[Sivad]

[Sivad]

[skinster]

She's been good on Syria.

Joe Rogan seems to have a crush on her.

[Sivad]

I don't trust any politician, especially after AOC shoved her nose up the establishment's ass, but I respect what Gabbard's done so far.

[Sivad]

It’s Official: Tulsi 2020


Howard Dean to CNN: All Dem candidates qualified to be president except Tulsi Gabbard
Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean said early Thursday that he believes all the party's candidates are qualified to the president, except for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).

"What do you think of Joe Biden getting in or possibly getting in?" asked CNN "New Day" co-host Alisyn Camerota during a discussion of the 2020 Democratic field with Dean.

"Well, that's his personal choice. I've already said what I had to say about turning the page on ... my generation," Dean replied. "But ... Joe Biden is a good guy and people like Joe Biden a lot. He's run before and hasn't been able to win."
ADVERTISEMENT

"I mean I'm really not going to take sides in this," he later added. "There are no candidates, with one exception, that I really don't think should be president."

"And who's that exception?" asked co-host John Berman.

"Tulsi Gabbard. I don't think she knows what she's doing and I don't think she ... is qualified. She's not qualified," Dean responded.
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4258 ... cept-tulsi

[ThirdTerm]

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean said early Thursday that he believes all the party's candidates are qualified to the president, except for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).

"What do you think of Joe Biden getting in or possibly getting in?" asked CNN "New Day" co-host Alisyn Camerota during a discussion of the 2020 Democratic field with Dean.

"Well, that's his personal choice. I've already said what I had to say about turning the page on ... my generation," Dean replied. "But ... Joe Biden is a good guy and people like Joe Biden a lot. He's run before and hasn't been able to win."

"I mean I'm really not going to take sides in this," he later added. "There are no candidates, with one exception, that I really don't think should be president."

"And who's that exception?" asked co-host John Berman.

"Tulsi Gabbard. I don't think she knows what she's doing and I don't think she ... is qualified. She's not qualified," Dean responded.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4258 ... cept-tulsi

Her father is a political figure in his own right and her opposition to LGBTQ rights is similar to his stance. Mike Gabbard is half Samoan and a member of a Hindu sect opposing gay rights, which is an odd choice as her family has no Indian roots. Democrats endorse minority candidates but some of them are ideologically quite conservative, contrary to the party's platform. Howard Dean said that she's unqualified and she doesn't know what she's doing.

[Sivad]

her opposition to LGBTQ rights

She supports full rights for LGBTQ. She did oppose gay marriage 15 years ago when she was 22 years old, but most establishment democrats opposed LGBTQ rights 15 years ago, are they all disqualified as well or do they get a pass?

[skinster]

Haven't listened to this but you might like this, Sivad.

[Sivad]

Haven't listened to this but you might like this, Sivad.

Gabbard is ZOG and ZOG is crime. Fuck Gabbard.

[Sivad]

The most that can be said for Gabbard on foreign policy is that she's not a neocon( neocons are the architects and promoters of the zionist-saudi fake war on terror). Gabbard isn't a neocon but she is an opponent of BDS and a "friend of Israel", she advocates for drone war and jsoc death squads and says she's "conflicted" on torture, all of which are instant disqualifiers in my book.


She does buck the establishment and she's definitely not a DNC goon but even as something of a maverick her politics and attitudes are still pretty troubling. I don't really have a problem with her pro-life sentiments, I don't agree with them but I do recognize there's a legitimate ethical concern there and also that there does need to be a counterbalance to the liberal nihilism. Her stances on gun control and climate change are just the standard liberal idiocy. She's decent on economic policy, supports medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, and strongly opposed the TPP, but that only makes her a right leaning centrist in terms of objective rationality.

So while she is the best of a bad lot, she's still pretty fucking awful and can only really be endorsed as a lesser evil to the rest of the shitstain neoliberal warmongers the dnc will be forwarding.

[Sivad]

Tulsi Gabbard Speaks to Right-Wing Christians United for Israel Conference 2015

[Sivad]

[skinster]

The most that can be said for Gabbard on foreign policy is that she's not a neocon( neocons are the architects and promoters of the zionist-saudi fake war on terror). Gabbard isn't a neocon but she is an opponent of BDS and a "friend of Israel", she advocates for drone war and jsoc death squads and says she's "conflicted" on torture, all of which are instant disqualifiers in my book.

She does buck the establishment and she's definitely not a DNC goon but even as something of a maverick her politics and attitudes are still pretty troubling. I don't really have a problem with her pro-life sentiments, I don't agree with them but I do recognize there's a legitimate ethical concern there and also that there does need to be a counterbalance to the liberal nihilism. Her stances on gun control and climate change are just the standard liberal idiocy. She's decent on economic policy, supports medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, and strongly opposed the TPP, but that only makes her a right leaning centrist in terms of objective rationality.

So while she is the best of a bad lot, she's still pretty fucking awful and can only really be endorsed as a lesser evil to the rest of the shitstain neoliberal warmongers the dnc will be forwarding.

I still haven't listened to that podcast but I don't really care for her either way. The only thing she did that was decent, as far as I'm aware, is her activism against war on Syria.

Aside from that she seems to be a typical American politician that supports a lot of awful shit at home and around the world. The debate about her is probably only cared about in the U.S.

[Sivad]

The only thing she did that was decent, as far as I'm aware, is her activism against war on Syria.

She was vice chair of the dnc and she broke ranks and resigned to endorse Sanders. She's also the one who objected to the truncated debate schedule in that election. I never gave her much scrutiny because I figured she was just a standard progressive politician but she's associated with a lot of shitheads and she's extra gung-ho about the fake war on terror.

She's not a neocon but she's not a progressive on foriegn policy either. She doesn't understand that regime change is central to the agenda of that Neocon-Zionist-Saudi axis of evil. She wants to continue prosecuting the fake war on terror with drone strikes and JSOC death squads, she just doesn't want to overthrow stable regimes by funding and arming invading hordes of terrorist extremists that are the proxy armies of that N-Z-S axis.

[Sivad]

The debate about her is probably only cared about in the U.S.

Most people in other developed nations have no real direct interest in US presidential politics but people in the developing world certainly do. Especially people in the Muslim world and those in Latin America. For those people the outcomes of US presidential elections determine just how deep and hard the ass fucking is likely to be.