"You must be bold, brave, and courageous and find a way... to get in good trouble." -John Lewis #TheReidOut 
#reiders (RTs/likes are not always endorsements)
Możesz dodawać lokalizację do Twoich Tweetów, jak miasto czy konkretne miejsce, z sieci lub innych aplikacji. W każdej chwili możesz usunąć historię lokalizacji swoich Tweetów. Dowiedz się więcej
Does anybody honestly care, at this stage, how these two lifetime politicians voted 30, 20 or even 5 years ago? #DemocraticDebate
Appreciating all the comments in the thread, even the angry ones, because there are SO MANY reasons to be angry and fearful right now. One adjustment I will make is that as a lot of you have said, yes - there are votes that are existential and that voters should never look past.
Could a reasonable person have voted for president a Senator who voted to acquit Nixon had it gotten that far & he not resigned first? Could a Democrat reasonably have been expected to vote for a Democrat who voted to convict Clinton, had such a Democratic Senator existed?
The Iraq war can definitely be said to be that kind of vote. That war drove me out of the news business and into campaign politics I felt so strongly about it, and it was a big reason Obama was my preferred candidate in 2008. But was it dispositive in my November 2016 vote? No.
For a lot of people, the crime bill is that kind of vote (Hillary Clinton got tagged for it in 2016 though she was first lady so only commented on it-and apologized for those comments). But in the current Democratic primary Biden wrote it & both candidates voted for & touted it.
.@nbcnews re the 1994 crime bill: Sanders has said the bill contained important elements but his past statement show he was more supportive of the law than is commonly assumed."
:https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/bernie-sanders-has-dodged-criticism-crime-bill-vote-while-others-n1020726 …
And from @voxdotcom: The controversial 1994 crime law that Joe Biden helped write, explainedhttps://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/20/18677998/joe-biden-1994-crime-bill-law-mass-incarceration …
Sanders' votes on guns, for a lot of people, are also hard to look past. And for people for whom gun violence is existential, that too is entirely fair.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/sanders-gun-votes-are-again-potential-liability-among-democratic-base-n999326 …
The impeachment vote will definitely be that kind of vote, and it is in the present not the past, with the reckoning coming in the same year in which Reps & Senators acted, or failed to act, to hold this president accountable. If any of them runs for president it WILL matter.
For Senators like Susan Collins, Martha McSally, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Cory Gardner, or Dems like Doug Jones, it will be decisive THIS November. And again, if they ever run for president (Mitt?) what they did this year will matter.
But my question was more narrow. In this current crisis situation, with a global pandemic upon us, do voters want to hear Biden and Sanders debate their old Senate records? The answers so far suggest views are mixed. If you're a legislator long enough you will take bad votes.
These men are now seeking executive authority. There is more to judge them on than their votes. Or maybe not: maybe those votes are the best test of how they would govern. I'm not ruling on it, just asking the question. The discussion is really important though so keep it going!
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
