Democrats are the main opponents of U.S. president Gorge W. Bush and the main critics of his military actions. A long time they criticized the war in Iraq and other military actions of liberal camp. They said they would never begin this war and they would end it if they would have enough political power.
But the newest statements of presidential candidates from democratic camp seem to be changed.
Senator Barack Obama says that he would leave the American forces in Iraq to protect Iraq against terrorism, train Iraqis and destroy terrorists in Pakistan with A-bombs if needed, senator Hillary Clinton would leave forces to protect the north of Iraq, and so on.
But why the main critics of Bush changed their political direction?
The answer is, they studied the opinions of American citizens and the most U.S. citizens seem to support a war against terrorism.
Is it right to adjust own interests, ideals and opinions on interests, ideals and opinions of your electors or should they be allegiant for that for what they contended?
If some politics can make so radical changes in their political aims, could we say, those politics have an own opinion?
I think if someone don’t have an own opinion, he can’t argue and take the responsibility for it.
