Did Kerry's IWR Vote Make Him More or Less Electable?

[THUNDER HANDS]

How did that effect him in the eyes of average Democrats and how will it effect him in the general election, should he be the nominee?

I know it's hated here, but what's hated here was supported by a majority of the American people at the time, who are now having reservations about it.

Which is exactly where Kerry can play this.

If he had voted against it, he would have had to debate Bush on the merits of going in there, instead of the debating him on how he messed up going along to war.

Why he didn't build a coalition.
Why he didn't plan for a post-war period.
Why he didn't do all the things he said in his speech on the floor that Bush had to do.

Once you have that debate, Bush can't pull the "well Saddam was an evil man" card because Kerry already pulled that away from him by voting for the IWR.

So he can't debate whether or not to get Saddam in the first place. Which takes away an advantage Bush would have had since most of the electorate seems to support the notion that the world is better with Saddam toppled.

Once Kerry trounces Bush on that issue, he can move on to the economy and domestic issues, where Bush is VERY vulnerable.

So what do you think. Did the vote make Kerry more electable, or less?

[David Dunham]

1. yes. latest newsweek poll ; 55 percent still support Iraq war

[KeepItReal]

6. Are these the same Saddam-did-9/11 believers being polled?

Of course they would support the war.

Better question series would be:

A) Do you support the troops? (Everyone says "yes")

B) Do you think we should have invaded Iraq, even though they had nothing at all to do with Al Qaeda *or* 9/11? (Care to guess what the result would be?)

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

2. The IWR is not a major issue with the general public

The general (Democratic) voting population is more concerned about domestic issues, for one, and how to bring the Iraq war to a conclusion now that it's already started. There is nothing to gain by dwelling over the vote authorizing the war as far as the general public is concerned, and I agree.

So I don't think the one issue of the IWR makes him either more or less electable in the eyes of average Democrats. I think his veteran status and foreign relations experience probably makes him more electable with many Democrats and Independents than the other candidates.

[cajun4clark]

3. Kerry will have little to no credibility.

That resolution was also meant to inoculate Bush. Those in Congress who voted for it did so based on what Bush will claim was the same intelligence he had. For Kerry to even hint that he was fooled by the Bush administration would be suicidal.

A bigger problem is that Kerry has tried to have it both ways. He already lost those who were against the war, and he can't use his vote to appeal to those who supported the war because he has since come out against it, and voted against the funding. Which leaves this:

The RNC will simply say that Kerry wants to be on every side of every issue, and I believe it will hurt his credibility on other issues as well.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. but how could Bush argue

With Kerry asserting that he had to build a legit coalition?

he can't

With Kerry asserting that he had to have an exit strategy?

he can't

With Kerry asserting that he had to do X, Y, and Z for this to work properly.

Bush can't.

Kerry can still hammer Bush, and I belive Kerry is strong enough to properly fight back.

[maxr4clark]

5. How can Bush argue anything?

He doesn't. He just says you voted for it, and nonsensical as that is, it will discredit Kerry.

[KeepItReal]

7. That is exactly what will happen.

Kerry and Edwards will really be dodging the Iraq War issue if they ever have to debate Bush & Co.

Their best bet is to get that independent investigation on the Iraq war fired up before the Presidential debates roll around...

If they can get a third party to expose Bush & Co. use of lies (yeah, I said it) and intimidation to get support for an unneeded invasion (like we couldn't bomb Iraq anytime - remember the "no-fly" zones?) they may be able to save face, somewhat.

http://www.truthuncovered.com/home.cfm

[cajun4clark]

8. The resolution made no such requirements of Bush

which is what was so freaking horrendous about the resolution. Robert Byrd stood on the floor of the Senate for hours waving the Constitution, trying to talk some sense into his fellow Dems.

Bush would have gone to war with or without the resolution--it was a trap, and instead of standing up to Bush, many Democrats in Congress fell into it. It's a losing issue for Kerry and Edwards. Democrats should remember that.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

10. The general population doesn't care about the IWR

It won't hurt him a bit. It isn't hurting him now. He won both primaries and is polling ahead of the other candidates in most of Tuesday's primary states - some by double digits. Your argument is already proven moot.

[newyawker99]

13. Hi cajun4clark!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[corporatewhore]

9. Rove will say its proof that dubya deserves no question over iraq

[quaker bill]

11. At least a couple of million democratic voters opposed IWR

They were in the streets, remember?

You may believe that their votes can be taken for granted if you wish. I suspect that with many this is not the case.

[corporatewhore]

12. Not just dems Greens Libertarians heck i even saw a Repub for peace sign

at a march Not to mention independts socialists and anarchists some willing to switch for the right cannidate

[Hep]

14. Worse than electability, it made him Bush's biatch.

"I was lied to" = "I am gullible"

[isbister]

15. trounce is a good word

and you left out many other foreign policy issues, N. Korea, the rest of the Middle East, and the old Soviet nuke stockpile for a few examples.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

16. yet another DU centric poll

and result.

[ModerateMiddle]

17. I don't think it was the vote, per se

I think one of the things that makes Kerry more electable is his nuanced position on Iraq. His ambivalence more closely mirrors the sentiment in this country - they wanted to use force IF Iraq was a real threat, and many of them don't think enough was done prior to the invasion to know for sure that it was a genuine threat. Most people think *something* should have been done, but they aren't sure that what Bush did was the right thing.