OK DU'ers I have a very serious question about the war and the candidates

[bigdarryl]

Will you vote for a democrat candidate in the current field who voted and supported this Iraq POLICE action that is killing our girls and boys? if so your not against the war in my opinion.

[Adelante]

1. In the primary I will not

I will vote for the nominee in the GE.

[The Magistrate]

2. A Question For You, Sir

Do you consider persons who voted for the recent supplemenmtal Bill to have voted in support of the war?

[bigdarryl]

4. the bottom line is I'm not voting for any SENATOR!! for President period.

i am heavily leaning toward Governor Richardson. he has the most experience put together out of all the top three people who are getting all the media press.he's a long shot but i like him a lot.

[SaveElmer]

5. You know he is DLC right?

eom

[mtnsnake]

7. Richardson is DLC? haha, wait till BigD gets a hold of that.

Imagine when everyone finds out that Gore was practically the godfather of the DLC. lol

[Adelante]

9. Nice one

:D

[Adelante]

6. He would be my first choice of the current field, too

Because he's got executive experience in running a large organization and because he knows how to operate in the larger world. I never really understand how legislating is seen as de facto preparation for the Executive.

[bigdarryl]

8. Thats my thinking also I agree with you 100%

[The Magistrate]

10. Is That In The Primary Only, Sir, Or In The General As Well?

[SharonRB]

14. If Gore doesn't run

I'm leaning toward Richardson, too. He's got more experience than any of the current top three.

Run, Al, run!

[Mass]

3. A question for you: when will you learn there is no such thing as a democrat candidate ...

except in freeperland.

Though I think the IWR was wrong, I have issues with people who call a vote for the IWR supporting the war (which is what I guess you refer to by Iraq POLICE action) and I would have issues supporting people who still have problems supporting a firm deadline to get out of Iraq.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. You won't like my answer...

partly because I thought this was actually a serious question, not another soapbox.

Not all that many here can match my activist background, being one of the few Quaker activists with VA benefits, such has been my strange journey. I've worked as a draft and GI Rights counselor, occasionally written and lectured on anti-militarism, pacifism, and non-violence, and been consistantly against military action. Non-violence IS actually my religion.

But after all that, I really don't give a shit about most of their stands on this war.

The simple fact is that while many share responsibility for this mess, few actually share the blame. As far as I can see, none of our candidates expected or wanted what we now have, and all of them are struggling to find ways to unscramble the egg and extricate us from the mess. There are no good ways to do this, only possibly less bad ones.

It's not only "our girls and boys" who are suffering through this, it is the millions of Iraqi people, and the destabilization of the entire area, that is suffering.

Yes, we can yank our people out of there and watch the bloodshed, or we can stick around a little longer and possibly reduce the bloodshed, but whatever we do it will not be enough and it will not solve the problems we have caused.

[FrenchieCat]

12. For me it is a question of "sound" judgment.....that is the test......

If voting or co-sponsoring a resolution that amounted to a blank check when other alternatives were present was the action, I question that judgment of such a vote. I question if such a mistake should end up earning one a promotion to the highest office in the land.

However, I will vote for the Dem nominee during the general election.

[Clark2008]

13. No, I won't.

And there's even one candidate I wouldn't vote for in the general (not that it would make a difference in my state).