Can a supprter of the Iraq War get the nomination of his or her party?
And can they win the White House?
Or will this election be about the war and nothing more?
2007-05-01 12:17:09 · 10 answers · asked by Zezo Zeze Zadfrack 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
it will be about listening to the people who vote for you. most don't like the war and don't want to vote for someone who doesn't listen.
2007-05-01 12:23:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
This election will be mainly about the war, that and immigration. But the war takes precedence. The answer to your question is no. Unless something changes in Iraq, we're going to see just we what saw in the mid-terms, except with a higher number of votes. The moderates and a good number of the conservatives will vote for whoever has a good plan for ending this war. They won't even consider voting for someone like McCain, at least not in large enough numbers to win, who clearly is backing Bush on this one - even though he floats around the subject in the strangest way. I think the Republicans know that and it's going to be one of their hardest decisions in picking a candidate. They'll want to appear united and not as divided as they really are, but which side of the plate do they unite on? I think they know that nominating a supporter of the war is the quickest route to losing the White House in '08. They really are caught between a rock and a hard place.
2007-05-01 15:07:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No one has a crystal ball to answer this question, but if the American people who are against the travesty (NOT a war) in Iraq are honest with themselves, they WILL NOT vote for someone who didn't do the necessary and CRITICAL research involved before giving the go-ahead to the "war monger in chief". There is only ONE running for President who DID study the intelligence and made the right decision to say NO to aggression: http://www.kucinich.us
This election should be about many, many issues that are not being addressed. The "occupation"
should not be the only issue. There is a whole country right here, under your own feet that have a vast amount of problems that need attention paid to them: health care; tax inequity; gaps between CEO's/Bosses and us workers; unfair trade; a hell of a deficit created in only six years; education funding; and on and on and on.
Again, PLEASE visit http://www.kucinich.us and support him in ALL these issues and more. Let's take our country back from the mainline, career politicians!
2007-05-01 12:35:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
not if they count the votes of everyone I know...
Just listen to how your question is phrased... who in their right mind would run on a platform of "supporting war"?
War is considered by some to be a necessary evil... but I have yet to meet the person who would refer to it like an enjoyable sport...
I mean, its really sad that we're getting to a point where people are actually calling themselves "war supporters"...
Even Nixon did not go that far during Viet Nam.
How far will it go?
Will pro-choice people start referring to themselves as "the happy baby killers"?
Maybe Christians will start calling themselves the "Anti-Homo Fundies" instead of just Christians...
Maybe peaceful Muslims will start calling themselves "the terrorists" just to communicate with todays media...
These kind of "extreme perspectives" are the only thing on TV anymore and it doesn't seem like it's going to let up.
How sad.
2007-05-01 12:44:24 · answer #4 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hillary. i think of the US is waiting for a white lady president no longer a African American guy no longer to point a woman. different countries had or have women human beings maximum advantageous them already this is basically the u . s . a . that's at the back of in this. yet a black working the rustic i'm no longer able to work out it yet.
2017-01-09 06:56:10 · answer #5 · answered by kunich 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, A sopporter of the iraq war can be elected in 2008 but it is very unlikely that one will be elected.
2007-05-01 13:33:51 · answer #6 · answered by Wanye gret 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't think so. Hopefully this next election won't be solely based on this war. But on what is best for the Unied States and it's place as a world power.
2007-05-01 13:02:06 · answer #7 · answered by gone 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Very few would elect someone who supports it.
Obama was against it from the start.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZUXhCW-OGM
2007-05-01 20:28:59 · answer #8 · answered by Frances 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Can you prove there are weapons of mass destruction? Was that not our intent for going in? okay there is your answer.
2007-05-01 12:24:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
i dont think so. Its all reltive dont you think so
2007-05-01 12:27:12 · answer #10 · answered by HeWillBeLoved! 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋