Why Democrats didn’t want to vote on the Iran deal

To hear the Democrats in Congress who supported President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal — and then successfully filibustered it in the Senate, refusing even to allow an actual vote — you’d think someone was literally holding a gun to their heads.

Because it’s hard to find a single one who argues that Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry negotiated anything close to a good deal.

Which is pretty significant — given that the president himself long insisted, “No deal is better than a bad deal.”

But that was then. Now, his foreign-policy legacy — as he sees it — is on the line.

Still, the list of Democratic supporters’ objections is astonishing. (Imagine what they’d be saying if they were voting “no.”)

Like House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer: “This agreement is not one I would have negotiated, nor one I think should have been agreed to . . . I believe this agreement gives too much to Iran and demands too little in return.”

Or New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker: “Unfortunately, it’s clear we . . . have only delayed — not blocked — Iran’s potential nuclear breakout.

“This deal has clear flaws and substantial risks even beyond the obvious and disturbing short duration of its term,” Booker added. “We are legitimizing a vast and expanding nuclear program in

Iran. We are, in effect, rewarding years of deception, deceit and wanton disregard for international law.”

Or Chris Coons, who holds Vice President Joe Biden’s old Senate seat: “This is not the agreement I hoped for . . . I have deep concerns about the scope and implications of Iran’s permitted centrifuge-development program after 10 years and its nuclear-enrichment capacity after 15 years.”

Moreover, the Delaware pol added, “Opponents decry . . . the exclusion of human-rights issues and Iranian support for terrorism. I share their frustration.”

Or Connecticut’s Chris Murphy: “This deal has many unsavory elements.”

Then there’s Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who says he decided to support the deal only because former Vice President Dick Cheney is against it.

OK, there are a few enthusiastic supporters: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi calls it “a diplomatic masterpiece.”

Then again, Pelosi probably thinks Congress has to pass it to learn what’s in it.

But the prize surely goes to tone-deaf Rep. Pat Murphy of Florida, who claimed the deal means “peace in our time” — the very words Neville Chamberlain used for his infamous Munich pact with Adolf Hitler.

President Obama promised he wouldn’t negotiate a bad deal. But his own supporters have made it painfully clear that that’s precisely what he did.