Some Democrats voted for President Bush’s Terror bill isn’t that usual? Yes when according to Nancy Pelosi Democrats were not under any circumstance vote for any Republican measure which is a clear effort to obstruct the 109th Congress with hopes to make political hay for the 2006 mid-term elections by haranguing this Congress as the “do nothing Congress.”
But being a Democrat is complicated these days and sometimes you vote for the right thing even though it’s not the thing that you would normally vote for because it goes against your political philosophy. Just what I’m I talking about? Let me explain.
Democrats who voted with the Republicans now can make the argument that they view national security as a priority and, thus, try to fend off GOP's frequent charge that electing Democrats would be dangerous.
"They're trying to play it safe," said Robert Erikson, a Columbia University political scientist.
In the Senate, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., voted with Republicans and avoided opening himself up to criticism from Republican challenger Tom Kean Jr. in a state where terrorism is a dominate issue. Only a river separates New Jersey from the New York City site where terrorists struck in 2001. Polls show the race very tight.
Democratic Rep. Sherrod Brown, an ultra-liberal, is trying to unseat Republican Sen. Mike DeWine in Ohio, and may be trying to project a more moderate position. That also could be the case in GOP-leaning Tennessee, where Democratic Rep. Harold Ford Jr., also a liberal, is challenging Republican Bob Corker.
Democratic Reps. Melissa Bean in Illinois, Jim Marshall in Georgia, John Barrow in Georgia, Leonard Boswell in Iowa, John Spratt in South Carolina, and Edwards in Texas.
"They are voting in line with what they perceive to be the views of a majority of their constituencies on this issue," said Alan Abramowitz, an Emory University political scientist.
He suggested that these Democrats cast their votes not because of this election year but because of the next few, saying: "They're just trying to avoid trouble in the future."
Convictions are such limiting things one should always be able to negotiate or completely vote against your conscience for political expediency. After all that is the essence of being a Democrat everything is negotiable. One wouldn’t want to be inflexible or unyielding like the conservatives would one?