Why Would A Republican That Supported The Iraq War Not Support An Attack On Syria?

[onehandle]

4 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Conscientious Apprehensions
	0 (0%)
	Black President
	4 (100%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[JoePhilly]

1. I can think of a lot more reasons ... although that is certainly one of them.

Democratic President.

Small limited strike is not a full blown invasion, which they'd prefer.

Libertarian.

Has kids who would have to go fight (oops, scratch that one).

[TwilightGardener]

2. Rather than Black President, I'd say Democratic President. They're always sudden

war skeptics when it's a Democrat.

[andym]

3. I'd say a Democratic President who is hated by the GOP

for his "socialist" policies like ACA. These fools will vote against anything Obama proposes-- anything.

[HappyMe]

10. Exactly.

[HooptieWagon]

4. The same reason a Dem voting against Iraq War would vote for Syria War.

Partisanship is much of the vote. I don't care their reasons, all I care about is the result. Military action in Syria is every bit the bad idea military action in Iraq was.

[City Lights]

11. Exactly. nt

[shenmue]

5. It's pretty easy to tell

That's why they oppose him on most things.

[zbr6]

6. Does the race card ever wear out?

I for one believe the only reason not to go to war and kill people is because the United States President is Black.

/sarcasm

[badtoworse]

7. I passed. Poll is a gross oversimplification

[onehandle]

8. This Congress is the definition of gross simplification. nt

[JustAnotherGen]

9. +1

To include Rand Paul who is just as worthless, divisive and a sneaky snake slithering around on his belly as any of the rest of them.

[rl6214]

12. I voted pass because the correct answer isn't there

Because there is a Democrat President. Color has nothing to do with is, it's the party in power.