If Senator Clinton had apologized for her vote on the IWR, do you think she would be easily winning?

[Seen the light]

As I've been pondering what went wrong with the collapse of the Clinton campaign to someone that had been a state senator just four years ago, I thought about this question.

Senator Edwards seemed to get a pass from DU because he vigorously apologized for his IWR vote and seemed to be trying everything possible to rectify the mistake he said he had made. Do you think if Senator Clinton had just had the conviction to do the same thing that she would be easily beating Senator Obama?

[fenriswolf]

1. I don't know about winning or anything

but it certainly would have helped her alot.

[jasmine621]

37. Not so. Hillary hate is large and somewhat unexplainable. The IWR

vote is just an excuse that many are using to carry on their hate fest. They just wanted to legitimize their hate.

[MercutioATC]

2. No, but it would be a start...

I'm having a hard time justifying a "hold-my-nose" vote for her should she be the Democratic candidate.

Viewing her as having the character to admit she was wrong would help a bit, I think.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

3. Maybe would've helped in the primary, but not in the general.

[Fredda Weinberg]

9. ..

[Blue_State_Elitist]

11. The general electorate doesn't want an apologetic candidate,

especially if the one apologizing is a woman.

[Fredda Weinberg]

26. The saying is

"All's fair in love and war" ... nothing has to be fair in politics. HRC is conducting herself in a dignified manner, with touches of emotion I find appealing. I know others who can't get past their anger ... it has nothing to do w/her.

No matter what, she will continue to be my senator and I'm looking forward to this conclusion. Either way, I've already won.

[IndieLeft]

4. I think she would be winning....

That is the reason I switched from her to Obama.

[incapsulated]

5. No

This is an excuse trotted out.... like some "apology" wouldn't have been hand-waved away as a bullshit political maneuver.

Which is exactly how I view all these bullshit "apologies" from politicians.

[Seen the light]

7. *I* personally agree with you

I would have still voted for Senator Obama regardless, but it did seem like the apology that Senator Edwards gave won over plenty of people, at least on DU.

[incapsulated]

15. I don't think it was that alone

It was also his whole new platform, to me a reinvention of himself, that was the big draw for a lot of supporters.

He really couldn't make himself into the "leftist of center" of the "establishment" candidates without the whole apology deal.

[Enrique]

6. it would have had zero impact

her lack of an apology is only an issue because it's HER.

[TexasObserver]

8. No. There are many objections to her beyond that vote.

[Adelante]

10. It wouldn't have mattered to me one way or another

I didn't excuse Edwards from his responsibility and I won't excuse Clinton even if she did apologize.

[tularetom]

12. I would be supporting her

so she would have had at least one more vote. Until bill clinton started opening his pie hole anyway.

[Freetospeak]

13. yup

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

14. Nope. She's Clarified It To The Nth Degree Already.

It wouldn't have made a rat's ass difference in my opinion. She already clarified it in a very common sense and rational manner. Most people are fine with that. Only the obsessive hillary haters aren't, from where I sit.

[coalition_unwilling]

21. She "clarified it in a very common sense and ratinal manner" . . . if you are willing to

suspend your disbelief. To wit, HilBilly claimed she was "misled" about intelligence prior to March 2003.

Either she's telling the truth, which makes her the biggest dupe in Presidential politics in U.S. history -- were you "misled"????

or

She's telling a flat-out lie, which then begets the question of her real reason for her vote. Could it be that HilBilly wished to show how tough she was on national security issues? Can you see the blood of 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians drip, drip, dripping off her hands???

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

27. "Squawk! I'm A Parrot!" "Squawk! IWR IWR" "Squawk! She Voted She Voted IWR IWR" "Squawk"

[coalition_unwilling]

33. The blood is dripping from her hands. Drip, drip, drip . . . -n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. "Squawk! I'm A Parrot!" "Squawk! IWR IWR" "Squawk! She Voted She Voted IWR IWR" "Squawk"

[coalition_unwilling]

40. The blood of 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians dead and over 2,000,000

wounded continues to drip from HilBilly's hands and all you can do is repeat your idiotic posts.

[Stephanie]

16. She can't apologize for the vote because she can't admit why she did it

Her implausible claims that she was fooled by George Bush have backed her into a corner. She can't apolotize without admitting that the only rationale behind her vote was the belief that it made her more electable. A mistaken rationale, as it turns out.

[noamnety]

17. Nope.

"Hey dudes, sorry my vote led to that whole genocide thing, and for voting to bankrupt the country for future generations to deal with. My bad."

[Tellurian]

18. nope- and I stand with her on her decision..

none of the Senators should have apologized afaic..

These two things have to be taken into consideration at the time of the vote.

Bush lied to Congress and it's Bush'War!

These two facts will never change.

[pocoloco]

22. LOL Your Girl is dumber than a bush???

That's one hell of an excuse!!

[Tellurian]

29. mmm...low self-esteem problems?

there are counseling services available; make an appointment!

[Political Heretic]

24. Funny how multiple congressment apparently had enough info to vote NO

And also funny how I had enough information as a lay person to know that Bush was lying.

:shrug:

[Tellurian]

31. Well, you know how it is...congressment is very busy helping the average working person..

You should have voiced your concerns HERE!

Next "WAR", please do so..

[Political Heretic]

34. thats it? that's your best response?

Why is it that numerous representatives and senators apparently have enough information to vote no?

[Tellurian]

38. I save my "best"response for the best questions..

"yours" doesn't qualify!

[Tatiana]

19. IF she had done it way earlier (before Edwards), then yes, she'd be winning handily.

I didn't give Edwards a "pass" on his IWR vote anymore than I gave Kerry a pass. People have died and I can't forget that.

However, we have to allow that people are human and they do make mistakes in their decision-making. To admit that one made a mistake in the wake of constant scrutiny would be a huge sign of character. It would be the anti-thesis of Bush, who never admits he's wrong even when it is patently obvious he's made a bad decision. I think people were waiting for Clinton to step up to the plate and finally take ownership for her vote and the consequences that resulted (like Edwards did). People respect someone who can own up to his/her mistakes.

If Clinton had done what Edwards did, people would have forgiven her and she would be easily winning right now.

[nomorewhopper]

20. not specifically, NO. but...

OK, HRC would not be winning if she simply conceded a mistake on her IWR vote.

Yet, it's a very telling detail that she simply cannot, will not admit and mistakes, any weaknesses. The voting electorate is not stupid. We sincerely hope that she wasn't "duped" by bush into voting for the war. if she was, shame on her. but we think she's quite intelligent. she voted because of political gain ,and that's the problem.

in 2008 the world is jaded and advertising has changed.

staged events and refusal to apologize are old school marketing, which doesn't work as effectively as true transparency and discussion. the electorate is very willing to forgive for past transgressions. but above all, consumers in 2008 want to buy a genuine product. they have been marketed to their entire lives, and can smell a come-on from a million miles away.

hillary's camp made the mistake of thinking that they can 100% control the message and the media. but with the internet today and the connected, youtube, blogcentric culture, you can do one of two things. make it work for you, or make it work against you.

at the time, you never know how these votes are going to come bite you in the ass. but imo the best thing hillary could do would be to simply admit that she was wrong and made a mistake. same deal with kerry. it made me sick to see them wandering all over this issue. they fucked up, we will forgive them, (maybe lol) but the act of not admitting the mistake is worse than the actual vote.

because it reeks of phoniness, and we are bred to be skeptical

[MagsDem]

23. If Obama wasn't lying she'd be easily winning

Obama beats the Iraq war drum on every campaign stop, but what he fails to mention is that he voted against all troop withdrawal legislation until he decided to run for president. Then he magically changed his mind and started voting for it.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

25. No, she would be where John Edwards is

First rule of politics: Don't do things that hurt you just to appeal to people who won't vote for you anyway.

Not apologizing is a political strategy, not a character flaw.

She was never going to get the strong anti-war vote, and apologizing would just make her look weak to voters she can get.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

28. correct.

[OnionPatch]

30. Well, she might have had my vote.

And my husband's. Actually, just about everyone I know didn't vote for her because of the IWR and her refusal to apologize for it.

[lastliberalintexas]

32. No

Although I am not a Clinton supporter, I am a woman. Her candidacy is much more difficult than even Obama's, just because gender still trumps race. A white man would still rather have a minority man as his boss rather than a female.

(generalization, of course- some men are not that way)

[EndElectoral]

35. She lost a lot of credibility for not acknowledging her mistake as Edwards did.

[Cha]

39. Any show of fucking humanity coming

from hilary would have been a welcome change from our senator but now it's too late and I can see we were right all along about hilary and her political expediency.