Senator Masto, Fetterman, and Angus King voted with the republican stopgap spending bill.

[lostincalifornia]

Two Democratic senators and one independent have broken rank and voted in favor of a GOP-led continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown in just a few short hours.

Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Sen. Angus King of Maine, an Independent who caucuses with Democrats, have all voted for the Republican stopgap spending bill. Senate Republicans would need four more Democrats to join them to avoid a shutdown, with GOP Sen. Rand Paul voting against the continuing resolution. The vote is not yet closed.

“We need a bipartisan solution to address this impending health care crisis, but we should not be swapping the pain of one group of Americans for another,” Cortez Masto said in a statement confirming her support for the GOP plan. “I remain focused on protecting health care for working families, and I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work together to tackle this problem.”

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/09/30/congress/cortez-masto-fetterman-and-king-vote-for-gop-funding-plan-00589113

According to Bloomberg TV retiring Senators of jean shenen and Gary Peters expressed openness to extension of a budget continuing resolution.

After everything the country has been through under trump's first and continuing second term, and the blind allegiance of the congressional rethugs to trump's dictatorial desires over the Constitution, and the well-being of Americans, that these Democrats still believe you can negotiate with the pathological liar and sociopath in the White House is beyond me.

[doc03]

1. Fetterman is our new Joe Manchin. nt

[Rebl2]

2. Has

been for a while now

[lostincalifornia]

5. I actually think he is worse than Manchin.

[PatSeg]

10. Yeah, I was going to say the same thing

Most people rather expected Manchin's behavior, but Fetterman underwent a drastic personal and political change. He has been a grave disappointment.

[lostincalifornia]

12. That is true. I have always been very leary of "populousists". They send out a populous message,

promise the world, seldom deliver, and can change on a dime, IMHO.

I also don't buy the reasoning by some that it was because of his stroke. Even after his stroke he was still talking his populist message during the campaign.

[PatSeg]

14. Good point about "populousists"

I've found that to be true with a few far left politicians as well - so much lofty talk, with very few tangible results.

[Freddie]

6. He has brain damage from the stroke

Should resign now.

[badgolfer]

3. Senator Masto

The Senator always sends me fund raising texts/emails.

She can forget about me ever donating.

[haele]

11. Nevada went very red violet last time, but really depends on Federal funding for most of their economy

Shutdowns always hurt that state badly. In Nevada as it currently stands (thanks to *rump making us the pariah of world tourism), the overall public effect to voting for a shutdown is really the equivalent of not applying for unemployment on principle if you're between jobs and still need to support a family. How can you justify it without appearing to be unrealistic and out of touch.

Whatever you think of MAGAts and GOP being their own worse enemies (think crabs in a bucket), I can see the political calculus that went into her decision.

Disappointed, but not surprised.

[SamKnause]

4. Why ???

I will never understand.

[flamingdem]

7. Some kind of pay off

Wonder what..

[Ping Tung]

8. Politics as usual. *Sigh*

"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians  Now, to go and stick one at the very head of government couldn't be wise." Mark Twain

[agingdem]

9. I have no doubt Fetterman will have a multitude of primary challengers..

and I suspect he will pull a a Kyrsten Sinema and announce he is changing his registration to Independent...

this may seem inappropriate but Fetterman is not who he was prior to his stroke...he's angry and that filter in his brain that flashes "Don't say that!" is gone...and I speak from experience...when my kind gentle 60 year old mother-in-law suffered a stroke she emerged from the ordeal angry, anxious, paranoid, and mean...

[Emile]

13. Why do we always have a couple centrists

in the party to prevent us from making progess? Even when we had 60 votes in the Senate, we couldn't pass a public option.

[lostincalifornia]

15. It was more than a couple, and we barely were even able to get the ACA passed.

The U.S. House of Representatives was safely Democratic as a result of the election by a margin of 257 – 199, but the political dynamics happened in the Senate.

Going into the 2008 elections, the Senate consisted of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and two Independents (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) who caucused with the Democrats. When the smoke cleared from those elections, the Democrats picked up eight seats to increase their majority to 57-41 (However, Democrat Al Franken’s recount victory was not official until July 7). With the two Independents, the Democrats were one vote shy of the supermajority magic number of 60 they needed to ward off any filibuster attempts and move forward with broad healthcare reform legislation.

In April 2009, the dynamics changed when Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Spector changed parties, giving Senate Democrats that coveted 60th vote.
Now we had a safe majority in the House and a filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 in the Senate, but that scenario lasted only four months because Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died on August 25, 2009, leaving the Democrats, once again, with 59 seats (counting the two Independents). One month later, Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed interim senator from Massachusetts to serve until the special election set for January 2010, once again giving the Democrats that 60th vote.

At that time there didn’t seem to be an urgent need for Democrats to reconcile both bills immediately, because the Massachusetts special election (scheduled for January 19, 2010) was almost certain to fall to the Democrat, Attorney General Martha Coakley, because no Republican had been elected to the U.S. Senate Massachusetts since 1972. Unfortunately, republican scott brown ran a campaign against the ACA, and won the special election by 110K votes.
That left House Speaker Pelosi and President Obama in a dilemma. Everyone assumed that the Christmas Eve 2009 Senate bill would be tweaked considerably to conform more with the House bill passed two months previously. But now that strategy wouldn’t work, because the Democrats no longer had the 60th vote in the Senate to end debate. So they decided to have the House take up the identical bill that the Senate passed on Christmas Eve where It passed 219 - 212, and no republicans came on board, and 34 Democrats in the House voted against it. President Obama signed it and it became law, with no Republicans coming on board, and 34 Democrats voted against it.

We barley got it through as it was, and with Nelson in Nebraska, Nelson in Florida, Lincoln in Arkansas, Lieberman in Connecticut, Evan Bayh in Indiana, and Pryor, all who wouldn't vote for a public option if it was included in the ACA, we had very little choice. Better to have something than nothing.

As to your original question, we are an open tent party on most issues, and that has been our greatest strength and weakness. Howard Dean's 50 state strategy recognized this, and we won because of that strategy. Excluding "centrists" from the Democratic party, would make us a permanent minority party.