How was Reid's vote against debating the defense bill a "procedural maneuver"?

[Athelwulf]

Quote from here: click

It’s official. The start of the process of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been put on hold. Both Arkansas Democrats, Blanche L. Lincoln and Mark Pryor, joined all 40 Republicans to sustain the filibuster against the National Defense Appropriations Act. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) switched his vote at the last minute in a procedural maneuver that will allow him to bring the bill back to the Senate floor for a later revote. At this time, that vote will almost certainly not take place until after the November elections during a lame-duck session.

I've seen this claim in a few places, but I haven't yet found an explanation. I don't understand how the majority leader's vote has any impact on his own ability to bring the bill back to the floor. In fact, it seems counter-intuitive; shouldn't a vote against even allowing debate undermine, not preserve, his ability to bring it up later? (In other words, "Why do you want us to debate this again? Even you didn't want to debate it the last time!")

Could someone who knows more about Senate procedure please shed light on this?

[Recovered Repug]

1. Any senator voting on the prevailing side

can make a motion to reconsider.

http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Senate_Rule_XIII_-_Reconsideration

What Reid did was not an unusual tactic.

[Athelwulf]

3. Strange rule. But thank you!

The logic is baffling. "Hey, I won the last vote, but I want a do-over!" But like another poster suggested, the Senate is not logical. At least there's a solid answer.

[Recovered Repug]

4. I guess the theory is

"I won the last time but, maybe I was wrong"

[Inuca]

2. Senate rule, don't look for logic

The reason is exactly what you bolded part of your quote.

[Lint Head]

5. There is no need for a vote. Obama is the Commander and Chief

of the Armed Forces. He can end DADT today. This whole thing is a ridicules maneuver to placate elected bigots.
It's politics.