Should we nominate anybody who voted for the '02 Iraqi resolution in '08?

[WI_DEM]

Many will argue that the resolution didn't authorize W to go to war, and so the votes of some who voted for it are being misinterpeted. Others will say that such Senators as Edward Kennedy, Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold saw the writing on the wall and were knowledgeable enough to vote against it.

Would it be best for the Democratic party to nominate somebody who opposed the '02 resolution in 2008?

[Mass]

1. I would argue I am not a single-issue voter. The IWR by itself is not enough

for me to support or oppose somebody. It is only a part of the question.

What the person did about the war afterwards, his/her positions on other issues are also part of my decision process. In other terms, no litmus test for me.

[LynneSin]

2. Oh hell no - I enjoy having republicans running the White House

:eyes:

I think Mass said it best - it's not the vote but what they did afterwards that counts.

[blm]

3. My concern is with those who believe the DECISION to go into Iraq shouldn't be investigated

because THAT is where we ended up in Iraq. The IWR did not take this country into an invasion. Bush did, and now we know with the DSM that they made the decision long BEFORE the IWR. If IWR had been administered honestly, there would have been no use of military force, just as the weapons inspectors were saying.

[Der Blaue Engel]

4. Your subject asks one question, but the poll answers another

Makes it kind of hard to answer.

[QuestionAll...]

6. yah, really bad poll form. farmed out to CNN maybe?

;)

[regnaD kciN]

5. It depends...

...in my mind, on two factors:

1) Just how genuinely bamboozled were they by the Bush song and dance act, versus how much of it was cynical political calculation. (In other words, was it a matter of "yeah, this is BS, but I'm running in 2004, and don't want to be derided as 'soft on terror,' so I'll let Georgie have his war"...?)

2) What have they done since then to acknowledge that their vote was a mistake (including an actual apology), and try to bring the war to an end?

In general, I'd prefer someone who had the wisdom to oppose the whole thing from the start. But it all depends on the particular candidate. Remember, in the '60s, some of the most liberal Democratic congressmen (and those who went on to lead the anti-Vietnam movement) were those who had voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, and only later came to realize that they had bought a pig in a poke.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. To me, it's an indication of very poor judgement.

That's not a trait that I want in an American President. I will not be supporting the nomination of anyone who voted for, or favored the IWR.