Was the IWR vote important to you in determining who you now support?

[Padraig18]

Poll question: Was the IWR vote important to you in determining who you now support?

Feel free to elaborate, if you wish, but PLEASE try to be civil. Thanks! :)

[Padraig18]

1. Civil reply #1.

I guess everyone is too shy to start, so I will.

The vote was very important to me, because I believe that Congress should not be allowed to devolve its war-making power upon the Executive, especially an Executive who has been proven to be a serial liar and incredibly militant/belligerent.

[aquart]

4. Also, anyone who believed Bush is too gullible to run the country.

Really, to just swallow that briefing whole? Is there lead in the drinking water in the Capitol?

[Padraig18]

5. That bugged me badly.

I followed the debates here at DU at that time, and elsewhere, plus I was in communication with Sen. Durbin's office on the issue; I reached the conclusion that * was lying, and so did my Senator, so why didn't they? :shrug:

[Zynx]

2. It was the key issue.

I was very disappointed, particularly in John Kerry whom I had been looking at for sometime as a potential choice, when so many Democrats voted for the IWR. With the crushing defeat of our party in the mid-terms afterwards, I felt that our leadership, what I call the "Old Guard", had betrayed us. The Clintons, Kerry, Daschle, and Gephardt had all failed us. That is when I was first drawn to the good doctor.

[Padraig18]

3. That's exactly how it happened to me, too.

I think many of us chose to support Dean at that time.

[Zynx]

12. I only took a look at him at that point rather than outright supporting

The first interview I saw of him in July or so of 2002 was at a time I admit to marginally, and I do stress marginally, supporting the Iraq war and he said he opposed it. That left me with an initially unfavorable impression at the time, but I was impressed by his candor. Shortly thereafter I began to do research on Iraq and did some serious thinking and determined it was a horrible idea. The real kicker for me was when I realized that there couldn't possibly be links between Saddam and Al-Qaeda.

Following that, I watched as John Kerry and the rest of my favorite Democrats with a few exceptions vote for the IWR. I was so disgusted with them that I looked at Dean and said, "This guy is saying what I'm thinking." and I began following him in the news and on C-Span very carefully. I once swithced to Clark on what I now realize is a phony electability issue, but I'm back to Dean now.

[Padraig18]

18. I initially supported Sen. Kerry.

I will still work my fingers to the bone to get him elected as President, should he win the nomination, but primaries are about voting your heart, and JK ripped mine out and stomped on it with that vote.

[adadem]

25. I strongly disagree about

voting your heart in this primary. Because of what we are faced with this election is, IMHO, the most important for the future of our country. I wish I could vote my heart and vote for Kucinich...he is my emotional first choice. I strongly believe that every Democrat must vote tatically in the primary...to put up the strongest opposition to the conservatives and the bush regime. If we end up with a floor fight at the convention rather than putting up the strongest candidate right from the start then we are at an automatic disadvantage to the pugs.

[Padraig18]

31. Im' doing both...

... in voting for Gov. Dean. :hi:

[IndianaGreen]

39. The strongest opposition to Conservatism is Liberalism

If Kucinich is your "emotional first choice," then you should vote for Dennis!

The problem in America today is that Reaganism has gone on unchallenged for so long that the public has come to accept as Gospel-truth the lies of the rightwing.

It is time to challenge Conservatism in all of its permutations!

[virtualobserver]

37. Betrayed......, exactly

I felt as if I had no one representing me in Washington.

[IndianaGreen]

6. Voting for IWR is bad

Voting for IWR and PATRIOT Act is truly bad.

Being unrepentant about voting for IWR and PATRIOT Act is not only horribly bad, but it is also a critical character flaw that disqualifies that candidate from the Presidency.

[virtualobserver]

38. exactly

perfectly put.

[Martin Eden]

7. I protested the war, but haven't ruled out Kerry

I believe Kerry showed poor judgement by voting for IWR, but if you look at his current foreign policy positions and credentials, they are, IMO, better than Dean's.

Dean wasn't put in the position of having to vote on IWR. If he was a Democratic Senator or Congressman who led opposition to the vote at the time, his credentials in this matter would be greatly enhanced.

Having said all this, I haven't ruled out Dean either. The only candidate I've ruled out is Lieberman.

[morgan2]

47. this man you speak of

"Dean wasn't put in the position of having to vote on IWR. If he was a Democratic Senator or Congressman who led opposition to the vote at the time, his credentials in this matter would be greatly enhanced."

is Kucinich. He was leading the fight against the IWR and the Patriot act in the house.

[Danocrat]

8. Yes, it was for me

but so was the vote on the Patriot Act and the vote to confirm the nomination of Ashcroft as Attorney General.

[poskonig]

9. The response after this mistake was more important to me.

Gephardt and Lieberman have always been proud of it, which did turn me off their campaigns.

Kerry seemed like he knew better, and I waited for a "knowing what I know now, I shouldn't have done that," but it never came. Currently, he is "proud" for voting for it too, which again, demonstrates a lack of judgment on his part and hence is a determining factor for my support.

[Droopy]

10. It's an important factor for me

I really like Kucinich who voted no on IWR. I think that took a lot of courage considering the climate of the country back then.

[JohnKleeb]

11. Yeah

During last fall and winter and spring, I was leaning Dean, I think after Gore withdrew I considered both Dean or Kerry, I wanted that to be the ticket, yes I know its horrible geography, and the two are like how Patton and Montegomery were. Well in like Spring, I read an article about DK, and was intrigued by it all, so since about early June I think I have been a set in stone DK supporter, I am edgy on those who voted IWR, I do try to see their good sides though, for instance Kerry is big on the environment and thats important to me, Dick Gephardt on Labor, Edwards on standing up to corporations. I've never considered Lieberman though.

[BootinUp]

13. I have stated before

That I believe all our candidates with the exception maybe of Lieberman were not in favor going into Iraq without a UN mandate, the fact is this IWR would have passed no matter what they did. They attempted to engage the republicans and effect the governments policy as they could.

Gimme a minute to put my asbestos suit on....OK ready!

[Padraig18]

15. No flame from me.

The only thing that bothers me about that sort of thinking, however, is that whether it would have passed any way isn't the issue; the issue, IMO, was whether voting in favor of it was the 'right thing to do'. I believe it wasn't. :)

[mzmolly]

14. What is more important to me is that the candidates be straight up with me

and not try to have it both ways like so many have done.

The only ones that haven't are Dean, Kucinich, Carol M Braun, Sharpton, Lieberman.

No matter the position, I respect each one of the aforementioned (sp) ;) for not wavering on their position.

I voted yes.

Footnote: Lieberman has lost me long ago, because of his support for this war. Gep/Kerry have lost me for wanting it both ways.

[Padraig18]

16. Interesting results, so far.

About 2/3 indicate that it factored into their decision, so far, something I think correlates with overall candidate numbers here in the DU candidate-preference polls.

[Padraig18]

36. And 2 hours later...

...the percentages remain unchanged: 2 out of 3 say it made some difference or a major difference...

[wryter2000]

17. At first it was a deal-breaker for me

Then, I figured if I was going to rule out anyone who'd voted for it, that ruled out too many good people. Then, I realized that the level of deception Congress was treated to was higher than what the rest of us heard. So, I'm willing to forgive and forget...as long as the candidate now realizes it was based on lies.

[Padraig18]

19. I could forgive the vote IF...

... just one of the 3 who voted for it would say, clearly and unequivocally, "I made a mistake, because I was lied to; I wouldn't vote for it today, knowing what I now know to be true."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. I really wanted Kerry to run even before he announced.

I was thunderstruck when he voted for the IWR. I was less surprised by Gephardt and Edwards, and I expected Lieberman to back the war. But, that Kerry would do so was a shock that I didn't expect. He came from a "safe" liberal state unlike some of the senators who really took a risk in voting against it.

It was with that vote, that Kerry, Gep and Edwards lost all credibility or respect with me.

I'm also surprised that Dean has managed to overcome all of the difficulties of being an unknown from a small state to lead for the nomination with an unapologetic anti-war, anti-bush, stance.

Ideologically, I'm much closer to Sharpton, Kucinich and Mosely-Braun, but realistically they have no chance of getting the nomination.

I'll vote for Clark if he gets the nomination. If, by mischance, Kerry, Gep, Edwards or Lieberman get it, I'll be voting Green.

So, the short answer to the question is: The vote has been a decisive factor for me.

[Padraig18]

21. My senator, Mr. Durbin, was running for re-election, and vored against it.

The invasion was very popular here in IL, but Sen. Durbin opposed it, nonetheless. The people here did not villify him for it, but respected his integrity, and returned him to office in a landslide.

[poskonig]

26. I love Senator Durbin!

I have no complaints about him, and would love to see him become majority leader some day!

[Padraig18]

27. yep!

I think he should be the next *crosses fingers* Majority Leader; he is articulate, bright bordering on genius, as honest as the day is long and absoultely FEARLESS when confronting Republicans. It would be a refreshing change. :)

[poskonig]

28. I like Durbin's skill

of defending *liberal* positions while looking like an average, joe-blow person you could have a beer with. Many liberal politicians come across like activists, pussies, and/or elitists, while the likable Durbin looks like none of these. DD would be an excellent spokesperson for the party.

[Padraig18]

33. Yes, he would

As you know, he racked up an 80% majority, and you don't do that in IL w/o getting Republican votes, in addition to Democratic ones. :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. So did my senator, Patty Murray, who is running this time.

I expect her to win in a landslide like Durbin did. It seems a lot of people respect integrity over political expediency.

[Padraig18]

32. They do.

Good luck to her! :)

[adadem]

22. I, too, protested

against the war. Then the Brits and bush provided intelligence in the form of proof. Did I believe it at first...yes. Did I ever dream that the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britian would lie...no. As much as I despise the bush regime never did I believe they would go so far as to lie to the world. That's why I forgive those candidates who actually had to cast a vote for or against the IWR.

The other candidates can say whatever they want to suit their purpose...no credibility...because all we have are their statements before and after. No credibility on this one. The only candidate who truly can state he was against IWR was Kucinich. Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt used their best judgement based on the data they were given. If I were in their shoes I probably would have voted as they did at the time.

[Padraig18]

23. I wouldn't have.

23 Democratic senators saw the same info and voted against it, including my own senator, Mr. Durbin.

[Scott Lee]

24. Pro-IWR has made us less nationally secure

The horrific results of the Iraq war, in addition to the obvious decimation of a once soveriegn nation, is a level of hostility built against us from the Arab world unknown before Herr Busch launched the Baghdad blitzekrieg. Attacks have not abated against the Us soldiers....they have in fact increased in both frequency and sophistication. Foreign Arab fighters are streaming into Iraq to fight the USA, sustaining the notion of America the Great Satan in the minds of increasing numbers of Arabs and Muslims. Today, Homeland Security has elevated the terror threat to Orange. With every stupid move made by the PNAC fueled warpigs in the Bush administration, our security is more and more tenuous.

And you can thank, in part, the congressional chickenshits that enabled Bushhole to do this with the help of some "democrats" who exposed their greater desire to stay in office than stand up for the American people, by voting for the IWR.

And you all know who you are. The American people know who you are. The VOTERS will remember who you are as terror against us increases and we head to the ballot boxes.

[Terwilliger]

30. I think less of Kerry and Gephardt today b/c of that

I might see them differently if they hadn't done that. (Gep's further ignominy of undercutting his fellow Dems and being a Bush show-token sealed the deal on him)

[sandnsea]

34. No, I saw it as a threat of force

That's how I saw it at the time, a unified U.S. voice to show Iraq and the UN that we were serious about inspections and ridding the region of WMD. Then Bush started lying about the intelligence and went to war based on those lies. I've always blamed Bush and the Cabal for this war and nobody else.

[Padraig18]

35. I'm curious.

Since almost half of the Democrats in the Senate voted against it, and saw exactly what JK, JL and JE did, what made them vote 'no'? :shrug:

[sandnsea]

40. They're Democrats

And the Democratic base kneejerks against war. In many ways, voting against the resolution WAS the politically expedient thing to do. Anybody who votes for a Democrat is going to expect that no vote and it isn't going to affect their vote one way or the other. In fact, it was pretty easy for Democrats to vote no because they knew the thing was going to pass anyway.

A question for you. If Dean and everybody else KNEW Saddam had no WMD, then why continue with containment???

[Padraig18]

41. They never said the *knew* he had no WMDs.

They said that containment was working, and that he presented no clear, immediate threat.

As for the Dems opposing it for 'knee-jerk' reasons, that is a huge slander against great senators of principle.

[sandnsea]

42. I'm a lifelong Democrat

46 years old. Democrats kneejerk against war. It's actually one of the reasons I am a Democrat. It's a fact, not a slander. It's also the reason that I know if someone like Kerry votes for a war, in any way shape or form, I better look twice at it. And that was way before I had even thought about a Presidential candidate. I was pretty much for Edwards at the very beginning anyway.

Hmmm, you've never seen the argument "I knew Saddam had no WMD, why didn't Congress?" You've never seen "Howard knew Iraq had no WMD, he made the right call, that's why he's the best on foreign policy."

It's impossible to debate this war vote because it isn't a real issue with most people. It's simply been used to slaughter Kerry by Dean and his supporters. Only Kerry. The arguments change every time Dean changes his rhetoric. It's been a great political ploy. But the sad thing is that Dean is running for the most important office in the world. And he's willing to say anything about national security, no matter his personal beliefs, in order to further his own ambitions. That's not leadership and it's not going to pass for leadership next year.

[kayob1]

45. Actually

Since my two sons and daughter-in-law were all in the Army until April of this year, and one of my sons is still in the Army, it is a pretty big issue with me.

[sandnsea]

48. The war is an issue

The vote is irrelevant. If you think Kerry would have your kids in Iraq, don't vote for him. If you think a different candidate has the knowledge to look at the world situation head on, tell the complete and consistent truth about it, and do everything necessary to protect this country, vote for that candidate. That's what your kids signed up to do, protect the country. Kerry would never send them into a war unless it was an absolute last resort. War is not part of his agenda in confronting terrorism. I have more faith in his diplomatic skills and his overall view on international relations than any other candidate. And he tells the straight truth, whether it's popular or not. That's why he has my support.

[kayob1]

49. I'm not planning on voting for him

Thank you very much

[Iverson]

43. it is one element

Given the political landscape, it is far easier to identify things I dislike than things I like. Accordingly, policies that are poisonous contribute to a process of elimination in candidate support, since I am loathe to support candidates who have agendas hostile to mine.

The decision to give a blank check to the head of a fraudulent administration is one of those easy negatives. Like enthusiasm about the death penalty or erasing the boundaries between church and state, it is very close to a deal-breaker all by itself.

The IWR resolution was a particularly disappointing example of timidity in realpolitik. Everyone knew that it was part of a rush to preventive war, but it was easier to sell out Robert Byrd than it was to stand up to GWBush. Candidates whose sense of pragmatism flies in the face of rudimentary civilization enjoy no propietary claim on my vote.

[ibegurpard]

44. Nicely put

I feel the same.

[Padraig18]

46. I echo that.

Nicely put, Iverson. :)

[Iverson]

50. Thank you, ibegurpard and Padraig.

I enjoy finding areas of agreement so much more than partisan crabbing.

:toast:

on edit: spelling correction