Tulsi Gabbard
- Thread starter Pirata
- Start date
Lots of middle of road democrats starting to distance themselves from a sinking ship. Who wants President Biden coming to there rally to generate support in the midterms?He’s an embarrassment and needs to stay hidden in a basement. Lately he’s been saying, “I will let you know what we decide” who is the we? Who’s running the country? It certainly isn’t Joe.
Tulsi supports a lot of common sense positions, served our country in Iraq and doesn't play the "diversity card" although she is a great example of a leader with a diverse background. Didn't say she was joining the Republican Party unless I missed it. Maybe she joins Andrew Yang's Forward Party.
She tells it like it is and a lot of folks don't like that in either party. A breath of fresh air IMO. We need more of that.
Indeed we do.
Tulsi was always more of an independent. This would have been more meaningful if it was while she was in office.
There was some truth in what she said. Though some was a bit over the top in my opinion, but over the top criticisms against democrats are what pays her bills now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsi_Gabbard
For those interested in her positions as a opposed to a meme....
For those interested in her positions as a opposed to a meme....
I think we are growing tired of the tribal war between the two parties. Common sense would be refreshing.
Tulsi was always a mainstream Democrat, but the party has moved towards the extreme left over the last 5-10 years. She was never much of an independent.
I just view her as independent because she really became a household name because she went after the democratic establishment. She went after Hillary for being too hawkish, after Obama for not saying "radical Islamic terrorism" etc but then is also to the left of mainstream dems on certain policies like healthcare and energy.
Doesn't really fit in any box. Not really a bad thing though.
She is very balanced. During the impeachment trials she said the following:
“I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing,” she said. “I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country. When I cast my vote in support of the impeachment inquiry nearly three months ago, I said that in order to maintain the integrity of this solemn undertaking, it must not be a partisan endeavor. Tragically, that’s what it has been.”
“I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing,” she said. “I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country. When I cast my vote in support of the impeachment inquiry nearly three months ago, I said that in order to maintain the integrity of this solemn undertaking, it must not be a partisan endeavor. Tragically, that’s what it has been.”
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
She was even less popular than Mayor Pete in the primaries.
Who really cares what Tulsi does?
Who really cares what Tulsi does?
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
She received less than 1% in most states during the democratic primaries. She's irrelevant, just like Yang.
Maybe MSM will write an article on my morning dump too.
Republicans do because they like people outside the Republican base who don’t like Democrats. Tulsi/Kanye 2024
Kind of similar to how Dems like Liz Cheney now though.
I was watching NewsNation the other night and they had a polling/data organization whose results indicated that there are about 20-23% of hard and fast Dems and Reps on each side that will vote for anyone that has the initial next to their name, but that there are close to 60% that are independent or don't have a strong affiliation from either party. So I agree that you have some extremists from either side that are going to like when someone breaks from the other party.
What would happen if enough "names" from both parties left and created that coalition? Does a Gabbard, Cheney, Yang alliance start that? It strikes me that there is some jockeying for position in seeing that both parties have such a putrid approval rating and there are issues (like immigration), that a third party can take a strong common sense position.
Many would take a very close look at a third party, but we saw first hand what happens to outsiders who rock the gravy train.
She did WAY better than Kamala Harris, is she irrelevant too?
Pretty much. Even though she is not in an irrelevant position.
However, Tulsi is an odd egg. She has some wild positions that some are far left and some are far right. In the end she is pro-Putin and a poor representative for this country. So anyone who thinks she is so great as an independent mind, she is not so independent. Just really a puppet. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zachev...in-2021-is-a-putin-apologist/?sh=1fa2dd864cd6
Not opposed but I just think we are way too polarized for that to really gain any steam.
Yes. Harris is fairly irrelevant other than having the title.
Tulsi just stayed in the race longer though. Harris would have picked up a few percentage points had she stayed in.
So are you not opposed to more options or are you for it?
we are extremely polarized today, but there seems to be an undercurrent of people that are fed up with it. That’s how change happens.
I've found her to be pretty reasonable in interviews even though she has taken some odd positions. The timing of her announcement and gaslighting on the way out turned me off a bit though.
I agree that she is not relevant. If she was, every news organization wouldn’t have reported on her video.
It’s funny how you to find her as an “odd egg” because she has a diversity of opinion. Do you prefer groupthink?
While I certainly don’t agree with every one of her positions, I think it’s refreshing to see a diversity of thought.
Overall, for it. I would happily support a 3rd party candidate but I am not sold on the idea that they could gain enough support to actually win given how divided the country is.
OK, thanks. Two separate things. I am also very much for more options but share your view that it’s a steep hill to climb even in today’s yesterday polarize environment.
It takes courage for people to leave existing parties to lead that effort.
Pro-Putin? Hahahha do you really believe half of the nonsense you post on here?
Cern has to put people into two buckets - with him or against him. No exceptions, there is no room for a middle ground. Typical of the mindless political drivel there is too much of these days.
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
It would take relevant people to lead a 3rd party. Andrew Yang and Christie Todd Whitman are not it. Gabbard doesn't move the needle either.
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
A third party would make the American voter basically irrelevant. You need 270 in the electoral college to win. If there are 3 legitimate candidates in the mix and none of them get 270, the House of Representatives then picks the President. Last thing I want is Ilhan Omar and Marjorie Taylor Greene deciding who our president is.
The third party could act as a coalition builder with one of the other two parties. Would not go to the house.
You described me to a T. Lol. Yes you and Hall 85 are such courageous independent thinkers. We should all aspire to be like you two.
