Senate defeats Gillibrand military sexual assault bill

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

What was the general reasoning behind the opposition?

[Zioneer]

Usual suspects on the Democrat side, except Whitehouse and Jack Reed. Interesting Republican list though, not exactly the folks I'd expect to be most likely to buck party line.

I'm especially disappointed by Whitehouse and Jack Reed. Why would they have any reason to vote against this?

[Donerail]

Usual suspects on the Democrat side, except Whitehouse and Jack Reed. Interesting Republican list though, not exactly the folks I'd expect to be most likely to buck party line.

I'm especially disappointed by Whitehouse and Jack Reed. Why would they have any reason to vote against this?

Of the 11 Dems who voted Nay, 7 (including Reed) sit on the Armed Services Committee - around 21% of Dems, and 50% of Armed Services Committee Dems, voted nay. I presume they support the McCaskill legislation.

[Maxwell]

This is awful. I hope other Democrats make note of at least some of these people (they certainly can do better than Carper in DELAWARE)

[Del Tachi]

Kudos to the Senate.

Interesting to note that people on this forum only call for compromise and non-partisanship in the Senate when it benefits their political wishes.

The defeat of Gillibrand's bill shows a wide coalition of support, something must have been wrong with it. 

[Potatoe]

Kudos to the Senate.

Interesting to note that people on this forum only call for compromise and non-partisanship in the Senate when it benefits their political wishes.

The defeat of Gillibrand's bill shows a wide coalition of support, something must have been wrong with it. 

Except that two of the most Conservative Republicans (Cruz and Paul) voted yes, while two quite Liberal Democrats (Reed and Whitehouse) voted against, that's not a wide coalition of support.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Interesting to note that people on this forum only call for compromise and non-partisanship in the Senate when it benefits their political wishes.

Just because you can get the two parties to agree doesn't guarrantee it is a good idea and unlike some I am not so fix deprived of collaborative efforts in the tea party era to sign on with everything that John McCain and is gang is willing to side with some Democrats on.

It should also be noted that wide doesn't even mean a majority in this case, definiton must of have changed. The nays were 45 in number I believe.