we all know the democrats sent a useless bill to the white house. we all know Bush stated quite clear he will not sign a time table for the war into law. I can't imagine any service personal or their familys voting democrat.
2007-05-01 17:56:58 · 18 answers · asked by Working Stiff 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Probably about the same amount that have voted for dems in the last few elections. Around 10%-15%.
The military is a cross section of every single place in America. Every type of American you can think of joins the military...just some in far less numbers.
The people who were libs to begin with and joined (mostly minorities) will still vote dem.
2007-05-01 18:00:56 · answer #1 · answered by Edward 5 · 5⤊ 4⤋
'Funding the war' is almost a slogan. The fact is...the 'war' has been over for years. At this point the funding is for a failed occupation. I suspect that there are a lot of people who will not see past the propaganda machine that fronts for the Bush Junta and these people will blame the 'liberals' or the democrats of your Uncle Bob when at long last the US military leaves the middle east. The propaganda machine will claim that 'bad people' who hate America caused 'us' to lose this ill concieved, incompetently managed and foolish adventure in Iraq. The blame will fall on everyone but the reactionary bozos that set this entire Iraq business in motion in the first place....and that's the stooge masters that pull George Bush's strings. Even if every single 'service person' and their entire families never voted for a democrat again getting out of this fetid swamp of stupidity would be worth it....for us...for them and for everyone concerned.
2007-05-01 18:26:45 · answer #2 · answered by Noah H 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They were willing to fund the troops needs. The problem was Bush didn't want to accept a timetable, or even setting benchmarks. Maybe you ought to ask why are both sides so determined for a political victory? The Dems gave the troops funding, but with a timeline for withdrawl attached. Bush vetoed the bill because it had a time line. Both sides need to erase their respective lines in the sand and work together, or else neither is going to get what they want and the troops will suffer regardless.
2007-05-01 18:11:00 · answer #3 · answered by Sam N 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
America was founded and built by Liberals who wanted to leave the extreme conservatism and tyranny of England !!! Conservatives stayed in England under one church, Church of England and the tyranny of the King. Liberals left England in search of a better life which included freedom to worship and no tyranny. Easy to see why Liberals are smarter than conservatives... Starting with our Founding Father George Washington who fought and won against the conservatives in the Revolutionary War. Abe Lincoln who fought against extreme conservatives in the Civil War and kept America together when the Confederates wanted to divide America. Thomas Jefferson who wrote our Declaration of Independence which gave Americans our new nation which allowed us to leave the extreme conservatism and tyranny of England. Teddy Roosevelt who fought against big business in support of Labor, started the Progressive Party and conservation. Therefore there are 4 Liberals on Mt Rushmore. Not to forget about Frankling D. Roosevelt who usually ranks 1, 2 or 3 on Presidential polls for helping the American people by implementing more laws and government social programs that helped the people than any other President in our history... Liberal President always rank higher than conservative Presidents.
2016-05-18 08:02:47 · answer #4 · answered by maranda 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All the anti-war bashing and not funding the military operation they helped make a case for is going to backfire on them hopefully sooner rather than later.
Is this really the way we are going to fight wars from now on? We have a 1-2 year limit set by democrats and then they start talking about how its unwinable, hopeless, all a lie it was the second it becomes unpopular? We are NEVER going to win another war EVER if this kind of political chaos continues.
If yesterdays democrats acted anything like todays democrats during WW2, Europe would be known as the German Union right now and the nazi party would be alive and well.
2007-05-01 18:29:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
It's got nothing to do with democrats not funding my needs. It's a matter of standing behind your convictions. Every democrat that voted for the bill, to include Clinton and Obama, stood up and said, "I oppose this war, so let's keep it going for a while."
That's why I don't respect them.
2007-05-01 18:03:13 · answer #6 · answered by DOOM 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Actually, the bill was a great idea. By drawing a line in the sand, it would force the parties to the table. Right now, everyone is content to let the US sit in the middle, taking shots from all sides, while no one makes any attempt to change the political dynamic. Instead, we are left with Bush's failed surge (hey, all you surge supporters who touted March's numbers as a sign of progress - take a look at APRIL. Things are still bad and getting worse).
And the reality is, we are fighting to protect a government that is aligned with Iran. The whole policy is bonkers.
2007-05-01 18:10:42 · answer #7 · answered by truth be told 3 · 3⤊ 5⤋
It is Bush that won't fund their needs! The Dem's are not invoking their own will, rather; they are invoking the will of the people who spoke loud and clear in Nov. 2006, and we will speak even louder in 2008!!! So let President Bush keep on pursuing this useless, unwinnable, war so that my dream can come true; Democrat Presidents from now until ?.
2007-05-01 18:09:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
That one guy that was going to has now changed his mind. He's planning to join the rest of the volunteer military and vote conservative. Again. As 75% of them always have.
2007-05-01 18:26:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
they passed a bill that WOULD fund their needs:
$2 billion more to address the current readiness crisis of our stateside troops, including ensuring that they are better equipped and trained
$1.1 billion more for military housing allowances
$3 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles for troops in Iraq ($1.2 billion above the President's request)
$1.6 billion for body armor
$9.7 billion to train and equip Afghan and Iraqi security forces
$900 million for Traumatic Brain Injury care and research and PTSD treatment and research (cut by half under the Republican Congress)
$20 million for facility improvement at Walter Reed
.
it's Bush who vetoed all of the above.
2007-05-01 18:26:11 · answer #10 · answered by answer faerie, V.T., A. M. 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋