Why the bailout vote failed.

I heard somebody on MSNBC say it was because the vote took place so fast that the whips of both parties didn't actually count the votes of their own party. So, there was confusion over who was actually supposed to vote for the bill and who was "allowed" to vote against it.

As this commentator noted (I'm too lazy to try and find video of this), typically the party whip makes sure that they have enough votes to pass (or reject, whatever the case may be) the bill, then releases those who want to vote against it--typically for political posturing--to vote as they please. This is why a huge amount of "nay" votes come in on a bill almost immediately after the necessary votes to pass have been cast. It was also noted that most of the Congressmen who voted against the bill are facing tough re-election campaigns (although I would like to see actual figures on this, but, again, I'm too lazy). Voting against this bill would allow them to say to their constituents that they don't bow down to Wall Street or Washington. And, if you're a Republican, you could even play it as being a "maverick."

Regardless, it really seems like the bill failed because of politics, not because people actually thought it was a bad deal. Unfortunately, we are never really told why something like this fails. 1) Politicians don't want people to see the petty games they play. 2) Most Americans could care less how Congress actually works, which is really sad. I was glad to see somebody in the media making an honest attempt to parse out exactly why the vote failed.