Democrats: do you care if Hillary says her vote was a mistake?

[Sbaraglia]

I know our jub Republicans will weigh in here with all the reasons they hate Hillary, but I'm curious as to whether jub Democrats care whether Hillary either apologizes for her vote to support the war, or admits it was a mistake.

For myself, I think it's a silly situation on both sides: silly of the moveon.org-type folks to be so fixated on doing it, silly of her to be so fixated on not doing it. Whether she admits it or not, we all know it was a mistake on her part, not just on Bush's part (a lot of people knew it was a mistake at the time, including those Democrat senators who voted "no", and Barack Obama - and many others - outside the Senate). I'll factor her vote into my own vote come the California primary, but I could not care less whether she admits it was a mistake or apologizes for it.

But it's apparent that a lot of Democrats care passionately about this, and confront her about it every time she speaks in public or has a town hall situation.

What about you?

 

[Lostlover]

What's done has be done. She voted for that tragedy (not a true liberal in my opinion). And now she wants to distance herself from it?

You can't have your cake and eat it too when it comes to starting a war. She started it, she should have a plan to guarantee success instead of going back on her vote. She's taken the coward's way out trying to shore up support for her because being anti-war is fashionable.

If she's willing to switch sides so easily when it comes to supporting a war she started, what isn't she capable of. This is the main reason why I'd support Obama over her any day of the week. Obama was always a critic of the war --> he thought clearly from the beginning.

Clinton is no different from the warmongers that started this war.

 

[jetsonboy]

Yes she is. She is married to no warmonger.

 

[White Eagle]

It won't matter to me as I will vote for whichever Dem is nominated. But I think it would be best for her politically to do so.

I consider the last quote as a sort of "apology". At least for me. Congress was misled.

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.

and

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/

"No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."

 

[CO Bob]

Yes she is. She is married to no warmonger.

Ahem, yes she is. He sent troops to Bosnia with no congressional approval. We are still there. Bill's use of the military was extremely wag the dog, but he was never called for it.

Democrats will fight wars too you know;

Roosevelt attacked Germany, they had never attacked us.
Truman attacked Korea. They had never attacked us.
Kennedy attacked Vietnam. They had never attacked us.
Johnson escalated Vietnam, still no attacks on us.

So lets not get all "they would never"! Of course they would!

 

[khushibagh]

I'll vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is as well. I don't think more highly of Hillary because of her vote but if she had been President in 2002 she would not have manipulated the intelligence to provoke a war either and in the end that's what separates the leading Democratic candidates from their Republican counterparts. I think she should play the "misled" card but not apologize too profusely.

A lot of people felt in their gut that the President was lying in 2002/03 but it would have been politically very dangerous to have voted against the war. Hillary's decision only looks cowardly now because it turned out that Republican incompetence was even greater than their venality.

 

[Boywonder89]

The damage is done. Whether or not she admits it was a mistake won't matter. Between her and Obama, I think the Dems will have a good candidate no matter what.

 

[NW007]

The damage is done. Whether or not she admits it was a mistake won't matter. Between her and Obama, I think the Dems will have a good candidate no matter what.

What if neither of them end up being the Democratic party's choice, who then?

 

[KennyD]

I believe she voted for the war based on the intel that was available to her at the time ... Now; she realizes it was all Bush induced lies , so she is sorry that she supported the war .... I could be wrong; BUT that is how I see it ...
As for President ; IF she does not win the nomination (and I'm certain she will ) I'd like to see Gore give it a go again with maybe Hillary as the vice president ..

 

[Lostlover]

She saw the same intelligence that Obama saw. As well as Howard Dean and many others. And STILL voted for the war.

I think she thought that Iraq would be a walk in the park, much like the Bush administration did as they screwed up the pre-war planning with such a small force they planned to use.

Imagine if Iraq was stable and democratic now. Hillary could say that she voted for the war and that she could be a war time president with a US induced democratic Iraq. It didn't happen that way obviously and now she's distancing herself.

Being a female and a Democrat in "war time" can be a double curse, so it makes perfect since that her support of the war was for her to buttress her credentials for president.

Democrats can't be hypocritical in this regard in my opinion. Bush dreamt up this war, but politicians like Mrs. Clinton put it in motion.

 

[jetsonboy]

C'mon boyz, let's not believe for one minute that Hillary would be her own President. With her, you get the experience and support of William Jefferson Clinton as well. Aren't two brains better than one, let alone none, in the White House?

 

[lawdude]

I voted "I don't care". I do care about the war obviously and any candidate's position on it. I am not bothered by her not saying it was a mistake as much I am bothered by her attempt to explain away her vote by saying that she voted to give Bush more leverage in pursuing a diplomatic solution, etc. and was unaware if not outright suprised that he would definately go to war with the vote. As someone who leans to the left and, generally speaking, likes Clinton, I have to say that this is pure bullshit. I just want her to be honest and stop trying straddle the fence as much as she does. If she thinks it was a mistake then she should say so. If she does not think it was a mistake then she should not. What I care about is honesty.

 

[Kulindahr]

She knew exactly what she was doing.
And of course she won't be honest about it; it's politics as usual.

 

[chance1]

she should not apologize for her vote

whether it was politically expedient or not - who knows what is in Hillary's heart - it was the right call

apologizing now is so lame

if she does it, I will respect her less

politics is like the fucking oprah show now - he/she who apologizes most gets points instead of scorn

 

[oceanmachine]

I'm on the lefter side of the scale and I wouldn't vote for her, based on things she's said and platforms she has taken, any way it goes.

 

[NickCole]

I couldn't care less what Hillary says about her vote now. It's done and I log it in the Live And Learn column.

What matters now is what she says about Bush & Co's mishandling of the war and what she plans to do going forward.

Moveon and the others are being very foolish, and it's one of the main problems with Democrats. Democrats are too honest and too honorable. Sometimes, in order to get what you want in the long run, even if you disagree with someone it's better to keep your mouth shut. But in the end that's the reason I'm a Democrat and not a Republican -- I'd rather stand with the ones who stumble on their honor than those who sprint on their lies.

 

[iman]

There is no reason for her to say that her vote was a mistake. Congress overwhelmingly favored the war, the public was in favor of the war, and the press not only favored the war, but shamelessly parrotted the administrations lies about the war.

Bush claimed that he needed the war resolution to effectively deal with Hussein and brought the resolution to Congress in October prior to the November election.

The Senate and the voters had every reason to believe that the administration would not lie to the extent they did and that the war would be waged with some semblance of competence. Senator Clinton made a defensible vote that reflected her constituents wishes, she has nothing to apologize for.

Obama was in the State Legislature, from a safe district that was opposed to the war. Who knows what he would have done had he been a Senator and had to answer to Illinois voters and his vote had consequences?

 

[Sbaraglia]

There is no reason for her to say that her vote was a mistake. Congress overwhelmingly favored the war, the public was in favor of the war, and the press not only favored the war, but shamelessly parrotted the administrations lies about the war.

Bush claimed that he needed the war resolution to effectively deal with Hussein and brought the resolution to Congress in October prior to the November election.

The Senate and the voters had every reason to believe that the administration would not lie to the extent they did and that the war would be waged with some semblance of competence. Senator Clinton made a defensible vote that reflected her constituents wishes, she has nothing to apologize for.

Obama was in the State Legislature, from a safe district that was opposed to the war. Who knows what he would have done had he been a Senator and had to answer to Illinois voters and his vote had consequences?

This seems to avoid the fact that 23 United States senators had enough sense / courage to vote against the resolution (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237#position):

NAYs ---23

Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (D-FL)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)

 

[iman]

^No, it means that 77 Senators voted the same way she did. Has anyone asked them to "apologize"? If Edwards was a serious candidate he would be savaged for saying he "made a mistake". Will he make another "mistake" about going to war if he was in the White House? Does he make these "mistakes" often? What else is he "mistaken" about?

I think the mistake thing is a ploy, a red herring. Presidents can be wrong based on the information they have, or make a bad decision based on advice they receive, or they can take responsibility for a situation, but a "mistake" about going to war would mortally wound any candidate.

 

[Sbaraglia]

^No, it means that 77 Senators voted the same way she did. Has anyone asked them to "apologize"? If Edwards was a serious candidate he would be savaged for saying he "made a mistake". Will he make another "mistake" about going to war if he was in the White House? Does he make these "mistakes" often? What else is he "mistaken" about?

I think the mistake thing is a ploy, a red herring. Presidents can be wrong based on the information they have, or make a bad decision based on advice they receive, or they can take responsibility for a situation, but a "mistake" about going to war would mortally wound any candidate.

Yeah, I wasn't really dealing with the "mistake" thing (whoops, the originator of the thread went kinda off-topic, sorry!); I was addressing the vote itself. There's no excuse for the vote itself. And seeing Democrats contort themselves making excuses for it makes me cringe. "Everyone else did it." No, they didn't. "Well, MOST everybody else did it!" Wow, I'm really impressed. So her vote to send men and women to die and get maimed in a pointless war was a smart political move because she was plotting a run for president? Wow, I'm impressed again. I'm not saying what she did was unforgiveable or that she's the devil incarnate. But do we have to excuse everything she does? How about if we try to judge each candidate on his or her merits AND demerits, without frantically trying to explain away every flaw? If she doesn't have enough to recommend her in spite of her flaws, she certainly won't survive a campaign based on attempts to deny that she has any flaws.

As for Edwards - uh, he is a serious candidate - ?? And I'm not quite sure how to take your comments about his "mistake". So, he and Hillary both cast a vote to give Bush authorization to invade Iraq, and you have less respect for him because he admits it was a mistake, and more for her because she won't admit it was a mistake? As I say, the whole mistake/apology thing seems faintly ludicrous to me, and here's yet another wrinkle in the whole tempest-in-a-teapot. (I'm not saying the vote is a minor issue, I'm saying the mistake/apology thing is.) I'm again saddened to see specious arguments put forth to defend one's candidate. Was JFK weaker for admitting that the Bay of Pigs was a mistake? I think he learned a lot from it and would have been less likely to fall for any future traps set by the zealots who dreamed that one up. Same for any politican who screws up: we shouldn't deny that the mistake was made, but we can judge them in their totality, including the mistake, and see if they come out looking good, or not.