But here's the problem with letting Trump off the hook for his past position on Iraq even as a private citizen.
Many people take it for granted that it is the Republican Party who is strong on national defense, vigorously supports our military and project decisive military power abroad. It's that last part that's important to this issue at-large.
By claiming that he was against the War in Iraq from the start, Trump is trying to convince voters that he was smarter than everyone else running for the position of Command-in-Chief, including most members of Congress which would include then Sen. Hillary R. Clinton. But he has a record verified through a few media sources that tell a completely opposite story.
So, if you allow him to have this pass, if the voters let him off the hook for this what you're really saying is his judgement in such matters where committing our troops to war or any other military conflict is perfectly okay because his views on such matters have simply "evolved" over time. NO! I'm not letting him off the hook so easily, especially when he's claimed to have access to better intelligence gathering as a private citizen than our government has. Alright, so he was really talking about business-related intelligence gathering against his business rivals or in the case of campaigning, against his political rivals rather than military intelligence. Still, because he left the matter so vague as he generally does I'm holding his feet to the fire.
Trump is trying to convince people not only that his instincts are better but also that he called the outcome of the War in Iraq long before anyone else and that's a bunch of bull! Not only did he not see it coming, he had no idea how things would end up any more than the next guy. Fact is, he's never said anything about the War in Iraq until the war had already started.