Tulsi Gabbard

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.

Billy Mays · 15-10-2019 4:27pm

notobtuse wrote: »

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.

Bonus points aswell for not being captured

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 4:28pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Very insightful for a person under 200 posts.

Boards is accessible to non-members. And historic threads are all there to be read also. So, you know your comment is illogical. And thinking someone's opinion is invalidated because of post-count is also nonsense.

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 4:31pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

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.

It makes much more sense than believing that Russians influenced people via platforms like Facebook to go and vote against their own wishes. Trump won the election fair and square. Get over it.

I'd also refer you to the comment above from Franz - "You guys are literally the modern incarceration of the US imperialist right during the Cold War" - you probably think you are all progressive too. You've been completely duped.

James Brown · 15-10-2019 4:32pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

Boards is accessible to non-members. And historic threads are all there to be read also. So, you know your comment is illogical. And thinking someone's opinion is invalidated because of post-count is also nonsense.

So you've been this opinionated but silent for some time? What triggered you, to use one of your lots Nickelodeonesque Trumpisms?

SJW Lover · 15-10-2019 4:38pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So you've been this opinionated but silent for some time? What triggered you, to use one of your lots Nickelodeonesque Trumpisms?

Point to where i have ever used the word "triggered"? You see, putting people in boxes when they dont agree with you or insulting them is really not the way to go in these sorts of discussions. As i said on this thread today, nuance isnt a strong point from some on here. The fact you all seem to have a common political leaning is interesting but probably not indicative given the sample size. Interesting nonetheless.

mcmoustache · 15-10-2019 5:11pm

SJW Lover wrote: »

It makes much more sense than believing that Russians influenced people via platforms like Facebook to go and vote against their own wishes. Trump won the election fair and square. Get over it.

I'd also refer you to the comment above from Franz - "You guys are literally the modern incarceration of the US imperialist right during the Cold War" - you probably think you are all progressive too. You've been completely duped.

Duped into believing what?

James Brown · 15-10-2019 5:49pm

notobtuse wrote: »

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.

I don't think membership of any organisation gives the member defacto honour or respect.
If she put her life on the line for the U.S. I feel sorry for her unless she did it for her career.

EDIT:

On August 7, 2018, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reported that the Hawaii Army National Guard had instructed Gabbard that a video of her in uniform on her VoteTulsi Facebook page did not comply with military ethics rules.

Oh, dear...

15-10-2019 10:33pm

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.

Unadulterated bollocks. Sanders is pissing all over Biden.

TallyRand · 15-10-2019 11:42pm

Speaking of the 2020 race I’ll say one thing about Fox News (RIP from sky box) it was nearly constant political news machine and I used to get my fix (swerving the clear bias) of US presidential races of the past.

What channel, on sky selection, would I get my late night geopolitical fix now? CNN doesn’t seem to work for me I don’t now why and not interested in websites just a news channel

Spencerfreeman · 15-10-2019 11:50pm

TallyRand wrote: »

Speaking of the 2020 race I’ll say one thing about Fox News (RIP from sky box) it was nearly constant political news machine and I used to get my fix (swerving the clear bias) of US presidential races of the past.

What channel, on sky selection, would I get my late night geopolitical fix now? CNN doesn’t seem to work for me I don’t now why and not interested in websites just a news channel

You can only get straight news online now. Jimmy Dore tells it like it is, I recommend The Duran for international news.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 15-10-2019 11:53pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

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.

Rupert didn’t get anything. The whole Steele dossier was a farce and the interference was a few tweets. Conversely the US interferes literally everywhere.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 16-10-2019 12:00am

mcmoustache wrote: »

Duped into believing what?

Well you are clearly hating on a progressive democrat who opposes war with the catchcalls of a child.

Trump. Russia. Putin. Russia Today.

No thought required.

I’ve opposed American imperialism all my life from the left. It’s pretty disgusting that the American left becomes dominant in Europe at the time when its at its most imperialistic.

We can only hope that sanders or that branch of the party wins, or it could be curtains for us all.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 12:02am

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Well you are clearly hating on a progressive democrat who opposes war with the catchcalls of a child.

Trump. Russia. Putin. Russia Today.

No thought required.

I’ve opposed American imperialism all my life from the left. It’s pretty disgusting that the American left becomes dominant in Europe at the time when its at its most imperialistic.

We can only hope that sanders or that branch of the party wins, or it could be curtains for us all.

Tulsi Gabbard is the only one with a chance of beating Trump.
Of course she appears to be anti war, that won't do.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 16-10-2019 12:05am

Of course if sanders does trend to win he will be called a stooge of Putin.

In fact it’s happened already.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

And Jill stein too.

https://thinkprogress.org/russia-jill-stein-2016-election-interference-48dff3966227/

Tulsi, Stein, Sanders - all opposed to war, all stooges of Putin.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 16-10-2019 12:08am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Tulsi Gabbard is the only one with a chance of beating Trump.
Of course she appears to be anti war, that won't do.

Well she has no chance. Trump, who isn’t so much anti war as not in favour of as many wars as they would like him to be, was a shock to the establishment and it won’t happen again.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 12:12am

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Well she has no chance. Trump, who isn’t so much anti war as not in favour of as many wars as they would like him to be, was a shock to the establishment and it won’t happen again.

I'm not sure, she has decided to toe the line somewhat, notice her approval of impeachment?
She must know it's a pointless exercise.

Rjd2 · 16-10-2019 8:16am

Gabbard clearly is not flawless and her previous support of Hindu nationalism is troubling. She also has approximately 0.00001% chance of winning and probably should have waited at least 4 years before running.

However its important that their is someone asking tough questions about foreign policy and she clearly is the strongest on stage about such issues.

Rjd2 · 16-10-2019 8:21am

Gabbard clearly is not flawless and her previous support of Hindu nationalism is troubling. She also has approximately 0.00001% chance of winning and probably should have waited at least 4 years before running.

However its important that their is someone asking tough questions about foreign policy and she clearly is the strongest on stage about such issues.

Most of the other so called progressives were hopeless when Trump was plotting regime change , Gabbard was on fire regarding that.

The smear machine has been brutal but to be expected. Its very much the Democrat media establishment still sulking after their beloved Clinton lost to an oaf despite having every advantage you could have.

The Russian stooge stuff is bollocks, but their is a very vocal online Democrat machine who have been calling her that for years and its got through. This machine is very similar to right wing Trumpers.

They deal in basic insults and they bank on their base living in echo chambers and so far both bases are correct.

Clicking the reaction on Twitter to her last night, its the usual democrat establishment bores and right wing centrist dip****s screaming Putin~!!!!.

Ah well.

mcmoustache · 16-10-2019 9:03am

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Well you are clearly hating on a progressive democrat who opposes war with the catchcalls of a child.

Trump. Russia. Putin. Russia Today.

No thought required.

I’ve opposed American imperialism all my life from the left. It’s pretty disgusting that the American left becomes dominant in Europe at the time when its at its most imperialistic.

We can only hope that sanders or that branch of the party wins, or it could be curtains for us all.

I guess it's just a coincidence then that this thread is full of Trump supporters and consumers of Russian propaganda fawning over her.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:16am

mcmoustache wrote: »

I guess it's just a coincidence then that this thread is full of Trump supporters and consumers of Russian propaganda fawning over her.

Ca Ca.
Tulsi knocked it out of the park in last nights debate.
The two best performers were her and Andrew Yang.
Go back to haters ville.

SexBobomb · 16-10-2019 9:16am

We are the Bots!, we are the bots! we are the, we are the, we are the bots !

mcmoustache · 16-10-2019 9:23am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Ca Ca.
Tulsi knocked it out of the park in last nights debate.
The two best performers were her and Andrew Yang.
Go back to haters ville.

Dude, you get your news from Jimmy Dore who pushed the Seth Rich conspiracy theory as well as the "Assad did nothing wrong" nonsense.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:24am

SexBobomb wrote: »

We are the Bots!, we are the bots! we are the, we are the, we are the bots !

We are the free thinkers, you should try it.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:25am

mcmoustache wrote: »

Dude, you get your news from Jimmy Dore who pushed the Seth Rich conspiracy theory as well as the "Assad did nothing wrong" nonsense.

Seth Rich was murdered.
Assad didn't gas anyone. Truth.

SexBobomb · 16-10-2019 9:26am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

We are the free thinkers, you should try it.

you're fun ..:rolleyes:

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:29am

SexBobomb wrote: »

you're fun ..:rolleyes:

I am, except when I have to wade through the wall to wall propaganda that you swallow whole.

SexBobomb · 16-10-2019 9:34am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I am, except when I have to wade through the wall to wall propaganda that you swallow whole.

Such as oh wise mind reader ? We're all very impressed by the way.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:37am

SexBobomb wrote: »

Such as oh wise mind reader ? We're all very impressed by the way.

As this is a Tulsi thread, why don't you try watching last nights debate and making your own mind up?

Elmer Blooker · 16-10-2019 9:39am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I am, except when I have to wade through the wall to wall propaganda that you swallow whole.

You seem to know a lot about this 'wall to wall propaganda'.
Go on and give us a few examples of what YOU consider propaganda. I'm genuinely interested.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 9:55am

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

You seem to know a lot about this 'wall to wall propaganda'.
Go on and give us a few examples of what YOU consider propaganda. I'm genuinely interested.

You need to read Edward Bernays book, Propaganda.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 10:03am

Rjd2 wrote: »

Gabbard clearly is not flawless and her previous support of Hindu nationalism is troubling. She also has approximately 0.00001% chance of winning and probably should have waited at least 4 years before running.

However its important that their is someone asking tough questions about foreign policy and she clearly is the strongest on stage about such issues.

Most of the other so called progressives were hopeless when Trump was plotting regime change , Gabbard was on fire regarding that.

The smear machine has been brutal but to be expected. Its very much the Democrat media establishment still sulking after their beloved Clinton lost to an oaf despite having every advantage you could have.

The Russian stooge stuff is bollocks, but their is a very vocal online Democrat machine who have been calling her that for years and its got through. This machine is very similar to right wing Trumpers.

They deal in basic insults and they bank on their base living in echo chambers and so far both bases are correct.

Clicking the reaction on Twitter to her last night, its the usual democrat establishment bores and right wing centrist dip****s screaming Putin~!!!!.

Ah well.

I don't know much about Hindu nationalism, but I agree with you about the rest apart from Trumps efforts at regime change, I don't see any. He seems to be laissez-faire.

SexBobomb · 16-10-2019 10:06am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

As this is a Tulsi thread, why don't you try watching last nights debate and making your own mind up?

No no, I'd like you to educate me on the propaganda I've "swallowed whole". Since you know what I think.

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I am, except when I have to wade through the wall to wall propaganda that you swallow whole.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 10:07am

SexBobomb wrote: »

No no, I'd like you to educate me on the propaganda I've "swallowed whole". Since you know what I think.

Like away.

SexBobomb · 16-10-2019 10:08am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Like away.

So you're just talking rubbish, thought as much.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 10:11am

SexBobomb wrote: »

So you're just talking rubbish, thought as much.

Oh please.

mcmoustache · 16-10-2019 10:17am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Seth Rich was murdered.
Assad didn't gas anyone. Truth.

Yeah, yeah. And Russia didn't shoot down MH17 and the Skripal poisoning was a false flag.

Like I mentioned earlier, it's no coincidence that people who like gabbard also happen to believe russian misinformation.

Elmer Blooker · 16-10-2019 10:18am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

You need to read Edward Bernays book, Propaganda.

Published 1928. That was even before anyone heard of Goebbels!
Could you come up with an example of something a ... little more recent?

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 10:20am

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Published 1928. That was even before anyone heard of Goebbels!
Could you come up with an example of something a ... little more recent?

It's the seminal work all have been operating from ever since. You don't need anything more recent.

Elmer Blooker · 16-10-2019 11:46am

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

It's the seminal work all have been operating from ever since. You don't need anything more recent.

No, there is nothing recent about propaganda.
For example just four days before the 1924 UK General Election the Daily Mail 'uncovered' the 'Zinoviev Letter', a forgery which alleged the Soviets were 'interfering' in the election to get the Labour Party elected. As always the public fell for it and the Conservatives were duly elected.
Sound familiar? .... of course it does.

Spencerfreeman · 16-10-2019 11:53am

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

No, there is nothing recent about propaganda.
For example just four days before the 1924 UK General Election the Daily Mail 'uncovered' the 'Zinoviev Letter', a forgery which alleged the Soviets were 'interfering' in the election to get the Labour Party elected. As always the public fell for it and the Conservatives were duly elected.
Sound familiar? .... of course it does.

His real name was Apfelbaum and they did assist the British Labour party.

Tulsi Gabbard

Comments