General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums61 Senators voted to give Trump power to start new wars without consulting Congress. 13 were Dems.
So they voted on repealing the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). Here are the yays and nays, just in case anyone was wondering.
BigmanPigman
(51,642 posts)Me.
(35,454 posts)woodsprite
(11,931 posts)Senate votes against repeal of 2001 authorization for use of military force
https://thinkprogress.org/senate-votes-to-kill-an-amendment-that-would-repeal-the-2001-aumf-9bf8909f6bbe/
sheshe2
(83,963 posts)Thank you.
Response to HarmonyRockets (Original post)
Post removed
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)And I say that as someone who got their first ever post hidden, in 16 years, just yesterday, for making snarky remarks at Clinton's expense.
She's not a candidate anymore, not involved really with the party. She's just on a book tour, thrilling her fans and pissing off people like you and me. But rehashing senate voted from retired people from 15 years ago? Can we give it a rest?
Arguing 2016 isn't helpful, granted, but at least it's still relevant.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)The OP could get hidden as a veiled reference to Clintons vote. I was of course being sarcastic but I should probably put that tag on there.
Seriously I had a post hidden for calling a Fox News Pundit a Fox News Pundit. It was alerted as a personal attack. I guess that person should seek another line of business.
Expecting Rain
(811 posts)She was clear that her vote was to authorize force as a point of leverage that would pressure Saddam to comply with UN resolutions and was not an endorsement of war.
But nice job demogagoging the issue.
Gee whiz. It thought I was on a pro-Democratic Party website.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)Why didn't more follow his lead?