Motley13 Jul 2017 #45

And yet no Democrat thought that. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #80

Only two of them opposed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and there were more of them then Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #103

Bernie also voted against the war in Iraq. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #104

can't imagine that happened here tho' JNelson6563 Jul 2017 #105

No back then he was a DU darling. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #107

I trust Bernie... there's a reason he's so popular. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #253

Explain how these sanctions impact the nuclear deal? VermontKevin Jul 2017 #110

There have been about 8 DU OP's this month expressing "surprise" about Sanders stance Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #127

Well, you didn't answer the question. Tell me how these specific sanctions VermontKevin Jul 2017 #134

Trust who you want. I never said "undo". They endanger them to some extent. Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #136

"to some extent" is pretty vague. I have to go with the judgment of the Democrats on this one. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #137

Nicely done! beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #155

Agree! PufPuf23 Jul 2017 #224

I just hope their pilot light doesn't go out, all that gas just needs one spark and... beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #225

I do find the situation disconcerting. PufPuf23 Jul 2017 #226

I'm not worried, most people can recognize fake news. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #229

Well I'm surprised. I don't have time to be on this site 24/7. I wondered who voted against it. kerry-is-my-prez Jul 2017 #180

Of course not... Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #195

And if they keep reading it gets quite entertaining. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #203

Exactly left-of-center2012 Jul 2017 #212

They (Democrats) did not vote for Gulf of Tonkin.... for God sakes anyone involved is long dead. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #237

Well, obviously the majority is always right, eh? X_Digger Jul 2017 #242

Well, if you want to go with the idea that every Democrat in the Senate is wrong, VermontKevin Jul 2017 #243

Is that similar to saying GaryCnf Jul 2017 #244

I don't trust the Repubs. But I do trust the Democrats. Don't you? VermontKevin Jul 2017 #246

I trust that GaryCnf Jul 2017 #248

Oh lordy, you think this vote is a purity test for Sanders? VermontKevin Jul 2017 #252

I think you have responded GaryCnf Jul 2017 #254

Argument from authority, eh? Novel approach, no points. n/t X_Digger Jul 2017 #245

I don't doubt the authority of the Democrats. Do you? VermontKevin Jul 2017 #247

We're always right, eh? Logic isn't your strong suit is it? n/t X_Digger Jul 2017 #249

We're right on this. If the only objection is that Bernie didn't go along, then I'd say your appeal VermontKevin Jul 2017 #251

John Kerry agreed but what does he know? He's only the former SOS. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #94

thats iran kerry is talking about. drray23 Jul 2017 #99

Iran sanctions are included in the bill. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #101

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how the sanctions affect the Iran deal. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #111

Good question. So far, it's whataboutism R B Garr Jul 2017 #124

Yes. I would like some explanation as to how the sanctions affect the Iran deal. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #125

+1 onetexan Jul 2017 #130

See #127 above. n/t Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #133

what just passed are sanctions on russia, iran, and north korea left-of-center2012 Jul 2017 #213

It has something to do with Iran, I think. MineralMan Jul 2017 #2

I wish he'd explain left-of-center2012 Jul 2017 #215

A Google search would have answered your question. SamKnause Jul 2017 #3

Yes left-of-center2012 Jul 2017 #217

Sanders Statement on Iran and Russia Sanctions leftstreet Jul 2017 #4

That was in June oberliner Jul 2017 #10

No change then n/t leftstreet Jul 2017 #37

Pretty much oberliner Jul 2017 #66

He's protecting Obama's Iran deal, as all Democrats should. The pukes want it derailed. Autumn Jul 2017 #5

So 48 Democratic Senators, ALL of them in fact, are for blowing up Obama's Iran Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #14

I would suggest that the 48 are buying the argument that the Iran sanctions will NOT blow up the karynnj Jul 2017 #46

I agree grantcart Jul 2017 #106

The answer is in junior-high-school civics. Jim Lane Jul 2017 #63

Dear Eliot saidsimplesimon Jul 2017 #153

Camp is very entertaining, left-of-center2012 Jul 2017 #219

The trump administration has re-certified the Iran deal twice now, as they are required to do.... George II Jul 2017 #30

So, you know more than John Kerry -- who knew? karynnj Jul 2017 #48

I don't agree. Stopping the Russians is more important. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #238

You don't have to agree. I agree with John Kerry and trust nothing that Trump and his bunch want Autumn Jul 2017 #241

Because they come with stupid sanctions on Iran. Voltaire2 Jul 2017 #6

They aren't stupid oberliner Jul 2017 #15

Because of AIPAC and not because the sanctions are needed. alarimer Jul 2017 #50

BS oberliner Jul 2017 #65

It's a safe place for Sanders to differentiate himself from Democrats. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #7

OR GaryCnf Jul 2017 #11

I don't believe that for a second. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #16

Of course you don't n/t GaryCnf Jul 2017 #20

No one would believe that democrats in both houses... Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #27

Could they GaryCnf Jul 2017 #100

Why did John Kerry publically speak against the added sanctions at this point in time karynnj Jul 2017 #51

Kerry isn't on the inside. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #53

Kerry was Secretary of State until January 20, 2017 and NO Democrat is really on the inside now karynnj Jul 2017 #59

I'm aware of the position Kerry held. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #64

You essentially implied that he would not understand the potential impact of sanctions on Iran karynnj Jul 2017 #71

"Bernie's vote was a protest vote" Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #72

and what do YOU think he is protesting? nt karynnj Jul 2017 #75

It was in the start to this conversation. Nt Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #76

It made no sense then and it makes no sense now karynnj Jul 2017 #81

I disagree. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #84

Have you ever met Bernie? I have, though I would not say I know him, but I know many who do karynnj Jul 2017 #89

There is a lot out there that goes against what you are saying. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #96

My definition of a phony politician is one who votes for political or strategic effect, not on their karynnj Jul 2017 #102

Do you think Obama's Iran deal should be done away with and the republican sanctions are better? Autumn Jul 2017 #19

Loaded question with no back-up of the assertion being made. Nt Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #29

Republican will use sanctions to get Iran to back out of the deal. That's my opinion. Autumn Jul 2017 #36

I don't see anyone here or in the party who are trusting Trump. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #41

Non-sequitor. I said I trust nothing Trump and the pukes do. The word I refers to me. Autumn Jul 2017 #43

It clearly insinuating others did. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #44

The word I insinuates myself. Me. There's not a lot of point in you attempting to argue I Autumn Jul 2017 #73

I don't get the aggression. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #74

I wasn't arguing. I was posting my opinion, which you seem to have a problem with. Autumn Jul 2017 #78

I love the rofl smilie!!!! Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #82

Yeah I remembered you would. eom Autumn Jul 2017 #90

Thank you for thinking of me. Nt Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #91

People keep saying that, but the Iran deal is not in jeopardy and will not be "done away with".... George II Jul 2017 #31

Weird, because we know the Russians rigged R B Garr Jul 2017 #34

If that is your answer, then you are missing the point virtualobserver Jul 2017 #55

I don't agree. So if I'm missing the point, just what is the point? George II Jul 2017 #58

The point is that Iran could back out of the deal. virtualobserver Jul 2017 #122

But Isn't That Somewhat Hypocritical? Me. Jul 2017 #35

It's politics. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #39

But Honestly, I thought That Sort Of Thing Me. Jul 2017 #49

I like Sanders. Weekend Warrior Jul 2017 #52

Agreements Are Nice Me. Jul 2017 #54

You don't get to be senator without being good st that sort of thing Nevernose Jul 2017 #60

I was wondering the same thing Gothmog Jul 2017 #8

I have to give you points for persistence GaryCnf Jul 2017 #9

I know, his reason has been posted time and agin. I think any Dem should want Obamas' Iran deal Autumn Jul 2017 #13

Yet you are saying ALL democratic senators want to blow up Obama deal, since Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #17

No I am not saying that. I said any Dem should want to support Obama's Iran deal over anything Autumn Jul 2017 #23

Voting for something isn't the same as wanting a thing metalbot Jul 2017 #129

+1 nt riderinthestorm Jul 2017 #21

I'll take Elizabeth Warren's judgment over Sanders. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #83

I'll trust both. It doesn't have to be one or the other. eom Autumn Jul 2017 #85

On Russia, it does. I take the judgment of the female, Democratic Senator, over VermontKevin Jul 2017 #87

What I won't do is trust anything or any bill the republicans put up or want a yes vote on. Autumn Jul 2017 #88

Wait, what? What does gender have to do with this issue? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #95

I respect Kerry, he was my Senator. I'm interested in any statement he made about the actual bill seaglass Jul 2017 #131

Nice strawman but I'm not interested in knocking it down today. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #151

I will take Elizabeth Warren over Sanders, every time. It's great if Bernie VermontKevin Jul 2017 #108

I don't consider gender to be an indicator of intelligence, I find both to be intellegent. eom Autumn Jul 2017 #112

What is "eom" and is there a spellcheck? VermontKevin Jul 2017 #113

end of message. Yeah there is one but I didn't use it so I may have misspelled something Autumn Jul 2017 #114

Indeed. Why would anyone think that gender is related to intelligence? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #115

Some people seem to think that. I don't care if they disagree. I know that both will always Autumn Jul 2017 #116

It's so 19th century. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #117

Oh yeah, it's so easy to become one Their gender has nothing to do with their intelligence or Autumn Jul 2017 #119

A million times since July 16th? R B Garr Jul 2017 #18

Do you think it was more? GaryCnf Jul 2017 #22

More what? R B Garr Jul 2017 #26

The Iran part cant be true otherwise the ENTIRE democratic party wouldnt Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #28

+1, good points, it doesn't add up. nt R B Garr Jul 2017 #32

It seems like you're really straining in this post dragonlady Jul 2017 #38

Here's a poll. Take your pick Autumn Jul 2017 #118

Did someone say PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS ? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #120

Why yes, PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS did come into play. Autumn Jul 2017 #121

Your logic makes no sense Kentonio Jul 2017 #139

Post removed Post removed Jul 2017 #165

... demmiblue Jul 2017 #12

Becase it contains increased sanctions on Iran. haveahart Jul 2017 #24

This is flamebait horseshit. rateyes Jul 2017 #25

I wish Trump would tweet about cocks or something leftstreet Jul 2017 #42

For real! rateyes Jul 2017 #47

I think you nailed it. nt LostOne4Ever Jul 2017 #69

I am so tired of this shit. rateyes Jul 2017 #70

Because He Honeymooned In Russia? Me. Jul 2017 #33

He went to Russia representing the town he was mayor of at a sister city karynnj Jul 2017 #56

This Was Meant As A Jest Me. Jul 2017 #77

Bernie has NEVER been friendly to Putin. Had to slip that in? Greybnk48 Jul 2017 #40

+1000 kacekwl Jul 2017 #57

It was a protest vote of some kind. He didn't like something MineralMan Jul 2017 #61

Rand Paul also opposes the Iran sanctions oberliner Jul 2017 #67

OK. It still doesn't make any difference. MineralMan Jul 2017 #68

No they actually didn't Alittleliberal Jul 2017 #144

Yes, they did oberliner Jul 2017 #145

Rand also didn't support the bill explicitly because of the Russia sanctions NT Alittleliberal Jul 2017 #146

I have been so disappointed in Sanders kimbutgar Jul 2017 #62

Why are you disappointed that Bernie supports Obama's Iran deal? Kentonio Jul 2017 #135

If the defense of Bernie on this site is any indication, say goodbye to the House and senate Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #143

You say he's "seemingly friendly" to Putin - why does that seem so to you? David__77 Jul 2017 #79

When you vote against sanctions on Putin for his behavior then yeah, VermontKevin Jul 2017 #86

To you. David__77 Jul 2017 #93

Bills are bundled all the time. But I think that Bernie is wrong on this issue. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #109

How would they not? Kentonio Jul 2017 #138

You are assuming a lot of feelings. Do you have any proof that the people targeted in these VermontKevin Jul 2017 #140

I'm not assuming anything Kentonio Jul 2017 #141

Well, when you breach a UN Security Council resolution, there's going to be a response. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #142

The Republicans just don't want any opening up of relations with Iran Kentonio Jul 2017 #236

Not really since he voted for the bill before the Republicans added the Iran sanctions. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #97

Certainly won't help him in his run for president. MrsCoffee Jul 2017 #92

Not this again. I read Bernie has a hammer and sickle tattoo on his ass! beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #98

Here's an interesting question GaryCnf Jul 2017 #123

Trump was going to sanction Iran anyway Tavarious Jackson Jul 2017 #128

That makes even more problematic GaryCnf Jul 2017 #132

I'm not into loyalty or purity test unless... Tavarious Jackson Jul 2017 #188

Exactly, so that makes his vote even more curious. R B Garr Jul 2017 #162

Because the New McCarthyism is total bull shit autorank Jul 2017 #126

Why is he one of the few who voted against the Magnitsky act? continentalop2 Jul 2017 #147

WAIT, WHAT THE FUCK, he did? Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #148

Nay Brother Buzz Jul 2017 #152

You are wrong Eliot Rosewater Jul 2017 #156

Maxine Waters voted nay as well. Are you saying she's "friendly" with Putin too? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #159

She is for them now after the Russians attacked our elections. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #240

He you go H.R 6156 Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #239

Wow, just looked that up. Good reminder. R B Garr Jul 2017 #149

Do you mean like GaryCnf Jul 2017 #154

WAIT, WHAT THE FUCK, Carl Levin and Maxine Waters did too? And Barbara Lee? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #157

Shocking isn't it? GaryCnf Jul 2017 #160

Whatever his "reasons" may be, I don't like it. NurseJackie Jul 2017 #150

That's nice. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #158

:-D NurseJackie Jul 2017 #161

Lockheed MArtin is a big employer in VT and sanctions related to missiles aren't VermontKevin Jul 2017 #163

So using your 'logic' he should have joined his colleagues and voted for the Iraq war. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #166

You previously accused me of something strange and had a post hidden. Please disengage. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #167

Didn't you just imply the senator was beholden to the defense industry? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #169

'Please disengage' melman Jul 2017 #192

... beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #199

I've never heard of Lockheed Martin being a major employer in Vermont. tammywammy Jul 2017 #170

The aerospace industry does employ Vermonters but it's not the state's largest industry. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #171

Here's two lists I found. tammywammy Jul 2017 #172

I don't know where that poster got the idea that LM is a "big employer" in Vermont. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #174

Here you go: VermontKevin Jul 2017 #173

F-35s are going to be stationed with the Vermont National Guard in Burlington. tammywammy Jul 2017 #175

Bernie himself said it was hundreds of jobs: VermontKevin Jul 2017 #178

Sandia tests solar panels in Vermont, it has nothing to do with defense contracts. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #183

Let's take a step back tammywammy Jul 2017 #185

I'm not upset with Sanders for the f-35. It's hundreds of jobs, like he said. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #187

Why do you keep saying Lockheed Martin is a big employer in Vermont? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #189

I'm not forgetting anything. tammywammy Jul 2017 #204

Article title: Lockheed taking cautious look at Iran helicopter market. R B Garr Jul 2017 #206

Yes, it's pretty easy to see that Sandia is a subsidiary of Lockheed. R B Garr Jul 2017 #190

Between the Sandia lab and the f-35, Lockheed is a formidable presence in VT. Iran's markets were VermontKevin Jul 2017 #191

Yes, and that is obviously recognized by Sanders. It's just a strange diversion to pretend R B Garr Jul 2017 #193

Every politician brings home the bacon. That's established politics. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #196

Yes, every politician wants their state to be competitive. R B Garr Jul 2017 #202

Bingo! Great link! Follow the money. R B Garr Jul 2017 #198

Neither of those articles prove your claim about Lockheed Martin. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #176

If that's the reason and the motivation... it's VERY disappointing. NurseJackie Jul 2017 #179

Well, as I noted below, Bernie promised hundreds of Vermont jobs from the f-35 VermontKevin Jul 2017 #182

Thanks for the links. NurseJackie Jul 2017 #184

Of course. I essentially agree with Sanders. The f-35 had to be built somewhere. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #194

Wait, what? Vermonters don't build F-35s. Where are you getting this information? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #197

Vermont doesn't build the F-35 tammywammy Jul 2017 #201

But Sanders promised hundreds of jobs with the Lockheed research center and the F35 VermontKevin Jul 2017 #205

Please read my post 185 tammywammy Jul 2017 #209

I'm not sure why you are arguing with me. I think Sanders securing the f-35, Sandia, and Lockheed VermontKevin Jul 2017 #211

"Learning to love Sandia" That's a subtitle of an article about the Sandia labs R B Garr Jul 2017 #216

I'm old enough to get the Dr. Strangelove reference VermontKevin Jul 2017 #218

lol..... R B Garr Jul 2017 #223

I lulz'd KG Jul 2017 #164

Don't laugh, they're trying so hard to convince us. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #177

Sanders is consistently friendly to dictators... Expecting Rain Jul 2017 #168

I have no words to express how I feel about that. NurseJackie Jul 2017 #181

He called Chavez a "dead communist dictator" last year. VermontKevin Jul 2017 #186

That's new information for me... I hadn't heard that. NurseJackie Jul 2017 #200

I honestly have no clue Warpy Jul 2017 #207

Actually he explained and SURPRISE! It has nothing to do with being "friendly" to Putin. beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #210

Thanks. I hadn't read his reasoning. It's sound. Warpy Jul 2017 #221

It was a lopsided vote, 98-2 in the Senate. It's not "wild speculation" to R B Garr Jul 2017 #222

Yeah, that's it GaryCnf Jul 2017 #228

419 to 3, a bipartisan show against Trump R B Garr Jul 2017 #230

The question is GaryCnf Jul 2017 #231

Welcome to DU.... R B Garr Jul 2017 #232

Thank you. GaryCnf Jul 2017 #233

I think you are delusional if you actually believe Sanders is "friendly" to Putin. PufPuf23 Jul 2017 #208

Bernie is not against samctions on Russia louis c Jul 2017 #214

Sanders Statement on New Iran, North Korea, Russia Sanctions OKIsItJustMe Jul 2017 #220

Excellent research, thank you! Rhiannon12866 Jul 2017 #234

Maybe it has something to do with the solar eclipse? aidbo Jul 2017 #227

You have no reason to imply that he's friendly to Putin. Ken Burch Jul 2017 #235

Lol, hilarious and wrong. Your insinuations make the baby Jesus cry Arazi Jul 2017 #250

K&R stonecutter357 Aug 2017 #255