…as far as I’m concerned. The way the game is played is that you vote “yes” if they need your vote, and then when it becomes clear that it’s failing, you become a “no.” That’s why there were so many “no’s” by the end. But it means you were ready to go along when it really counted.
What’s extraordinary about what Brownback did is if that’s the game you’re playing you hang back and see how everyone else is voting before committing yourself. Also, as a Republican senator, you should have at least some vague idea of which way the tide of your colleagues is running and not get yourself in this kind of position.
Now, if the campaign’s (hard-to-believe-verging-on-laughable) explanation is true that this was a deliberate strategy on his part to vote first “yes” and then “no,” well, then, he’s badly in need of better political advice and you have to question his judgment for going along with it. Did he have no idea how it would play?
When I was e-mailing with a Senate source opposed to this bill going through potential votes last night, he said something like, “I hope Brownback just doesn’t show up,” given how unreliable he was on this vote. I bet Brownback now wishes the same thing.