She’s arguing that she supported the threat of force as a means of avoiding conflict. That’s a complicated case to make – and it still leaves the question: why did she think President Bush had the same judgment she did?
But here’s a new angle she hasn’t used before in these debates: that she would never have contemplated an invasion of Iraq. It’s another way of trying to draw a distinction between her views and the president’s. She’s running from the past.
–CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider
Oh there's Hillary famous cackle again. Sounds like she's sidestepping this question about her husband's role. I'm a woman and I'm not convinced. He's still wearing the 'pants' in this family.
Wolf Blitzer's comment that Hillary might have been naieve was irresponsible and he stepped over a line, seemingly trying to influence voters. Last night's debate was also problematic due to too much focus on Romney and McCain. Perhaps CNN should have different moderators if they can't manage equal time or impartial questions.
I respected CNN till now but you and couple of people on CNN are making me to look somewhere else and so for many of my friends..Be fair and look through same lense. Otherwise no difference betwen dirty Politician and a journalist.
Fantansy world answer about being right the first time
He was in the State Senate! It didn't matter what he thought then. It only matters when people are in the position where they have to make those decisions. How easy for Obama to say he would not have voted for it.
Tina, did you understand his healthcare plan??????????????? I find it hard to believe this landed you to vote for Obama. Tell the truth.
I don't think there's an issue with using what you have learned from the past to move forward. Using your prior decisions to better enhance your current decisions shows growth as a person.
It's so hard to admit when you are wrong.....Obama got it right from the start....
It is remarkable to me that you do not emphasize the obvious difference in substance between the two. Hillary is so obviously aware of the issues and an answer to each of them rather than him. Both Wolf and the woman from Politico.com ask unreasonable and stupid attack oriented questions. Why not stick to the issues of the people and not the campaing malarkey. It must be misogyny, self-importance or fear of women.
She's riding on the coattails of her husband....
i think the debate was better mostly due to the courtsies both candidates gave to each other. they acted more like to reasonable adults. whoever wins, the other should be vice president, with edwards as attorney general. that would be a dream ticket.
I have been on the fence for some time on who to support for President. I have been impressed with Clinton’s experience up to this point, but she has really lost me with her response on Iraq. I feel like she is not taking responsibility for her actions. I can understand that she thought it was the right thing at the time, but why not admit she was wrong and that she has moved on?
Barack is right, and Hillary is wrong–she's dissembling and being disingenuous. The typical Clinto MO is denial, obfuscation–"I did NOT have sex with that woman". Well, actually, you did. And Hillary, yes you did support the war and give W carte blanche. Admit your mistake and move on.
Thank you for that last question!!
I am an independent voter that supports McCain, but is it just me or does anyone else see that last nights debates as well as tonights, that CNN is inciting the candidates to attack each other!!!??? I must say that the democrats are hitting more on the elements of the issues as opposed to last nights debates. I largely think that if all candidates stuck to the issues, and spelled out the differences, and detailed the policy elements in which they are running on, we as americans could make better informed decisions as to who our next president would be.
Wolf – A "dream" ticket....are you kidding! ..........a very BAD dream!
I don't beleave she is running from the past .She delt with the cards she was given at that time and played them as any other senator there did.
Since we are now in the character issue
Many would say this is a chice of pragmatism vs. idealism , wouldn't it be interesting to ask this to Sen Clinton if it works does it make it right? and to Sen Obama if it is righy does that mean it works? Food for thought!!
I think both candidates handled themselves professionally. CNN you should be ashamed of some of the immature questions. I'm actually feel bad for you.
Bill Schneider you are biased. Seems like paid by Obama or his supporters.
Now here is the logical point I wish Hillary would have made... When you work in bipartisan mode you discuss and try to work with each other and try to trust each other. That's what Hillary did. Obama did NOT!!! He never wanted to work on a bipratisan wayto solve the national crisis!!! Now in case of Hillary's vote to Bush was a trust on a responsible citizen of USA!!!
Hillary and her people have clearly parsed this issue, run it past focus groups and tested it with research. They have an "answer," but the logic eludes most of us; despite all her protestations, the basic question still remains; why did she vote to allow GWB to start a war?
Obama is answering clearly and honestly. Clinton is full of complicated explanations because she does not have honest answers especially about Iraq.
Bill – I'm losing respect for you. Every headline is Obama this.......give it a break!
Hillary has a lot to run from, and nothing to run to.
Obama, on the other hand, has no skeletons in his closet, an immpecable relationship with his wife, and only the future to share with all of us. Welcome to the presidency, Mr. Obama!
Hillary IS trying to run away from her past... don't blame Bill Schneider for calling it as he sees it.