• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Using Dems Votes for War as Leverage in 2006?

ShullsM

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
By using some of the Dems votes for the Iraq War Resolution, do Republicans gain a true upper hand, despite the fact that many of the Dems have come out and said they made a mistake and that many Americans believe they were decieved as well? Is this really going to be a hot button issue come 06?

My belief is that the whole situation must be reevaluated and that a vote for the war resolution combined with a changed view on what has gone on should not damage a candidate. Agree, Disagree?
 
For strategy purposes, if they ever got off their soap box, I think they could put a Democrat in.
 
I agree. Especially since both sides messed up big time. I think the democrats have a huge advantage regardless. The results of the recent elections just proved that people are fed up of Bush and, perhaps, those like him.
 

We need to be careful. Neo Cons are similar to the German Nazi SS, and they always lie and deceive. even when it isn't necessary. then they want to kill some one.
 
A few of the democrats have already agreed they made a mistake. Edwards said it and came up with an exit strategy. I respect that. Many of the democrats who voted for the war have now come back and said we should start looking at alternative strategies. The thing that bugs me is that these people are getting railed by the Reps, but everyone knows the course of the war has not gone as planned and the smart thing to do is re-evaluate. Cantwell and others have mentioned it and they've gotten railed for flip-flopping. I don't think the term flip-flopping even applies in this situation. It's the circumstances that have flip flopped, not the congressional leaders.
 
Thank you. I see it your way as well. That's why I'm so confused by some of the conservative comments I've seen lately using this as ammunition against the Dems. It just doesn't make since. What sparked my interest in this was an article I read about a GOP leader in WA, Chris Vance, and a random condemnation of Maria Cantwell for voting for the war. It's like they are reaching.....
 
I think you hit it on the head with the continued scandals that crop up every other week with the Republicans. I just don't get it. People seem to be blind to it and believe it is ok that our countries leaders are accepting bribes on decisions that we elect them to make. It's crazy. All the stuff you pointed out is right there in everyone's face. The Democrats get railed by the Republicans for trying to pin down the oil executives, and then a week later it comes out that they in fact did not tell the truth in fron of Congress. Why do people think liberals wanted them to testify under oath? They don't exactly have a record that spills honesty?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…