oh good, someone compiled all the stances Tulsi has taken so I dont have to
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/dk6tuo/tulsi_gabbard_unites_putin_apologists/f4bchcv/
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/dk6tuo/tulsi_gabbard_unites_putin_apologists/f4bchcv/
you can go down the list on those lazy spins.... anti-war and anti-regime change being the most dreary and reductive ties of the bunch.
Instead of naming a position, they name the person in the administration as if it weakens a process afforded to all under consideration. That's called petty. Especially in regards that a serving military member would have to consider potential appointments that other congressmen or candidates, who were very few at the time, in a different way than others.
Being called an islamaphobe for saying that islamic terrorism, namely tactics, propaganda, and recruiting inspired directly from wahhabism should be named specifically. Ironically, the same stance scrutiny is what people demand when referring to white nationalism and domestic terror. But suddenly highlighting a point of emphasis is case by case. You tell me if that sounds right?
I could obviously go on. About India, the misinformation listed about the Syria events and the order in which they're represented, and how people will still lose their shit if you applied half of that scrutiny to Pelosi or Clinton...
Instead of naming a position, they name the person in the administration as if it weakens a process afforded to all under consideration. That's called petty. Especially in regards that a serving military member would have to consider potential appointments that other congressmen or candidates, who were very few at the time, in a different way than others.
Being called an islamaphobe for saying that islamic terrorism, namely tactics, propaganda, and recruiting inspired directly from wahhabism should be named specifically. Ironically, the same stance scrutiny is what people demand when referring to white nationalism and domestic terror. But suddenly highlighting a point of emphasis is case by case. You tell me if that sounds right?
I could obviously go on. About India, the misinformation listed about the Syria events and the order in which they're represented, and how people will still lose their shit if you applied half of that scrutiny to Pelosi or Clinton...
Tulsi Gabbard isn't anti-war. She's a self-described hawk against terrorists. Her narrow objections center around efforts to spread democracy: "In short, when it comes to the war against terrorists, I'm a hawk," Gabbard said. "When it comes to counterproductive wars of regime change, I'm a dove."Sorry is this a salient point to be made when Obama was droning Northern Pakistan and Clinton was ordering his unilateral military actions in several different regions at one time? Who else on the dem ticket is going to be doing different. And don't fucking tell me Bernie when his fucking answer to foreign policy has been "lets just all get along, let's get SA and Iran to the table together to sort the ME out."
Wahhabism is very specific. Same with white nationalist. Islamic terrorism is broad and leads to people beating up Sikhs
By Fenderputty Go To PostWahhabism is very specific. Same with white nationalist. Islamic terrorism is broad and leads to people beating up SikhsWahhabism is what we've been fighting. In the context of the discussion at the time, it needed to be noted what the defense objectives were - and beating around the bush for optics was helpful to no one. Hell, its not like we're asking for the exact same type of descriptors for the branches of domestic terrorism we're facing either. This is picking and choosing about what you're willing to be upset about just to call someone racist.
By i can get you a toe Go To PostSorry is this a salient point to be made when Obama was droning Northern Pakistan and Clinton was ordering his unilateral military actions in several different regions at one time? Who else on the dem ticket is going to be doing different. And don't fucking tell me Bernie when his fucking answer to foreign policy has been "lets just all get along, let's get SA and Iran to the table together to sort the ME out."They even glossed over the arming groups in Syria shit too and presented it like a lie.
Shit, Tulsi's got some unreal rating for pro-LBTQ votes in congress but she still gets more shit for telling people off for interrupting a town hall about schools 20 years ago than Clinton and Biden get about stepping on black people more than grass.
The India stuff is a joke too.
"the reason we have Donald Trump is because Hillary ran against him"
😂 Facts
It's crazy how many people still don't understand how hated Clinton is.
😂 Facts
It's crazy how many people still don't understand how hated Clinton is.
By DY_nasty Go To Post"the reason we have Donald Trump is because Hillary ran against him"
😂 Facts
It's crazy how many people still don't understand how hated Clinton is.
By that logic there's no way he gets re-elected.
By RrusheR Go To PostBy that logic there's no way he gets re-elected.Hillary and the DNC have done more harm to the party than Trump could ever hope to do since 2016.
Until there's a massive course correction with democratic leadership then I see no reason why we won't continue to see people actively voting against the party out of spite.
Actually if Russia really wanted to help Trump they would just concentrate on destroying all of Biden's opponents.
By linsivvi Go To PostActually if Russia really wanted to help Trump they would just concentrate on destroying all of Biden's opponents.Starting with Tulsi...
By FortuneFaded Go To PostStarting with Tulsi…I mean opponents that can actually win.
By DY_nasty Go To PostHillary and the DNC have done more harm to the party than Trump could ever hope to do since 2016.
Until there's a massive course correction with democratic leadership then I see no reason why we won't continue to see people actively voting against the party out of spite.
Oh, so vote for the destruction of the governing body just to own the democrats?
Rock solid.
Like, I don't think enough is made of Boris's failures during his time as PM. But really it all hinges on Brexit. It the UK exit under his tenure all will be forgotten, despite the fact that it shouldn't.
By Cleff Go To PostLike, I don't think enough is made of Boris's failures during his time as PM. But really it all hinges on Brexit. It the UK exit under his tenure all will be forgotten, despite the fact that it shouldn't.
Ehh he's awful but think he's achieved alot more than may was able to in a shorter space of time.
Even if i disagree with what he's pushing for he's putting us in a position where we will have to do something.
By Kidjr Go To PostEhh he's awful but think he's achieved alot more than may was able to in a shorter space of time.The only thing he has done is saying yes to all hard Brexiteers that voted down May's option(s).
Even if i disagree with what he's pushing for he's putting us in a position where we will have to do something.
By Kidjr Go To PostEhh he's awful but think he's achieved alot more than may was able to in a shorter space of time.
Even if i disagree with what he's pushing for he's putting us in a position where we will have to do something.
I mean, all he has achieved is being found having broken the law and then in a panic taking May's deal and making it objectively a lot worse then bringing it back to Parliament.
Side achievements include losing almost every fucking Paliamentary vote possible.
By linsivvi Go To PostI mean opponents that can actually win.
She’s polling at 2%. Must be the DNC. She told Tucker
Guzman really just said the president better remember who got him in there 😂 God Mexico is fucked
By /sy Go To PostMakes me sick tbh but whatever
Is this real life
By Perfect Blue Go To PostJimmy Kimmel jokes now? 😟
Whose mans is this
By blackace Go To PostJimmy Kimmel jokes now? 😟She’ll do blackface next
Hillary has always been outspoken. Whether it's for the right reasons or not is the question.
I agree with her on Tulsi.. and probably less in a lot of other areas.
Also like Horse said the myth that Boris managed to do something May didn't is more due to him unsuccessfully breaking everything to get what he want, and being a petulant cunt.
I agree with her on Tulsi.. and probably less in a lot of other areas.
Also like Horse said the myth that Boris managed to do something May didn't is more due to him unsuccessfully breaking everything to get what he want, and being a petulant cunt.
Clinton is a sore loser and wants to take pot shots at anyone who were in her path to presidency. Her surrogates have been attacking Bernie non-stop and it's just a matter of time she jumps into the pit.
By Fenderputty Go To PostHot take: Clinton is souring the waters for a Tulsi 3rd party runMild take: If Hillary runs, the real third party divide that everyone keeps worrying about will finally start to happen
By /sy Go To Post
Is this real life
bruh
By DY_nasty Go To PostMild take: If Hillary runs, the real third party divide that everyone keeps worrying about will finally start to happen
Ohhh god o hope she doesn’t jump in. Side line pop shots I’m ok’ish with
By Laboured Go To Post
Oh the Grand Ol Duke of York
He had an underage girl
He marched her up to Epsteins house
And pulled out this vibrator thing
By NinjaFridge Go To Post
Kind of surprised that Barclay actually knows any of the details of the deal
By Diego! Go To PostOh the Grand Ol Duke of York
He had an underage girl
He marched her up to Epsteins house
And pulled out this vibrator thing
Kind of surprised that Barclay actually knows any of the details of the deal
Maybe someone explained it to him. Slowly. With pictures.
By Fenderputty Go To PostOhhh god o hope she doesn’t jump in. Side line pop shots I’m ok’ish withShe can't. It's obvious the donors are done with her, and without the billionaires she's nothing. Who the hell would still give her money in 2019? All she's got are her former surrogates spread throughout the campaigns and the media and take cheap shots is all she can do.
By linsivvi Go To PostShe can't. It's obvious the donors are done with her, and without the billionaires she's nothing. Who the hell would still give her money in 2019? All she's got are her former surrogates spread throughout the campaigns and the media and take cheap shots is all she can do.
I would still prefer her over Biden, if I'm being honest.