Some Senate Democrats are open to giving Trump more money for Iran war.

[AStern]

"I don't rule anything out," said Senator Elissa Slotkin. "I mean, we're in it."

"That includes the panel's top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, as well as Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan."

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/04/democrats-iran-supplemental-funding-00813547

[vapor2]

1. Just WTF?????????

[EarlG]

2. "Some Democrats"

Four are named in the article as possibles.

That includes the panel’s top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, as well as Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan.

Only one is named as a definite (Fetterman).

To pass any new military funding measure through the Senate, the support of at least seven Democrats will be needed to overcome the filibuster. It’s far from certain the votes are there.

“Good luck. What Democrat is going to vote to fund an illegal war?” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Wednesday. “I don’t think — with the exception of one Democrat — there will be any votes for it.”

[betsuni]

14. Thank you. Both sides bashing: even one vote evidence the whole party's bad.

Usually something that hasn't happened yet so facts aren't necessary. Goal is cynicism and anger at Democrats. That isn't a discussion or constructive criticism. Tired of it.

[kwolf68]

3. EDITED

SO DEMOCRATS are going to fund this bullshit? Or just one idiot?

[msongs]

4. how bout repeal some of the big ugly bill tax breaks and claw back the lost money nt

[Jack Valentino]

5. And we SHOULD get OUT OF IT, MY SENATOR!

So talk about the huge Trump DEBT, when you vote against this!!!!!

[leftstreet]

6. Ka-ching, ka-ching!

I'm just shocked

[Boo1]

7. I don't see

a scenario where that funding bill isn't going to pass, and very few Democrats are going to see being on the "said no to funding our troops" side of things as being helpful

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

8. Of course they are. Bipartisanship!

I doubt the list is limited to those Senators started above. How many Democratic Senators voted to pass the Republican's last budget extension to avert shutdown, against the wishes of those trying to end the ICE gestapo? Now they're not trying to end ICE, or do what really needs to happen and end DHS, but talking in MODERATE ways to limit ICE. As if.

All the while. there's no danger of ICE running out of funding, so no Democrats are going to get in TROUBLE with their "moderate" supporters, either, thanks to Trumps Big Beautiful Budget.

As presently constituted, this party stands for everything - so it stands for nothing. Even when they have the Executive and Legislative branches of government, they are paralyzed - as we saw during the Biden administration. Moreover, Democratic Party voters keep re-electing these people. So bed made, lie in it.

[AZJonnie]

9. Agree with the first part, but Biden got a LOT done in the first two years

Calling them "paralyzed" is just off-base. Not to mention, we had a tie in the Senate, with two being turncoats at the slightest provocation.

[fujiyamasan]

11. It's really weird watching history play itself over again

I thought I watched this shitty movie just over twenty years ago. That one had more hype. Big theatrical production of scare tactics beforehand. These guys aren’t as good at marketing. I haven’t seen as many productions of “shove a boot up your ass” and eagle animations on fox. I didn’t see a big spectacle of vials at the UN or talk of mushroom clouds over American cities. I guess these guys learned they could skip all that, because in reality none of it mattered then.

[fujiyamasan]

10. Once again they're putting Dems on the defensive

They’re hoping for another Kerry statement like “I voted for it before I voted against it”.

Thune knew they were in trouble in November. I’m certain this played a role. This will be a good distraction for a little while before voters feel the pain at the pump and other inflationary effects.

[BaronChocula]

12. I could imagine those Dems being afraid of being called "weak on defense."

But being weak on defense starts at ceding your constitutional duty to declare war to the president.

[cstanleytech]

13. I'd limit the funding if possible to defensive weapons such as anti missile defense and only that.

Problem is though Trump would illegally seize the money in some way and misuse it.

[Deminpenn]

15. For context. Slotkin is former CIA, Reed is a West Point grad,

Kaine's from Virginia, a state with a large military-industrial complex, Peters spent 10 yrs in the Navy Reserve including after 9/11.