Do you think Hillary Clinton was "duped" by Bush into supporting the War?

Question

...Or do you think she knew damn well it was wrong but supported it anyway because it was popular at the time? I think its the latter, simply because from what I've seen, Hillary is a slave to the opinion polls. She is a woman obsessed by her ambitions and achieving the presidency, and will therefore do anything and say anything in order to maintain high approval ratings. The alternative is that she was dumb enough to be duped by an even dumber president, something thousands of Americans weren't four years ago. I don't think Hillary is dumb. That makes her immoral, a person who would sacrifice American lives in order to realize her ambitions. Is this really a person you want in the Oval Office? Sure, she has experience, but what about character?

Answer 1

I would agree with your overall assessment of her. Nearly everything she does seems to be positioning herself, either for the primaries or the general election. She's plastic and, yes, she's not stupid, so she must just be machiavellian.

I dislike Bush as much as the next guy... I mean, he's single-handedly turned me away from the Republican party. But Hillary is, ugh.

While we're at it, Guliani is just as disgusting, perhaps moreso, fear-mongering against the dems and riding the 9/11 wave for all it's worth, even despite some of the mistakes he made before and after. How can these two people be the front-runners? Is this really the best we can do? *sigh*

It's hard for a democracy to work when the voters are this foolish.

Answer 2

I think that it was convenient for Hillary to support the war and the Patriot Act. She had to follow what was popular at the time. now that she has to go back and answer to the Lefties, she has to come up with an excuse on why she supported the war. Instead of standing up on her own, she has to depend on blaming someone else for decisions that she made. As for experience, I don't think that being first lady counts.

Answer 3

You have to remember, Bush's approval ratings were in the 80s at that point since 9/11 and the Democrats were trying to hold onto Congress, so if they rejected the Iraq War Resolution, the RSCC could have attacked them and pretty much ensured that the Republicans would get the Senate, which they did anyway. And if they had rejected it Bush would have just put the Resolution through the new Republican Congress. Hillary, like Kerry, Dodd, Biden, Daschle, Edwards, etc, all wanted to run for President somewhere down the road and to remain "mainstream" at the time they felt they needed to vote for the resolution.

Answer 4

I absolutely agree. I like your perspective here, and I love the fact that you are so grammatically correct - and can spell! Hillary Clinton isn't so stupid that she can be "duped" by anything, but at the same time, she likes to look favorable in the public eye, so I think she'll do or say whatever she needs to "get the votes". I think I've read a lot of posts where people tend to believe that she's "getting the votes". She's not getting my vote!

I don't care what any of the democrats (that support her) have to say, either. I think that she's the one trying to dupe us! She's a snake, and her politics cut like a double-edged sword. She will say one thing during the elections, but IF ever elected...she will not hold true to any of the promises she's made. Hmmm...reminds me of someone...oh, that's right...HER ADULTEROUS HUSBAND!

Answer 5

She knew outright what she was doing. She has a few good ideas but does not have us in her intrest at all.
She is a female Bush with a democratic perspective.

I am leaning towards a lessor known candidate but the best one yet who seems to be for the people as well as getting the America we were once so proud of back.. ( Ron Paul ) he is not a modern republican or democrat both of which are failing us

Answer 6

She was duped, plus her New York constituents were for the war. Hillary was also afraid to vote against a very popular president at that time.

In other words she, like most in Congress, screwed up.

Answer 7

Duped? No way.
Let's pretend tomorrow the war in Iraq suddenly becomes popular again.
I'll bet she's all for it.
You're not the first to talk about it this way. She has the talent to be president but does she have the character to be president?
My feeling, ain't noooo way!
She'd sell Chelsea if it meant getting elected.

Answer 8

I really dont call a few years in the senate valuable experience. I am married to a accountant, but that doesnt mean I should do your taxes. She is a joke, and if she did get duped I guess that would mean Bush is a little smarter than her.

Answer 9

Are you old enough to vote yet? I'm only asking because you seem so innocent. If Hillary was the only senator with ambition you might have a point. If she were the only politician concerned with polls, you might have a point.
In fact they all have ambition, no one even thinks its bad for most people to have ambition, why is it so bad for Hillary?
Politicians should be concerned with polls, polls tell them what the people they represent want. Politicians aren't supposed to vote against things the people in their district want. They represent the voters, they aren't supposed to act like their constituents Daddy.
In the day and time when Hillary and the rest of Congress was briefed about the war, Colin Powell, respected by both sides, got up at the UN and laid out all the bad things Saddam did. I assume we all believed that no President would lie us into war. I was wrong, Bush, to be kind, cherry picked the information that he was giving, I wasn't against the war, until I learned that Bush..um..cherry picked the information and had no exit plan and kept changing his reason for going in and no WMDs were found, and no mobile chemical labs, and Saddam got caught and killed and they had two elections, and still we were there?
I'm not dumb, neither is Bush, neither is Hillary, but Hillary and I both trusted a president who didn't deserve our trust.

Answer 10

It never ceases to amaze me how you can take an issue that the ENTIRE Congress was lied to, both Pubs and Democrats alike. Yet you do not think all the Republicans that voted for the war were "duped" yet you accuse Senator Clinton of being either stupid or immoral. I do not see you accusing Bush, Cheney, and all the Pubs that voted for the war and are still supporting the war, "Immoral" They are far worse as far as I am concerned since they continue to support a war that was begun for the opportunity to get oil and no-bid contracts and lots of money for the Bush supporters!