Bernie: Hillary’s Iraq War Vote Is Fair Game

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP


Hillary Clinton has yet to live down the vote she cast to back the Iraq War as a senator in 2002—a vote that helped President Obama beat her in the 2008 democratic primaries. On Thursday, her 2016 rival Bernie Sanders stopped short of saying that her vote should disqualify her from being president. But there was a “but.”

“I’m not here to criticize the vote she cast years ago,” Sanders, the most progressive candidate in the democratic field, told reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor in Washington, DC. “But what does that mean in terms of your judgment in assessing information?”

His answer didn’t go as far as another 2016 Clinton challenger, former Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chafee, who doesn’t believe that “anybody should be president of the United States that made that mistake.” Sanders’ take was more forgiving: “Everybody makes bad votes in their lives and I don’t think anyone is ‘disqualified.'”

Sanders did throw down the gauntlet for his Democratic rival on another issue: trade. Clinton has been conspicuously silent on Congress’ imminent vote on a trade promotion authority bill that would allow President Obama to move forward with a big Pacific Rim trade agreement. Sanders and many other progressive Democrats—along with tea party Republicans—oppose both the so-called “fast track” legislation and the trade deal waiting around the corner. The candidate said Thursday he is working with progressive House Democrats to defeat the legislation.

“If she’s against this, we need her to speak out, right now. Right now,” Sanders said. “Be for it or against it, but I don’t understand how on an issue of such huge consequence you don’t have an opinion.”

“My own very strong view is that when you try to understand why the middle class in this country is disappearing, trade has got to be one of the issues you look at for an explanation,” he said.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.