Tulsi Gabbard

15-10-2019 1:47pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

The thing is though, is that she is only about a 10th as popular as Hillary was among Dem voters. If she was as popular as Hillary, who wasn't that popular, she would be polling at least in the 20's at this point.

I get that she is popular with some Trump voters but she would need to gain a crazy amount of Trump voters to make up for her lack of interest if not outright hostility among Dems.

Yeah but that's popularity among Democratic candidates. The Dem candidate will be running against Trump ultimately, not another Democrat. I really question if the crazy attitudes that the mainstream Dems talk about really appeals to the Democratic base... Working class people in Iowa for example?

begsbyOnaTrain · 15-10-2019 1:58pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I really question if the crazy attitudes that the mainstream Dems talk about really appeals to the Democratic base... Working class people in Iowa for example?

If I were the Reps, I'd just re-run the recent Dems LGBT debate night over and over in the swing states. The bs mad nutter grabbing the mike at the end was hilarious.

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 1:59pm

I understand Gabbard’s no longer boycotting the commercialized reality television event (aka debate) tonight. She might be the most interesting thing about CNN’s DNC lovefest. She pretty much took Kamala Harris out of the race in July with the attacks on her record. I wonder who she’ll put in her crosshairs tonight.

My question for tonight’s debate… Will the mainstream media again give Biden another win, merely for surviving, or will they concede Biden is toast and hook their wagons up to Warren? The softball questions pitched to the candidates will be telling.

mcmoustache · 15-10-2019 2:07pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I understand Gabbard’s no longer boycotting the commercialized reality television event (aka debate) tonight. She might be the most interesting thing about CNN’s DNC lovefest. She pretty much took Kamala Harris out of the race in July with the attacks on her record. I wonder who she’ll put in her crosshairs tonight.

My question for tonight’s debate… Will the mainstream media again give Biden another win, merely for surviving, or will they concede Biden is toast and hook their wagons up to Warren? The softball questions pitched to the candidates will be telling.

The "winner" of these debates is very subjective and can be safely disregarded. What matters ultimately is how it changes polling. Right now, Warren and Biden are neck and neck with Bernie a distant third. In fact, Biden's polling has barely changed and it looks like Warren is absorbing Sanders supporters.

With regard to Gabbard, she's barely registering. She'll probably provide some soundbytes for Russia Today and Trumpy twitter but I don't see her having much of a productive impact.

rossie1977 · 15-10-2019 2:12pm

She hasn't been able to poll above 1% since entering race. Clearly voters simply aren't interested in her message

Boom_Bap · 15-10-2019 2:12pm

For the layman, who is this now, and where can I see more of her...erm.... policies?

mcmoustache · 15-10-2019 2:15pm

Boom_Bap wrote: »

For the layman, who is this now, and where can I see more of her...erm.... policies?

Here you go. This website has loads of articles about her.

https://www.rt.com/trends/tulsi-gabbard-hawaii-us/

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 2:24pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

The "winner" of these debates is very subjective and can be safely disregarded. What matters ultimately is how it changes polling. Right now, Warren and Biden are neck and neck with Bernie a distant third. In fact, Biden's polling has barely changed and it looks like Warren is absorbing Sanders supporters.

With regard to Gabbard, she's barely registering. She'll probably provide some soundbytes for Russia Today and Trumpy twitter but I don't see her having much of a productive impact.

If Gabbard goes after some of the candidates on tough issues (which should be CNN’s job), she will be doing something productive. She has no chance of winning but would do the country great service if she illustrates the fact that with media entities like CNN and The New York Times… democracy dies in bias.

Sonny noggs · 15-10-2019 2:27pm

sk8erboii wrote: »

Actually cringing at the thought of someone from Ireland using all those American buzz words without a hint of irony.

Says the antifa cheerleader. Pot, meet kettle.

Overheal · 15-10-2019 2:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Seems the Democratic MSM and the Twitterverse all hate her. Yet she ticks all the diversity boxes: she's ethnic Samoan, a woman, anti war and Liberal on spending. There have been several hit pieces on her being a Russian spy and an Assad lover among others, which are utterly ridiculous.

Then there was Google shutting down her Google Ads account right after the first debate, depriving her of funding.

The only thing I can see is that she's against third term abortions... A pretty reasonable stance assuming she excludes FFA from that (I haven't checked).

The only other thing I can see is that she is a very beautiful and fit woman, and actually comes across as genuine so doesn't fit the feminist penis envy archetype, but is an actual strong woman. Also she doesn't play identity politics like the rest of them. Thoughts?

hatrickpatrick · 15-10-2019 2:35pm

She doesn't believe in intervening in foreign wars, specifically Syria. And apparently the Democrats are all for that now.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 15-10-2019 2:40pm

SkepticQuark wrote: »

She cozy with Modi who's a Hindu nationalist and has gone further right on healthcare now that she's becoming irrelevant. Has nothing to do with identity politics when your politics are ****ty. Thank you, next.

She is a bit too cosy with modi. It’s not like the US has broken relationship with India.

By and large though the problem with her as far as the US establishment is concerned is that she is genuinely anti war.

As we can see here that’s enough to get accusations of alt-right, nationalist, Putin, Russian etc.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 15-10-2019 2:42pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

Just a pawn, I would imagine with some common positions such as the support for Assad thrown in for good measure.

It's completely rational for Russia to support her given her positions on issues such as Syria and it would be negligent of them if they didn't. Why not promote the candidate with the least hostile stance towards Russia?

But while Russia promoting here isn't really that interesting, what is interesting is how much it bleeds over into alt-right social media circles as well. It could be a coincidence. The same thing happens with Sweden as well. Russia Today is full of stories about Sweden, usually immigrant crime of the day type stuff, and I see the same obsession in alt-right circles. Again, it could just be a coincidence.

What’s more interesting is how a democratic anti war candidate gets smeared. You guys are literally the modern incarceration of the US imperialist right during the Cold War who saw Russians and internal enemies anywhere. Anybody who opposed war then, as now, was a Russian stoodge.

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 2:45pm

Boom_Bap wrote: »

For the layman, who is this now, and where can I see more of her...erm.... policies?

She warrants my respect...

14092532650_20a3f62d6d_o.jpg?quality=85&w=840

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 2:45pm

sk8erboii wrote: »

I know youre a rereg troll but my first hundred posts were all ironic.

I am not a re-reg and, as i said previously, i am happy for anyone to check that out. Nothing to hide here. You must be in a state of constant euphoria given how incredibly smart you are :rolleyes:

hatrickpatrick · 15-10-2019 2:46pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

What’s more interesting is how a democratic anti war candidate gets smeared. You guys are literally the modern incarceration of the US imperialist right during the Cold War who saw Russians and internal enemies anywhere. Anybody who opposed war then, as now, was a Russian stoodge.

This. It's completely insane. The Republicans are supposed to be the party of war hawks. The Dems by and large positioned themselves as the opposition to that during the Bush years, as well as the infringement upon privacy brought in by the NSA and others, and yet as soon as Obama took charge, the status quo carried on and suddenly the Dems made every excuse in the book to justify this sh!te. That's actually one of the main reasons I opposed Hillary Clinton long before she was even a 2016 candidate, her attacks on whistleblowers and defence of warrantless universal surveillance of electronic communications as revealed by Edward Snowden are, as far as I'm concerned, designators of someone who doesn't belong in any party other than an openly far-right authoritarian one. It's absolutely bizarre to see a supposedly centre-left party embrace this kind of crap.

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 2:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Supporting Trump??? I don't support Trump - I detest him. I said he's going to win against the current crop of Dem front runners. Very different things.

That won't compute for this poster. Nuance is an alien thing. I find Trump utterly detestable in so many ways. But he aint working with Russia and, if you believe that, you're a dangerous fool.

hatrickpatrick · 15-10-2019 2:47pm

notobtuse wrote: »

She warrants my respect...

I'd certainly be happy to serve under her :pac:

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 2:49pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

I am not a re-reg and, as i said previously, i am happy for anyone to check that out. Nothing to hide here. You must be in a state of constant euphoria given how incredibly smart you are :rolleyes:

Have you ever noticed the many attacks on you always seem to follow Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals?

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 2:49pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

She hasn't been able to poll above 1% since entering race. Clearly voters simply aren't interested in her message

Yet she is the most searched for candidate by a country mile after the debates and even in the debates where the DNC conspire to not have her on stage. Which is where the bot rubbish comes from. People like Tulsi and the establishment heads will just have to get over it and beat her fair and square. I'd trust people clicks rather than polls produced by the establishment.

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 2:51pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

What’s more interesting is how a democratic anti war candidate gets smeared. You guys are literally the modern incarceration of the US imperialist right during the Cold War who saw Russians and internal enemies anywhere. Anybody who opposed war then, as now, was a Russian stoodge.

If i could thank this post twice i would.

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 2:56pm

I’m saddened Marianne Williamson won’t be participating in the debate tonight. I miss the cosmic sorceress.

Spencerfreeman · 15-10-2019 3:04pm

Still 50/1 with PP for the nomination.

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 3:07pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Have you ever noticed the many attacks on you always seem to follow Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals?

I've had to deal with the rereg thing a few times but its rubbish and am happy for anyone to check it out. I am not a rereg.

I find that there is a lot of condescension aimed towards opinions that dont match what people are being told by the networks. So i guess the Alinsky comparison is probably right. And i think that is the biggest problem with all of this. People assume they are being told the unbiased truth by the news when the opposite is the case (and i include both sides of the spectrum in that). Once someone is perceived as an authority figure, they can pretty much tell you any lie and it is believed without further thought. People really need to think for themselves.

The most vocal people on these issues on Boards are those who havent a clue. To be talking about Russian bots post-Mueller shows you arent that critically minded.

Overheal · 15-10-2019 3:36pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

To be talking about Russian bots post-Mueller shows you arent that critically minded.

Why do you think that?

James Brown · 15-10-2019 4:15pm

biko wrote: »

The Squad are the best assets the Russians could ever hope for.

What about Don jnr.?

James Brown · 15-10-2019 4:18pm

notobtuse wrote: »

She warrants my respect...

Because she was a Girl Guide?

James Brown · 15-10-2019 4:19pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

I've had to deal with the rereg thing a few times but its rubbish and am happy for anyone to check it out. I am not a rereg.

I find that there is a lot of condescension aimed towards opinions that dont match what people are being told by the networks. So i guess the Alinsky comparison is probably right. And i think that is the biggest problem with all of this. People assume they are being told the unbiased truth by the news when the opposite is the case (and i include both sides of the spectrum in that). Once someone is perceived as an authority figure, they can pretty much tell you any lie and it is believed without further thought. People really need to think for themselves.

The most vocal people on these issues on Boards are those who havent a clue. To be talking about Russian bots post-Mueller shows you arent that critically minded.

Very insightful for a person under 200 posts.

notobtuse · 15-10-2019 4:24pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Because she was a Girl Guide?

Girl Guide? Do you ever think before making such comments? Because of her service and the willingness to lay down her life for her country.

mcmoustache · 15-10-2019 4:26pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

To be talking about Russian bots post-Mueller shows you arent that critically minded.

How does that even make sense? You think the Russians thought to themselves "Woops, Robert. Got me. I stop now"?

I also take it that you didn't read the summary of the report into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Tulsi Gabbard

Comments