When I hear, "I'll never vote for any dem that voted for the war",...

[Liberal_Andy]

my heart sinks.

I can't speak for them (Edwards, Gep. & Kerry). Maybe they know the voters better than I do. I don't know. I think they're wrong as hell, and they make me mad as hell. Especially John. And I've told him.

Having said that, they did what they did, and they're dealing with it. But at the same time, does anyone here think they (or Gore) as president in spring 2002, would have invaded Iraq without international support?

I don't think so.

Would either of them given the surplus over to the Crony Capitalists?

Not likely.

Sold medicare down the river?

Not bloody likely.

So I guess all I'm saying is we can;

1) Make the perfect the enemy of the good, and stay home if our guy doesn't win. And bitch and moan for four more years,...

2) Or, we can ALL get behind whoever wins, and be done with Bush and his gang of thugs before it's too fucking late!

Your choice....

[GOPBasher]

1. ABB for me.

[John_H]

2. You'll just have to deal with it

Some people just can't wrap they're minds around more than one issue.-jobs? the erosion of rights? the environment? Sorry. No vote for those things.

Its simple psychology--not a lick different from wingnuts who vote on abortion.

[maddezmom]

4. some of us have a 1st choice

but are still ABB. That's where I find myself, sorry if it makes others uncomfortable.

[quinnox]

3. Yes, indeed - Bush is the worst

n/t

[Sterling]

5. I get all happy when I hear that.

It means someone pulled their head from their ass and has stopped tolerating weak ass representation.

[Liberal_Andy]

7. and bush is an example of strong ass representation?

please.

[Sterling]

9. Dont be stupid.

If Bush is bad so are the people who have enabled him. Nice strawman by the way.

[greatauntoftriplets]

13. Yup, Sterling.

:hi:

Go Sooners!

[Eloriel]

17. As long as we keep voting for whoever deigns to grace the

Democratic ballot, without regard for how they perform for us (or don't, as the case may be), then we'll never get anything better than mediocre.

I'm tired of it.

And the bottom line for me was that Iraq vote. Not as if there's not a lot more, but there will BE no crossing of that threshold.

However, please bear in mind that each and every one of them has it within their power to get my vote in the general election. All it requires is a d\complete renunciation of their vote. "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I regret that vote."

It's really not so much to ask, given their complicity in a war I consider the worst atrocity since Hitler invaded Poland. Yes, worse than our involvement in Vietnam.

If they want us to make them the Leader of the Free World, they'd better goddamned start acting like that calibre of leader. There is no room in the America I want to see for someone who cannot see, and/or won't admit, the error of their ways on such an earthshattering issue as full-out war and the illegal, immoral, unwarranted, unjustified and unjustifiable invasion of a sovereign nation.


Eloriel

[RetroLounge]

6. Definitely ABB

eom

[AP]

8. If IWR is your litmus test, tell me, would you like Bush if it weren't

for the Iraq invasion? Or was he doing some other real bad shit notwithstanding the Iraq invasion?

[JohnKleeb]

11. Although IWR is an important factor in my candiate AP

I have to agree with you, Bush would be doing some pretty scummy shit even if there was no Iraq Invasion and he has done more damage than that in other things as well.

[Sterling]

15. It is nice we have a choice and are not stuck with pro war

candidates. It does not look like this will be an issue as it was already decided months ago when the grass roots dems through their support behind the anti war candidates.

"I will never vote for a pro war dem" is a moot point as no pro war dem will be nominated. It is unfortunate that our pro war dems did not figure this out before backing the crusade. Lucky for us there were strong anti war candidates who were willing to take over the party.

Pro war is a loser. Don't kid yourself, it becomes more true everyday. It is spilt milk the damage to the careers of the pro war people is done, time to move on.

[JohnKleeb]

16. I already have my decision Sterling

I am very happy with whom I support. I just like some of the people who voted for IWR despite IWR. I am for Kucinich till he drops out, believe me, there hasn't been much to make me want to switch. Yes it is a good to have a choice. I too wish they had said no.

[AP]

18. Pro-war isn't a loser and anti-war isn't a loser in and of themselves

What matters is what Rove does to the nominee. If an anti-war candidate gets nominated, Bush is going to pull out, or there will be another attack, or they'll find WMDs. If a IWR-yes voter gets nominated, they'll figure some other shit out.

[HazMat]

21. None of the Dems are pro-war (except for Lieberman)

The original poster was on point: it's more about policy direction and vision. Most of the Dems who voted for the IWR are Clintonites on foreign policy, i.e. tough on dictators/rogue states/terrorism, while aiming for mulitlateral/global/inclusive solutions. They never would've gone into Iraq the way Bush/PNAC did. The Clinton position is a far more moderate/mainstream/practical position for the Democratic party to take on foreign policy/national security, especially in this post 9-11 world; one could argue that the party needs to be even tougher and smarter on foreign policy than it was during the Clinton years. 9-11 changes everything. At the end of the day very few Americans will support an anti-war candidate like Dean who they perceive to be un-American/un-patriotic and a lightweight on foreign policy .. a risk to national security. Dean would never play well in the swing x-urban counties that Clinton (and Gore to a lesser extent) carried easily.

[Sterling]

12. Bush is just BAD.

The fact so many of the supposed opposition have helped further his agenda is unforgivable and it is a great thing many voters are choosing not only to hold Bush accountable but the Senators and Reps who enabled his crime.

[demigoddess]

10. ABB but also all the democratic reps and senators that we can get

If they were surrounded by dems instead of repubs they would have had more guts to vote against the war and other stupid stuff. But I am still mad a Kerry and Lieberman for not voting at all on the medicare bill.

[pearl]

24. I'm with thant! ABB

The sooner everyone on our side realize this is an all out vicious
Civil War, big problem the honcho's in the DNC are starting to understand we're losing.
About 20 yrs late to the battlefront.
Which by the way is the Mass fu**kin'media. They own it!

"The left at it's core understands in a way Grant understood
after Shiloh that this is a civil war, that only one side will
prevail, and that the other side will be relagated to history.
This war has to be fought with the scale and duration and
savagery that is only true of civil wars. While we are lucky
in this country that our civil wars are fought at the ballot
box, not on the battlefields, nonetheless it is a civil war."

New Gingrich
(qouted by David Brock in
BLINDED BY THE RIGHT)
we're all gonna have our hands full next year just to keep them from
stealing it all, by making the mass media pay for not telling the
truth. But would it be the biggest scoop of the mil/century if the
internet did it all bringing out the voters, watching the polls,
of course spreading the message.
These Bastards in the media have already been so scooped and they don't even know it.

Sorry for the spelling and the rant but I lost cable today, Oh well
it tortured me anyway.
Keep on keeping on!
Voting Poet

[Alpharetta]

14. The Iraq vote is ONLY my litmus for the Dem primary

Of course I'll be happy to vote for the Dem in November.

[_Jumper_]

19. Voting based on the IWR

Voting based on the IWR will likely cost us the election because we will nominate our 6th most electable candidate. :scared: :nuke:

[HazMat]

26. just as Rove planned when he thought up the IWR

pushing the issue on Iraq does 2 things:

- ensure that any Dem who goes against it is unelectable in a general election.
- ensure that any Dem who is for it is unelectable in the Dem primary.

The GOP is a lot of hideous and evil things -- but stupid is not one of them. When Howard Dean loses 40 states we'll all look back on the IWR as the moment Rove won the 2004 election. Dividing the Democratic Party on Iraq was the key: Bush ramped up his rhetoric specifically to enrage activist on the left, to split the Democratic party, to get a weak Dem nominee, to alientate the UN so his PNAC/Halliburton crew would have full control of Iraq.. for four more years.

[izzie]

20. Well why would they give up their power to someone like Bush?

:shrug:

[drfemoe]

22. minor correction

Kerry is on record (posted here on DU by one of his rangers) that he DID support invading Ira* with or without international support.

If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international
community's already existing order, then he will have
invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at
the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if
the Security Council fails to act.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=721776

[sandnsea]

29. He supports his vote

Half the people here insist it's political expedience. Then his own words show he thought Saddam was a threat and that's turned against him too.

He is serious about weapons proliferation and serious about rogue nations not being allowed to have them. He will not tolerate it. But if he were President he would work with the UN to have a strong and effective weapons inspections process so that we would never be in this position again.

There really truly are WMD floating around the world. Terrorists really truly do exist. Countries with tyrannical leaders really truly are making WMD and they really truly would sell them to terrorists. Bush hyped the intelligence to start a war in this case, but it doesn't mean that the United States should consequently ignore the problem in every case.

[quaker bill]

23. I will vote for the Dem nominee

But I will support an anti-war candidate through the primaries.

For me this goes beyond the simple concept of being against the war. I believe that the people who voted for IWR were out gamed by the republicans.

The republicans raised the stakes so that these men needed to have the conviction of principle sufficient to bet their seats on this vote. The repugs put these guys in a box of either being pro-war or anti-American. Few were willing to take the risk to break with this paradigm and step outside of the box. Bob Graham did. Dennis Kucinich did as well. Most did not follow.

My point is that this is the kind of hardball the republicans play now. They will play it on any issue important to them where the opportunity presents itself.

Several candidates have shown their vulnerability to this sort of gamesmanship. I belive this will cause them much more trouble with the repugs if elected.

Because of this, I do not support them.

[Pastiche423]

25. The very essence of my being

won't allow me to vote for anyone that condemned little innocent children to death or to be orphans, especially when some voted for their own political reasons.

But then, my single vote really does not matter.

[sleipnir]

28. I agree, no IWR Candidate for me either

It's a decision I made back in Jan (almost a year ago) and I plan to stick by my choice. I feel that by voting for IWR, those people chose to align themselves with the evil that is gripping this country and until they publically recant, I cannot vote for them. We need a Dem who will stand up to the Pugs and not kowtow like Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman and Edwards. Those four will not get my vote (IF they even get the nomination) unless they make a damn good case as to why they voted the way they did and publically apologize (Kerry nearly has.)

[roughsatori]

31. I too will not vote for anyone who voted IWR

And if they voted for the Patriot Act too I will actively work against them if they should ever run for office again.

[HazMat]

32. Wellstone voted for the Patriot Act

I guess if he was alive you'd work against him too ?

[roughsatori]

33. I used the word "too." You must not know that means "also"

To simplify: If they voted for IWR AND the Patriot Act I would work against them if they ran for Dog-Catcher in my district. And since Wellstone voted for the DOM (Defense of Marriage Act) and the Patriot act, I don't think I would support him even if he were to resurrect himself from the grave.

[sandnsea]

27. Lying is my litmus test

I've had enough lying the last 2 years to last me a lifetime.

All I care about the IWR vote is that it was made in good conscience by the candidates. Based on massive amounts of research on what various experts in the IAEA, UNSCOM, and elsewhere said about Iraq; and the statements made by the various candidates over the years; I've come to the conclusion that they made the vote in good conscience. They aren't lying.

Now Dean, he lies. He fails. I can't see how the war vote, made in truth, could be more important than lying about what your real position on the war was. And lying about so, so much more.

[roughsatori]

30. I respect people who refuse to vote ABB

Of course, people who lack an ethical and intellectual capacity will want to blame the voter instead of the Democratic party which is doing a disgraceful job.

The IWR and Patriot Act (as well as the Dems letting Medicare pass) are things that prove the Democratic Party is on its last legs as a viable force.

Everyone in the USA with a brain knew that Bush would attack Iraq without coming back to the House for another vote for permission-and to listen to our Reps who voted for it lie about how they thought he would come back for another vote is nauseating. I hold them responsible for their votes. I also hold the Democratic Party responsible for letting the Medicare Bill pass.

I have never voted for anyone but a Dem. I was going to vote for anyone but Bush or Clark, but I now am starting to wonder if I can vote for anyone who is a Democrat or Republican. I never thought that I would agree with the idea of letting the Corporate Dems and Repukes destroy the country in hopes of spurring a fundamental Chiang in our corrupt country.

I don't think anyone who voted for the IWR will win the nomination so this is really hypothetical.

[WilliamPitt]

34. Wow

This survived a locking with a cuss word in the body. Impressive.

P.S. I agree.

[TahitiNut]

35. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include profanity, excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation. Inflammatory rhetoric should also be avoided.

3. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

4. If you wish to start a vanity thread (ie: a discussion thread in which the sole purpose is to share your personal opinion) you must state your opinion in a non-inflammatory manner which respects differences in opinion and facilitates actual discussion.

5. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
TahitiNut - DU moderator