Has proven to be a huge disappointment to me as she has shifted policies in her ambitious drive to get Donald Trump to name her as his VP candidate. But there is one good thing about it if she succeeds: her debate with Kamala Harris would be epic, and would probably exceed the number of tv viewers of any American political debate in history. For that reason alone it would be worth rooting for her to get the nomination.
Tulsi Gabbard
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Tulsi is an attractive articulate Swamp Creature. For her campaign efforts she will be given the Ambassadorship to Tuvalu.
It breaks my heart to think you are right. She wasn’t always a swamp creature, in fact she was as far away from it as she could get. She was young, very attractive, very intelligent and very articulate and was set up to become the voice of the anti-war movement who today could be leading the charge of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of young Americans who have figured out the establishment is evil. Alas, she calculated it was in her personal best interest to turn her back on that in hopes of cashing in by making the Fox News crowd feel good about their authoritarian proclivities. It seems the only true politician with authentic anti-war bona fides is Jill Stein. Jill at least has the courage to speak up against Israel’s genocide. She participated in the protest at Washington Univ in St. Louis, was assaulted and arrested by the police. Oh if only Tulsi had such courage in her convictions!
Flip flopping on the Bill of Rights isn't something someone with "convictions" does. I'm glad Tulsi is chewing the soft brown Neo Marxist underbelly out of the DNC, but she's not someone to trust with any decision making authority.
Being "anti war" is little more than a flaccid trope having nothing to do with realpolitik.
In her case you are right, but it doesn't have to be that way. Somewhere out there, Jill Stein it seems, there's a truly anti-war candidate.
Last edited:
I personally want people in line-of-succession to have Chief Executive experience.
Tulsi has never had more responsibility than 1 of 465 influence.
I still appreciate here gnawing into the soft brown underbelly of the DNC racists. Must suck when a brown woman flips the script on the party of racism.
Oh, I thought we were talking about Jill Stein. IMO Tulsi blew an opportunity to rank right up there with Martin Luther King as one person who changed the personality of the country. She could have been the face and the voice of the anti-war movement, doing exactly like he did: hold rallies, give speeches, get arrested at protest marches and ultimately could have ended in a massive protest/rally speech in front of a couple million kindred souls from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial as awe inspiring as “I have a dream.” It breaks my heart to see her cash in for a spot at Fox News. And what’s more humiliating than anything is my nemesis, @my_2cents said that was exactly what she was aiming for and I raked him over the coals for his cynicism. That being said I think she could handle the duties of the job equally as well as most “highly qualified” nincompoops that have held the position. I’d choose her over either Biden or Trump. Oh well, we get what we deserve.
Being 1 of 465 or even 1 of 100 is far far different than being the buck-stops-here-final-decision-maker Executive.
You might "hope" she could handle the job, but reality is she's never risen to a similar top executive job.
Told you when she was running for the president. She is not reliable is being supported the right wing Hindu party RSS
Show me on the doll where Tulsi refused to touch you. And why the disappointment in a politician you weren’t going to vote for anyway?
She may be a candidate in theory, but he isn't going to choose her. Wouldn't' trust her to continue shunning her lib roots if she became president in 4 years. It is going to be the dude from North Dakota or Stefanik (sp) IMO. I would prefer Byron Donalds though even if it presents a problem for the residency in the short term.
Well look at this. Dan giving me some credit for once. Admitting I was right about something he argued so fiercely against me about. Thanks Dan.
I didn't really consider it cynicism to say that was what Gabbard was aiming for though. It was clear the moment Gabbard's political career began falling apart that she was switching gears, changing her focus, and aiming for something else. I just saw it as being honest about what she was up to.
Also Dan, I may end up commenting some on the threads, but I've been impressed reading your defense of Palestine and your critique of Israel's actions. I agree with much of what I've read in your posts I've seen. Don't know if that will make you feel any better about your position now, lol, but you and I agree on a lot it appears as it relates to Palestine and Israel.
I’ve made no secret that my primary political issue is being anti-war. I stupidly bought into what Tulsi was selling. She made a damned fool out of me. Never again! There’s one “politician” I know will never betray her anti-war attitude, and that’s Jill Stein. I’m all in on Jill Stein. Don’t get too cocky. I can’t stand the sight or sound of Donald Trump, but he’s still preferable to Joe Biden.
If you’re so anti war, then why do you always seem to side with the aggressors? First the Russians, then the Palestinians. And why no posts about the other 108 wars going on?
Keep practicing your bluegrass drum licks.
I am not pro-Hamas.
@OrangeTuono keep an eye on this conversation since you claim we liberals don't want a discussion with reason.
I also really like Jill Stein. I agree with most of her policy positions. We may have a few policy differences here and there, but not many from what I can tell. As it relates to policy, I am in more agreement with Stein than I am with President Biden. Where Stein and I disagree with the most is over the process. How we realize the policy changes we desire and keep from electing reactionaries
Which is why, given what is at stake in this presidential election, I cannot vote for Stein. Unfortunately it would be a wasted vote and perhaps a very dangerous wasted vote. And I hope that she doesn't distract enough votes away from President Biden to ensure that Trump is elected President again.
This is where you and I, of course, still firmly disagree. And actually, I don't understand how you can hold this position while also supporting Stein.
There is very little in common between Stein and Trump as it relates to domestic policy. There is commonality between Stein and President Biden though. And regarding being "anti-war," Trump is going to be much more supportive of Israel and "pro-war" as it relates to Palestine than is President Biden. Not to mention that it was President Biden who ended the war in Afghanistan, not Trump. Yes, I know you didn't like the way the withdraw was handled, but President Biden ended that war that you wanted ended. Not Trump.
I don't see how one can make a sound argument that Trump is preferable to President Biden if one is supporting Jill Stein for President.
Last edited:
Please do not misunderstand my support of Jill Stein. I fundamentally disagree with virtually everything she advocates. But she is adamantly anti-war, and as far as I can tell she is the only American politician who does. And that alone is all I need to hear in order to support her. If she were to become President I would be against her 99% of the time. But I would stand with her every time she resisted the war machine. As I said earlier anti-war is more important to me than every other so-called policy combined.
Ok. I don't understand why you would support someone you only agree with 1% of the time but hey, that is your prerogative.
Similar threads
