Will You Vote For A Candidate In 08 Who Supported The Iraq War Resolution ?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

[mike_c]

1. never-- in fact, I will do whatever I can to work for their defeat....

No one who voted for the IWR deserves to lead the executive branch. Set foreign policy? What a disaster that would be.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. I Think Those That Voted Yes Ought To Tell Us Why

At least they will have McCain...

[mike_c]

9. the problem is that I don't trust any of them to tell the truth....

I keep coming back to the preamble of the IWR. It is filled with lies about WMDs, links between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and so on. Everyone who voted for the IWR either affirmed their acceptance of those lies-- despite clear and well known evidence to the contrary-- or they agreed to participate in the charade to give themselves political cover. In the first instance they demonstrated unfitness to lead, but in the second they proved themselves willing to say or do anything for their own political advancement.

The IWR vote was a MASSIVE betrayal of America. I can never trust anyone who voted for it again unless they can convince me that they were simply stupid and had their heads up their butts-- and in so doing admit that they are unfit to lead.

[last1standing]

2. I'd vote for someone who supported IWR.

But I wouldn't vote for someone who STILL supported it. Everyone makes mistakes but it's essential that those mistakes be acknowledged and actions taken to rectify them when possible.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Leaving The Water Run In The Bathtub Is A Mistake.

Supporting the "greatest strategic blunder in the history of the republic" out of political expediency is an abomination

[last1standing]

15. LOL! I knew someone would start with the semantics.

Supporting IWR at its inception and supporting bush's* inept and insane botching of the war are two incredibly different things. I'm sure you've been here long enough to remember how many DUers supported the war at the time (I was not one of them). People make mistakes, the greatest danger is in not recognizing them and altering course. Lieberman, McCain and bush* all fall within that group and therefore essetially disqualified from future office (my opinion only). Those Democrats or even repubs who have recanted their support should be able to run.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Few DUers Were For The War.

I was nominally opposed to it from it's inception but saw the writing on the wall when Colin Powell made his "presentation" to the United Nations.

[last1standing]

63. But I'm sure you remember the thread after Powell's performance supporting the war.

I sure do and wondered how they could be duped so easily. But that doesn't mean I don't respect some of them as good Democrats, they just made a mistake. I'd be much less likely to respect them if they still supported it, but I can't think of anyone here who still does.

[geek tragedy]

4. No, I want someone with the good judgment to recognize

a disaster before it happens.

[Starlight]

49. I'm constantly appalled that so many politicians & "experts" couldn't see what was so obvious to me

and many others. It's all about good judgment. They don't have any. If they couldn't predict something as obvious at the Iraq fiasco, how can we trust them to make good decisions on other issues?

[The Count]

6. Absolutely not. A war supporting nominee would take the war off the table too

much like Kerry/Edwards did in 2004, resulting in the war continuation...

[stray cat]

7. Absolutely!

If the democratic candidate voted in favor of the authorization and the republican is a governor who didn't vote are people really going to vote against the dem?

[Fermezlabush]

10. OP question refers to "support" not "vote". We know with some non-senators where

they stood on the issue - especially if they had the courage to come public with it - whether they had a vote or not.
It's a matter of judgement, of what kind of POTUS would they be re: starting wars.

[mike_c]

16. yes-- without hesitation....

The IWR is THAT important to me. I will vote green in a skinny minute if the democratic party runs a candidate who voted for the IWR.

[cool user name]

60. Me too!

[Fermezlabush]

8. K&R. The one relevant 2008 question today. My answer is "NO"

[Catch22Dem]

11. I'm not a single issue voter

I won't let IWR define the candidate. If there were two candidates, one who supported IWR (but no longer does) and another who didn't, it would be ignorant on my part to go with the second candidate based on one issue. What if ALL his/her other issues are the opposite of my own. And it would be even more ignorant to go third party, so that's out.

Sorry, I have more than one thing that I consider important.

[NoPasaran]

12. I did it in '04 and if necessary I'll do it again

Politics is about winning and exercising power over a broad range of issues, not passing a series of litmus tests.

Purity standards are for soap, not politicians.

[rebel with a cause]

43. Politics is about winning

Sad but true. That is why it would be nice to have someone who believes in doing the right thing for once and not someone who only says what people want to hear. Someone who does not jump on the bandwagon of issues only when they suit the purpose of getting them elected. Kucinich is probably not a good candidate, and I am not pushing his candidacy, but I respect him more than some of the others. Call me idealistic, but before I die I would like to see someone at least running for the presidency that I could feel was right for the job.

[robbedvoter]

13. No. One warmonger for my lifetime was enough. Let's try

something different this time, OK?

[Fleshdancer]

14. no in the primaries, yes in the GE

I hope I don't have to, but I really don't think I have an option.

[davekriss]

27. Perfect

I agree with this.

[Catchawave]

17. Guiliani, Pataki, Romney, Huckabee didn't vote for the war.

Can I vote for one of them now?

:sarcasm:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. You Can't Catch Me

"Poll question: Will You Vote For A Candidate In 08 Who Supported The Iraq War Resolution ?"


They are all on the record as supporting the war...

[Catchawave]

40. My bad, the IWR threads are running

together in my dizzy blonde brain these days. I'm also bad at "snark".

Yes, Yes I would support and vote for A Candidate who supported and voted for the IWR, because what's left over for the D's 62% of the voters would not support and vote for, and the Republicans win again!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. I Would Vote For Any (D) In The General

But only anti-war Dems get my vote in the primaries...

[rock]

18. Yes. Reluctantly. A stinky ol' rotten Democrat

still beats a fresh-cleaned republicon. No matter how much you wash a turd, it continues to stink, until it washes away.

[rebel with a cause]

45. what's in a name?

Republicans could be tolerable sometimes. One of them voted against giving bush the power to go to war without congressional approval. Can't remember his name, but he opposed bush on almost everything. Something that many democrats did not. It is the right winger that are bad, bad, bad. They are the ones that must be gotten rid of. And people like mccain and lie-man are no different, even if they say they are middle of the road.

[bookman]

19. Yes, if ...

..they admit it was a mistake.

[gollygee]

20. I will vote for whomever has a (d) next to his/her name

no way I'm going to contribute to another Republican getting in the White House.

[ComerPerro]

21. might have to

[Jack Rabbit]

22. By 2008, no one should be terribly interested in how a candidate voted on the IWR

It's water under the bridge.

I'll be more interested in hearing about how said candidate will, if elected, withdraw troops from Iraq, wage a real and effective war on terrorists, restore civil liberties, restore fiscal responsibility to the federal government and generally clean up the huge and ugly mess the Bush junta will leave behind.

[blm]

39. I agree - can a candidate get us OUT of Iraq? Heck - most Dems won't say 'Civil War'

and some of them weren't even for the IWR, but they do believe in keeping the reality of Iraq from the citizens.

My main criteria is for the Dem to be anti-corruption and open government so NO iraq War or a 9-11 ever develops in secrecy again.

[bridgit]

73. agreed...

[Debi]

23. In the primary or in the general election?

I won't vote republican in November 2008 so I may not have a choice but to vote for a person who supported IWR. I do have a choice in the caucuses, though.....:think:

[Eugene]

24. Yes, as long as he or she admits the war is a mistake.

Support for the IWR in 2003 does not disqualify John Kerry for me.
Most Americans, Democrats included, trusted their president in 2003
even if the visible case against Iraq didn't add up. Bush betrayed
that trust. That should be impeachable.

While I will support the 2008 Democratic nominee, whoever he or she is,
I will not support a Democrat who is still pro-war in the primary.

Where a candidate stood on the 2003 IWR is important but it is not
a litmus test.

[bigtree]

25. yes, if they are the nominee

makes no sense at all to concede to a republican. There is so much more at stake than that one issue, no matter how important and grave it may be.

[davekriss]

26. I will vote for any Democrat

They could run Bozo, for all I care. It is incrementally better than anything Republican. Abstain, or vote third party, and you increase the chances in our duopoly of another Republithug administration. Vote Democrat!

[Mass]

28. For those who answered NO, does that mean that you would vote

Buchanan in a Buchanan-Edwards's race? Or that you would vote third party because there is no difference between the two?

Please explain.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

29. People seem to have unrealistic expectations of politicians.

I really think it would be a lot better if everybody here would just drop the notion that the Democrats are somehow inherently better or more just or less corrupt than the Republicans and deal with the reality of politics as it has existed in human civilization since the dawn of time.

[LWolf]

33. Ok, here is my explanation

although I certainly can't speak for anyone else.

If I cannot, in good conscience, vote for the democrat on the ticket, I will do one of these 3 things:

1. Vote 3rd party, if there is a candidate I can vote for in good conscience.

2. If not, write in a candidate I can vote for in good conscience.

3. Not vote.

My choices do not include voting for a republican. I couldn't do that in good conscience, either, lol.

I also will not accept blame for any Democratic losses that may result. If the democratic party wants my vote, it is the democratic party's responsibility to put someone on the ballot that I will vote for. That's the party's choice. :shrug:

[rebel with a cause]

46. Exactly,

2000 - I voted D even though I was put out by the choice of vp and the treatment of Clinton.

2004 - I voted D even though I was not thrilled with Kerry, less with the vp choice, and was disapointed in the lack of strength shown by the two during the campaign.

2008 - If I am still alive, I want someone that I can actually feel good about. I do not want another "anyone but bush" year. If they can't give it to me, then I will look else where. And that is my voting right.

[sandnsea]

30. Will you vote for a candidate who distorts and distracts?

I won't support anyone on the left who has distorted the IWR for political purposes for the last 4 years, and let George Bush off the hook in the process. I won't support any candidate who continues to drag it out, or creates a new controversy by using defunding for political purposes, which only serves to create division among Democrats and distract from the real issue of getting our troops home as quickly as possible. Voting no on funding won't bring the troops home any more than ranting about UN troops would have.

[Schema Thing]

31. I could *maybe* pass on the vote, but I'll look at their words carefully

I won't be voting for Edwards or Hillary, if I have a choice.

[Clark2008]

32. Thank you - those are the two I've gotten raked over for

not supporting - like either one would win my state with or without my vote in the first place.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

34. I didn't even vote for Hillary as Senator. I voted straight Dem for all other

candidates.

[UrbScotty]

35. Primary or general? (nt)

[smoogatz]

36. Not if I have a choice. Hell no.

I would much prefer to vote for someone who opposed the Iraq invasion from the outset. If, in the general election, that choice is not available (God forbid), and I'm only able to select between two judgment impaired dumbasses, I'll pick the judgment impaired dumbass with the (D) next to his/her name.

[Pachamama]

42. NO - Not in the primary - Quite simply, even if they are great, its my Litmus test....

It's the principle and I hope the Democratic party is smart enough to not nominate someone who supported the war.

It's simply that important...

[rucky]

44. Primary or General?

Primary, no.

General - as if I'd have a choice.

[rebel with a cause]

48. Not advacating but

If enough people got fed up and went green, you might have a choice. ;-)

[rucky]

55. or...

www.thelaborparty.org

[Kelly Rupert]

47. Primary or General? n/t

[Pastiche423]

50. No

To the person upthread that said DUers were for the invasion, there were fewer that I can count on one hand. Moreover, they are no longer posting here.

[sendero]

51. While I believe and always have..

... that most Dems who voted for the damned thing did so because it, at the time, would have been politically difficult not to - I can forgive the error on the condition that they have admitted it was a mistake.

Those who insist on acting like they "did the right thing" can jump in a tar pit, they aren't worthy of being Bake Sale president, much less president of the US.

[eridani]

52. Primary or general election?

In the primary, absolutely not. In the general election, whoever is the Dem nominee gets my vots.

[frustrated_lefty]

53. If they don't dilly dally and they have the balls to call a spade

a spade. Something like "the administration lied and belongs in prison. It fooled me once, and I would appreciate the opportunity to redress that error."

[here_is_to_hope]

54. No. Never. Not. Wont.

Seriously.

[Lex]

56. So you didn't vote Kerry in 04?

:shrug:

[Lex]

57. Everyone who says "NO" -- does that mean you didn't vote Kerry in 04

either?

Or is this a new found 'rule' for the next election?

:shrug:

[frustrated_lefty]

61. Hopefully

the democrats won't put forth such a lousy candidate this time around. :shrug:

[Lex]

62. I didn't think Kerry was a "lousy candidate" at all. You didn't vote

for him it sounds like.

[frustrated_lefty]

64. I consoled myself with the knowledge that a vote for Kerry

was also, at the very least, a vote against Bush.

Maybe Kerry wasn't a lousy candidate. It's striking to me, however, that he ran with the assumption he didn't need the South and had the nerve to say as much. In stark contrast, we now have Howard Dean heading the DNC with a 50 state strategy which appears by all measures to be a raging success. One acted as though votes were his entitlement. The other treats a vote as a thing of value, to be earned and requested with humility and purpose. Yeah, I still think Kerry was a lousy candidate and I hope the party isn't suicidal enough to put him out there again.

[mike_c]

66. nope-- I didn't vote for Kerry and won't vote for anyone else...

...who supported the IWR. I don't play political games. No one who voted for the IWR will ever get my support. Period.

[Lex]

67. If you didn't vote for Kerry, then you essentially help re-elect Bush.

Nice going.

[mike_c]

70. it's called democracy...

That's evidently an alien concept to some folks-- you vote for the candidate that best represents your interests.

[Nutmegger]

78. Good on you

There's a point when enough is enough. They keep taking the "base" for granted while they prace around in the light.

Here's a start: The majority of Americans have woken up and wants an end to the "war". There's your democracy.

[Lex]

80. It's called electing the guy who closest represents your ideals

and NOT electing the guy who represents your ideals the least.

We need to get the stars out of our eyes around here.

[mike_c]

85. that's why I voted for David Cobb-- he more closely represented...

...my ideals than any of the other candidates in 2004. It sounds like we're on the same page(?).

[Raine]

58. Yes

the environment is my number one issue not the war plus I'm a "yellow dog Democrat" so I'll always vote Democratic.

[cool user name]

59. Fuck NO!

[Morgana LaFey]

65. Only if they have recanted -- with sincerity and modesty and

without blaming others or circumstances. I'd never vote against the Dem candidate, but I sure might leave that line blank.

[Lex]

68. Not voting means one less vote for the Dem, which is essentially a vote

up for an R.

[mike_c]

71. that's a damned lie, and one intended to suppress democracy....

A vote for X is a vote for X, period.

[Lex]

81. Nope. WHY do you think "Get out the vote" is important on election day?

You have to pull the lever for your guy. Stay at home (or withhold your vote) and the other guy wins.

It's math.

[mike_c]

83. I have not missed an election since the early 70s....

I do not "not vote." Ever. I vote for candidates who represent my interests. Lately, those have not often been democrats-- they've been green more often than not. But I "pull the lever" every November, no matter what.

What you seem to not understand is that there are usually more than two candidates, and democracy demands that we vote for whomever best represents our interests and our hopes for the nation. Not for blind party loyalty.

[Lex]

86. The person in this subthread I originally posted to said

"but I sure might leave that line blank."

Ergo, I posted what I did about the hazards of not pulling the lever or not voting.

Comprend?

[Morgana LaFey]

91. Then the nominee had better damn well make sure s/he has

apologized thoroughly and contritely if they want my vote, hadn't s/he? Comprend?

[AtomicKitten]

69. Not in the primary.

[bridgit]

72. i'm going to say 'yes' if only because saying 'no' reduces the field...

all kinds of decent folks voted for it thinking bush was going to be level headed, and never be capable of the war lunatic he turned out to be...yeah-yeah i know, maybe the office of the presidency will be so degraded as a result of all of this it will no longer matter one way or the other

[Jcrowley]

74. No

[laureloak]

75. It doesn't matter one little bit whether they voted for it or not. n/t

[Imagevision]

76. In a time of war Bush & Cheney say they'll truthful about WMD'S being the reason?

Imagine if you were a senator or Congressman and you hear running her mouth off about "mushroom clouds" etc... obviously to think about the fear factor, hey, most all the other Senators are fearful of Saddam, you would back the President and Vice President, wouldn't you?

This is why it's imperative Carl Levin gets his lead-up to war investigation going, need to nip this one in the bud so we can say; "Time Out" we got problems here...

(of course Cheney will resign the next day citing heart issues)

This fiasco must be properly investigated and not like last time when George & Cheney go in and NOT testify under oath and NOT together!!!

[Nutmegger]

77. No, but if they recanted

and are sincere then I would listen to what they had to say.

There's no excuse now, after all we know, for someone to parade behind this jackass occupation.

I worked my fingers to the bone for Lamont. And I'll do the same for any anti-war primary candidate. If the others don't have spine then step aside, there are people that have spine who would like to lead.

[jen4clark]

79. Primary -- no

General - of course.

[Buck Rabbit]

82. I wish your poll had more categories.

1) Voted For the IWR - not the litmus test for me.

(Kerry, Edwards, Clark - said he probably would have voted for it if he was a Senator, Clinton etc..)

2) Supported the invasion even after the IWR did its job and got UN Inspections. - my litmus test for the primary.

(Kerry and Clark pass this one as did all those that voted against IWR)

Anyone who supported the invasion even after the UN weapons inspections fails my good judgment test and I wouldn't support them in the primaries.

In the general election the only Republican I would vote for instead of a Demo War supporter would be Lincoln Chafee and he ain't running.

Before anyone jumps on me for supporting the IWR, I didn't and was proud of my Reps for voting against it. But if we had had a sane President the IWR would have proved that Iraq was unarmed without a war. It would have been a good thing. The decision to invade after the IWR did its job was Bush's and his cronies not those seeking to disarm Iraq.

[welshTerrier2]

84. would I? yes ... will I? probably not ...

what is important NOW is stopping the war and the occupation ... you give me a candidate who shows real leadership on that and i'm more than willing to forget the bone-headed blunder of handing bush the keys to Baghdad ...

so, would i vote for a candidate who supported the IWR ... under the right circumstances, absolutely!!

the problem, though, is not one of the IWR "Aye" voters, nor frankly any prominent Democrat, has supported getting out of Iraq as quickly as troop safety permits ... it seems to me the entire Senate and a few other 2008 possibles are still peddling a "here's how we can make progress in Iraq" approach ... if that's what they're selling, i'm not buying ...

not only do i not expect to be voting for an IWR supporter but i think it's entirely possible i'll be voting for a non-Democratic Presidential candidate (no, not for a republican) for the first time ever ... i truly hope this does NOT happen but that's what i see as more likely than not as of today ... candidates who have failed to lead on the war and occupation will NOT be receiving my support ...

[imperial jedi]

87. absolutely not.

n/t

[dogday]

88. I will support anyone who wants to end this

war regardless of how it was started, now that all truth has been revealed, those who say this war has to end will get my vote....

[Coventina]

89. Not only would I not vote for them, but should they become the nominee

I would most likely resign membership in the Democratic party.

Sorry, there are just some lines I won't cross.

[dysfunctional press]

90. Never. and i will even work to see them defeated.

there's NO excuse for our national disgrace.

[Cameron27]

92. No, not in the primaries.