2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhen "they" attack Hillary, "they" attack me ...
and these other people, many of whom have decades-long and well-documented credentials in fighting for the most vulnerable.
Heres what 54 leading progressives think about Hillary Clinton
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/heres-what-54-leading-progressives-think-about-hillary-clinton/
We can reasonably differ about which candidate we support. We can point out differences in their policies and contrast them, so long as those differences are accurately represented and not mere repetitions of GOPer talking points.
But what I have seen on DU, especially since 01 Jan 2016, are full-blown Clinton Derangement Syndrome OPs.
Let us PLEASE stop using DU as a vehicle to assist the GOP.
And before anyone posts the "but Clinton supporters do it too" excuse or some such, I would like them to find and link to anything derogatory that I have ever said about Bernie Sanders here or anywhere else. If you can't find it - and I am sure that you won't because I have never said anything derogatory about him - then please do not use that BS on me or in response to my OP.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)excuse.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)very seriously about the answer: If Bernie had been a recently-elected Dem Senator from NY in 2002 instead of a long-standing Ind Rep from VT in Congress, would he have dared to vote against the IWR?
More Dems voted for it than not, to our everlasting dismay. Hillary's was hardly the single vote that would have made the difference.
While Bernie's vote may still conceivably have been the same, please objectively remember the passions that were still running very high in NY even among Dem voters, especially after 9-11.
Clinton's IWR vote was not in support of the invasion of Iraq, although it has certainly been misconstrued as such by those who want to damn her for this single act. As a matter of fact, her IWR vote was one reason why she was not my preferred candidate in 2008.
Since then, however, she has certainly made up for that fumble and has said that her vote was wrong. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2014/06/05/hillary-clinton-on-iraq-vote-i-still-got-it-wrong-plain-and-simple/
For those here for whom that vote is set in amber, it may seem damning. But that single action does not offset her decades of public service in aid of the most vulnerable. Bernie likely regrets at least some of his own votes over the years even though he got this one very right, IMO.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)If I could figure out what was going on, Clinton could have.
And no, she has not made up for that blunder. She never can. Hundreds of thousands of dead, injured, traumatized, orphaned, widowed and on and on.
Tired of the excuses.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)What we do know is that Hillary voted for it and Bernie against it.
Hillary is happy with the ACE and Bernie wants Single Payer.
The Clinton's have gotten huge sums of money from corporations and Bernie hasn't.
Hillary thinks $12 an hour is enough for minimum wage while CEO's rake in billions and Bernie wants to start at $15.
Bernie thinks education is important and should be easily and freely attainable by all and Hillary wants to keep it expensive so Trump's kids don't benefit.
Do you need more? I do have plenty more if needed.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)Thank you also for your courteous reply even though we still have different perspectives.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)For now nearly 20 years, the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered, is because of Saddam's leadership.
The very difficult question for all of us, is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven track record of a commitment, if not an obsession, with weapons of mass destruction.
I ended up voting for the Resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision, and it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution. That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein, and a willingness on his part to disarm, and to account for his chemical and biological storehouses.
With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for United States leadership.
http://dailykos.com/story/2008/3/2/467547/-
She parroted Bush's lies about Saddam harboring Al Qaeda:
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.
This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."
And in 2008 she claimed what we did to the Iraqi people was a "gift":
https://dailykos.com/story/2015/11/30/1455533/--Iraqis-Were-Given-the-Greatest-Gift
To answer your question, yes I absolutely believe Bernie would have voted against the war no matter which state he was from, listen to him yourself:
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4543960/bernie-sanders-speaking-persian-gulf-war-1991
cali
(114,904 posts)enid602
(8,606 posts)It's Bernie's 'get out of jail free' card.
jfern
(5,204 posts)Ridiculous.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)here that is "pants on fire lying about Bernie."
You specifically ignored my request and went ahead and posted your own bias.
jfern
(5,204 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)disrespect towards me personally.
You have a lot of other threads where you can go to post this crap. I specifically requested that such not be posted in a response to this OP unless you could find something derogatory that I personally have said.
You're in full-fledged "some say" mode, which is exactly the kind of thing that appalls me here - on a Democratic website that was created specifically to elect and support Democratic candidates.
jfern
(5,204 posts)What I said is that the Hillary campaign is attacking Bernie repeatedly with lies.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)On one hand you're castigating Bernie supporters en masse for attacking Hillary, and then saying no-one is allowed to point out the similar behavior from Hillary supporters because you personally haven't engaged in it.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)posted by a Bernie supporter that had nearly the same title.
I at least put quotation marks around the "they" in a likely failed attempt at sarcasm.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)supporter to mean elected Democrats in office and party officials.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)But perhaps that's just me.
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)Thank you.
Exactly what part of my post do you characterize as "whine" and why?
You don't need to worry about real wine for me though. I live in the midst of an excellent wine-producing region and am actually looking at a vineyard as I write this.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)That anyone takes an attack on a politician seriously.