Honest questions for both sides...

[Lucky 13]

It's standard for conversation in GDP to be pretty defensive and flame-ish. We jump in and automatically defend our chosen candidate, sometime in the complete absence of fact or reason. And I'll admit - I've been as guilty as anyone.

But in the last week I've been making an attempt to be a responsible, informed voter and not just buy everything from one candidate and disbelieve everything from the other. Attempt to see things from both sides. Understand that one candidate is not evil and the other not a saint. Admitting that my candidate does, in fact, have faults and the opponent does, in fact, have some strengths. I've been trying to remember that it's not about Barack or Hillary. It's about us, the democratic party, and beating McCain in the fall.

There are a number of things about EACH candidate that bother me, but the two listed below stand out to me at this time. I can't seem to make sense of them or come up with any reasonable defense of their actions.


Question for Barack Obama supporters:

WHY did Barack have all those "present" votes in the Illinois state legislature and the Senate? If you are there, should you not take a stand on an issue? At first I thought maybe he did not feel informed enough about the issue(s) to vote on them... but as elected official, isn't it his job to know about the issues and vote on them? Then I thought maybe he was avoiding taking a stand on controversial issues, but some of the votes didn't even seem that controversial. What's up? Can someone explain this to me?


Question for Hillary Clinton supporters:

WHY will she not release her tax returns? I understand that there are 20 years worth of tax returns available to view, but none for the last eight years when they have made the majority of their money. There's rumors and innuendo about impropriety on their part. Releasing her returns would, presuming there is no funny business, put these rumors to rest and allow Hillary to support her claim that she's the most vetted. But holding them back and making excuses implies to me that maybe there IS something to the rumors. Can someone explain?

Thanks in advance for your honesty (and for not roasting me over flames).

[Johnny__Motown]

1. 3% of votes were Present.... not many 97% were up or down.. and it is there for a reason

If you support the idea but believe that there are problems with he bill itself you vote Present


The fact that he reviews the bills closely enough to know how to vote is impressive.


Unlike someone who voted for the IWR without reading the NIE





Hilliary grew up in Illinois, she passed her 8th grade civics class. Hell she even became a lawyer. She knows exactly why the Present option exists. She lied to you and you believed her.

[Bobbie47]

2. I think

Barack thought some of the parts were unconstitutional this is why he voted present.

[Johnny__Motown]

5. Again some problems with the Bill itself.. there were about 130 of them, I assume the reasons varied

[Bobbie47]

9. Yes

it was a problem with the bill itself. Why im sure was for different reasons

[Kittycat]

4. Thank you Johnny

Yes, it's a way to support the premise of the bill with faults - without someone (for example) being able to say you hate america and the troops.

[lapfog_1]

3. Ok...

Obama votes present...

as has been repeated here over and over, with video interviews of the principals involved, Obama was ASKED to vote "present". NARAL and Planned Parenthood both have said this. Only the NOW spokesperson has said that "they don't remember such a strategy"... but NOW would not have been involved in the issues up for vote as PP and NARAL. I'll leave it to you to research the strategy, the votes, and the bills that were being voted on.

And, under Illinois law, a "present" vote was the same as a "no" vote.

[not_too_L8]

6. A present vote is the same as no, it usually means..

the concept bill it self is OK but that there is something in the bill or a rider attached that the senator doesn't like.

It's like saying I would have voted yes but because of certain content I'm voting no.

[Johnny__Motown]

7. I am no expert, but it sounds like you want the wording changed

[not_too_L8]

12. ????????????

[Johnny__Motown]

14. The way the bill is worded.... as if you support the idea but not the exact phrasing in the Bill

sorry if I was not clear

[Alter Ego]

8. It is not a matter of taking a stand on an issue.

"Present" in the Illinois state legislature does not mean what Hillary Clinton's campaign would like you to think it means.

What it means is that (back me up here, I'm doing this sans research and cannot remember many of the specifics) while a legislator agrees with many of a given bill's contents, he/she would like to take time to discuss them further or negotiate different terms on a certain element of it. "Present" essentially means "Yeah, I guess, but I'd like to discuss this further in committee."

It's not a simple matter of "taking a stand". The vote is used strategically.

[not_too_L8]

16. essentially correct ,but because of....

the fact that the bill needs a certain number of "yes" votes to pass and "present" does not count as "yes" then the "present" vote is the equivalent to a "no" vote

[TexasProgresive]

10. I apologize upfront but I couldn't resist - Both Sides Now

Ive looked at clouds from both sides now
From up and down, and still somehow
Its cloud illusions I recall
I really dont know clouds at all

--Joni Mitchell
I guess I'm showing my age.

[Johnny__Motown]

11. Any Hillary Supporters gonna tackle the Tax Return Question? I Tackled the Present one

[Lucky 13]

13. Thanks to Johnny Motown and other Obama folks

What you said makes a lot of sense... so much so I feel a little silly about my original question. You've pointed me in the right direction to do my own research on this. Thanks for explaining...

Hillary folks? Any thoughts on your question?

[Johnny__Motown]

15. No Problem, I did need to look into it a little after Hillary's attack, it isn't just you

[JuniperLea]

21. I'm not a Hillbot, nor an Obamaniac...

But I have a question concerning Clinton's tax returns.

Doesn't she have to make those public record as a Senator?

[DangerDave921]

17. Not a supporter BUT

1. My guess is that Bill has been getting some serious cash from speeches overseas, and she is reluctant to show how much they now are worth. 2. Bill may be on the board (or have some other advisory role) with overseas corporations where he is earning a ton of cash. 3. They may have some major windfalls from stock/land deals that would look unseemly. 4. The returns would show some financial dealings with some companies or individuals that Hillary does not want to be associated with in public. 5. Hillary is making a ton of cash outside her Senate job that she doesn't want public.

In politics, you never keep something secret unless there's something damaging in it. So what is it in Hillary's?

[Johnny__Motown]

19. I think the OP is looking for an answer other than "we have something to hide"

[DangerDave921]

22. WTF?

And the OP thinks that someone on DU is going to have that inside information regarding the Clinton's tax returns? Of course I don't know what the heck it really is. I'm just tossing out speculation. That's all anyone has on here.

What a stupid comment you made. Sorry, no offense. But just really stupid.

[Johnny__Motown]

24. Sorry,, I am on your side... My point is that not releasing the tax returns can't be defended

saying "we have something to hide" isn't a defense


Unless I am reading it wrong he/she is looking for a..... it will put our daughter in danger if we release that information, people would be able to track her down if they know where some of our money comes from....

Something along those lines.


We are not looking for the information itself, just the reason to not release it.

[DangerDave921]

26. Sorry!

I thought you were faulting me for not knowing the real reason. LOL

Who knows what secrets people have after 25-30 years in big-time politics.

[Johnny__Motown]

18. Still Just Crickets From Hillary Supporters?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. I doubt these questions are as honest as you claim.

But I'll go ahead and give you an honest answer.

"WHY did Barack have all those "present" votes in the Illinois state legislature and the Senate?"

Voting "present" is a standard and prudent option for flawed legislation. It allows legislation to be fixed without killing it, or passing it. It's something experienced legislators understand, and are expected to do after voting on thousands of pieces of legislation.

If you have an issue with something he voted "present" on, please cite which specific bill, and then maybe we can give you a more specific reason, if not then STFU.

[Lucky 13]

30. Now see? That's just fucked up.

The questions were honest. I posted in a deliberately neutral manner, respectful of both sides, in an attempt to get someone from each camp to answer honestly.

Don't we have a responsibility to understand these things and be able to answer WHY we voted for someone? I'm sorry if it was a stupid question, but I really didn't know. With a simple explanation, Johnny Motown and others at least helped me understand the issue and why Barack did what he did. And it makes a lot of sense to me. I now have an answer when my family and friends talk about the very same thing.

And I asked a question of the Hillary supporters too, the answer to which I would really honestly like to know.

Assuming people are the enemy or that they have an ulterior motive just because they ask a question about your candidate is a screwed up, ultra-paranoid way to look at the world... and won't win you any more votes. If you can attempt to be civil to people that ask questions, it will do your candidate much more good than if you tell people to STFU.

[2rth2pwr]

23. Here's your answer

Simple but effective. And it has worked for years, let people get all worked up about something, , leave hints that it may be damaging, get the opposition to commit and put all their eggs in that one package and then when it is almost too late , let it out. Let it out and show the sparkly clean nothing there for everyone to see. Your opponent is demoralized and has no credibility left.

[Johnny__Motown]

25. and lose votes along the way?

[2rth2pwr]

27. no

[Johnny__Motown]

33. Then your answer makes no sense. The tax returns have been an issue long enough to have cost her

some votes

It even came up in a debate and she had to squirm out of it

[slinkerwink]

28. The present votes are a legislative strategy

Many of those present votes were asked for by Planned Parenthood in reaction to anti-abortion bills that would've taken choice away from Illinois women, and some of those present votes were as a legislative strategy to mark opposition to a part of a bill while agreeing with other parts of the bill. It's a state legislature strategy that many don't understand.

[Catherine Vincent]

29. You're asking questions that no DUer can answer.

Contact Hillary and Barack directly.

[Lucky 13]

31. I disagree...

As seen in the previous posts, people were easily able to explain to me why Barack might have voted present. I didn't understand the legislative strategy part of this thing. Now that I get that, I see the argument through a different filter.

Likewise with Hillary. I don't expect you to tell me WHY Hillary won't release her taxes. I wanted to understand how her ardent supporters defend her not releasing the documents. Tell me why you think this isn't a big deal. Tell me why it shouldn't bother me. Tell me why it doesn't bother you.

Does that make sense?

[meow mix]

32. they generally know in advance how the "votes" are going to go.

if a yes or no isnt going to change anything.. "protest votes" or "present" is an option.