smjjames Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Of all the Democrats who might run Gabbard is the only one I find tolerable. I will not vote for her, She is still a representative of a party with far too many members that think the rights and property of the individual are only theirs at the pleasure of the state. But she is by far the least objectionable of all of them. In other news how cool is this? https://abcnews4.com/news/local/congressman-joe-cunningham-caught-bringing-beer-onto-house-floor To you, what makes her different from the other Democrats who may/are run? Just wondering. I know she is supposedly one of the more moderate Democrats who might run, but theres other Democrats who could run (in this massive potential field of like, 30) who are also moderates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicMage117 Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 is it John Goodman playing Trump? That's who I was thinking lol Just what do you think you're doing?! You dare to come between me and my prey? Is it a habit of yours to scurry about, getting in the way and causing bother? What are you still bothering me for? I'm a Knight. I'm not interested in your childish games. I need my rest. Begone! Lest I draw my nail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Of all the Democrats who might run Gabbard is the only one I find tolerable. I will not vote for her, She is still a representative of a party with far too many members that think the rights and property of the individual are only theirs at the pleasure of the state. But she is by far the least objectionable of all of them. In other news how cool is this? https://abcnews4.com/news/local/congressman-joe-cunningham-caught-bringing-beer-onto-house-floor To you, what makes her different from the other Democrats who may/are run? Just wondering. I know she is supposedly one of the more moderate Democrats who might run, but theres other Democrats who could run (in this massive potential field of like, 30) who are also moderates. She opposes military intervention in places like Syria, West Africa, and well, anywhere else for that matter. People who have served in combat are less cavalier about asking others to do it for bad reasons... or no reason at all. 2 "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadySands Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 (edited) Julian Castro is throwing his hat in the ring as well. Gabbard is the one that I most wanted to run this time around even though I think her being Hindu might hurt her some. I hope Sanders and especially Biden stay out of it. Also there may some Clinton loyalists who may still hold a grudge against Gabbard. Edited January 12, 2019 by ShadySands Free games updated 3/4/21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Can't wait for Prietprat to photoshop her face on a Kali statue. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoraptor Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Clinton loyalists/ corporate dems are definitively holding a grudge. Going solely by people that are obviously Democrat Shareblue/ Correct the Record astroturfers: her foreign policy isn't non interventionist but really consists of loving Putin and Assad, she actually wants to bomb more muslims than peaceful mainstream pro regime change and military intervention democrats and domestically she is really a right winger and closet republican and any left wing person who votes for her instead of a sensible mainstream candidate is an idiot, Republican plant or a traitor to the party deeply misguided and not paying attention. So don't listen to them if they say anything nice about her, they're idiots closet republicans or deeply misguided; listen to me the objective voice of reason. Fortunately she's also also not got a chance, is not a threat of winning and is only running because she wants a cabinet position or to be a VP nominee so please don't bother paying attention or getting excited about her in any way because she's going to lose and drop out and is only doing it to get a cushy job later and raise her profile. Plus, plus; on the qt she's a polytheist and worships cows! Cows! Not that there's anything wrong with that and I'm fine with it, but worshiping cows! You know a lot of people won't vote for someone who worships a burger ingredient even though I would consider it if she wasn't so useless in every other respect and [mainstream candidate] wasn't so much better and doesn't worship cows. Plus Hindus have far too many vaguely androgynous multiarmed deities, very confusing*. She should worship a cloud or a burning bush like normal people instead, would be far better politically. Think I hit all the salient points in their briefing document. Pretty standard propaganda greatest hits parade. *might have added this one myself 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 That's it... close the thread. Zorp wins! Ain't nobody topping THAT one! "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 what does "God bless Amerika" become with a Hindu in charge? inconceivable The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elerond Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Gabbard is very much younger version of Hillary in that she changes her political agenda to fit what will most likely get her elected. So I find it quite funny that people who don't like Hillary like Gabbard and vice versa. It is like their actual politics has less effect on people's opinions than mental image caused by media narrative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcador Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Modi would be pleased with her, at least Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
injurai Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Gabbard's worst track record lies with her personal beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman, which there is no evidence this has changed but she has laid down that fight as far as her political career is concerned. I'm personally very much a fan of her foreign policy though, in so far as what her stances have been thus far. I also think establishing a new long-term foreign policy is necessary to establish a foundation by which we can figure out what America's internal economic policies need to be. While I also opposed the TPP last election cycle, given where things currently stand with China. Both on the trade war, the current US deficit, and maybe most alarming to me the IP-drain currently being enacted on the US which relies on IP and rendering of skill services related makes up 80% of our economy. Currently I'm in favor of some new trade-partnership that will hopefully strengthen America's presence in SEA, while maintaining the independence of Taiwan. Honestly I think India is probably the better ally than China, but giving up our relation with China would probably only bring them closer with Russia. The original signatories of the TPP are probably a good network to re-approach for something new. I honestly think the US might be able to find itself some valid manufacturing sectors to round out the bottom rung of non-skilled labor that keeps being used as a political crutch to change the guards without actually attending to labor issues. Something probably needs done to encourage most of America's largest corporations to bring their assets back to American shores. This might be have to entail tax cuts, but only on corporate gains, not personal income or dividend payouts. She's also pro-science and environmental conscience which, regardless of economic interest groups, I think is important solely to maintain a scientifically literate figure head for a nation that relies so much on innovation for it's economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoraptor Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 A fair few of the TPPA (as it is now) signers were not overly disappointed when the US pulled out. I mean, they weren't happy and would mostly have preferred the US to be there, but most of the really contentious issues in TPP were added at the behest of the US and it got a lot less opposition once the US was gone. Ironically, even though some of those controversial provisions were kept anyway. I don't think anyone is looking forward to re-renegotiating it with the US though. .. she changes her political agenda to fit what will most likely get her elected. That's not really being similar to Hillary in particular though, that's basically just plain old standard being a politician. Politicians will try and make their views palatable to the largest number of voters possible, if you don't you generally don't win elections. But otherwise Hillary is pretty much a dead straight typical corporate Democrat in every respect. Gabbard is a lot less tailored to getting the party hierarchy onside and at times she's completely disregarded them eg endorsing Bernie; she's also a lot less tailored in her general and policy views whereas Hillary came across as not having had a thought that wasn't vetted by focus groups beforehand. No doubt Gabbard does have some sort of message tailoring/ control going on- as above, she is a politician- but it's a lot less overt than Hillary's was. There's also very little similarity in terms of their rise and they share some considerably differences in both policy formulation and application/ theory of those policies. They have a fair few similarities on policy too, but they are in the same party. I might agree in the future though, we've had 30 years to get to know Hillary fairly well even if you don't live in the US; if I list the things I definitely know about Gabbard it's a lot shorter and there are more gaps to be filled in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orogun01 Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 On a different note I thought this was funny as hell... or not: I wonder if understanding of the Federal Reserve system will ever reach the point where people start to act against it. I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"* *If you can't tell, it's you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktchong Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 (edited) The one issue that Tulsi Gabbard has always been consistent: she has always been anti-war and anti-intervention. You can't say that about Hillary Clinton, who has always been a hawkish warmonger, which is one of the main reasons why many progressives refused to support her. Frankly, I couldn't care less about Tulsi's supposedly homophobic or Islamophobic history. Those identity politics issues have been toxic to the Democratic Party. Those issues impact very small segments of the American population (LGBTQ and Muslims,) and they distract from what are really important: economy, education, healthcare, and war. Democrats need to focus on issues that deliver maximum impacts to the most Americans. No, LGBTQ and Muslims, I don't care about issues that appease you at the expenses of everything else, so go away. I don't mind gay people getting married or more Muslims claiming asylum, but they must be "side issues", not platform or priority issues that override economy, education, healthcare, war, etc. I will NOT support any candidate who make LGBTQ, Islam, or women as her main thing, (i.e., like how Hillary made women's right into her main issue.) Edited January 13, 2019 by ktchong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcador Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 No, LGBTQ and Muslims, I don't care about issues that appease you at the expenses of everything else, This was a problem ? Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elerond Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 A fair few of the TPPA (as it is now) signers were not overly disappointed when the US pulled out. I mean, they weren't happy and would mostly have preferred the US to be there, but most of the really contentious issues in TPP were added at the behest of the US and it got a lot less opposition once the US was gone. Ironically, even though some of those controversial provisions were kept anyway. I don't think anyone is looking forward to re-renegotiating it with the US though. .. she changes her political agenda to fit what will most likely get her elected. That's not really being similar to Hillary in particular though, that's basically just plain old standard being a politician. Politicians will try and make their views palatable to the largest number of voters possible, if you don't you generally don't win elections. But otherwise Hillary is pretty much a dead straight typical corporate Democrat in every respect. Gabbard is a lot less tailored to getting the party hierarchy onside and at times she's completely disregarded them eg endorsing Bernie; she's also a lot less tailored in her general and policy views whereas Hillary came across as not having had a thought that wasn't vetted by focus groups beforehand. No doubt Gabbard does have some sort of message tailoring/ control going on- as above, she is a politician- but it's a lot less overt than Hillary's was. There's also very little similarity in terms of their rise and they share some considerably differences in both policy formulation and application/ theory of those policies. They have a fair few similarities on policy too, but they are in the same party. I might agree in the future though, we've had 30 years to get to know Hillary fairly well even if you don't live in the US; if I list the things I definitely know about Gabbard it's a lot shorter and there are more gaps to be filled in. She is from Hawaii, where being those things is popular these days. If you look what she advocated in beginning of 2000, you will see that she supported same things as Hillary. Also Hillary's and Bernie's voting record in senate match over 90% of time, so difference between two them is more flavour how they present themselves than politics they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadySands Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 (edited) I don't think voting record is the best measure as I wouldn't be surprised if most Senate Democrats matched up similarly. Also, while they were mostly in a general agreement on the issues they both had some (occasionally wildly) different views on the cause and how to tackle those issues. Besides that as others have said, they're all still politicians. Edited January 13, 2019 by ShadySands 2 Free games updated 3/4/21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elerond Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 Besides that as others have said, they're all still politicians. Yeah which is why I would look how much they have been willing to go against party line when it comes to voting on issues instead of what they are saying in order to gather votes. Because I don't think it really matters what are politicians' personal beliefs if they always vote according to what their party says. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktchong Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 (edited) After Tulsi Gabbard had confirmed on MSNBC that she would make an official announcement of her bid for the presidency in the following week, the Republican National Committee (RNC) did a couple very interesting, unexpected things on Friday and Saturday. The RNC did somethings that they did not do when Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris announced their bid for president. The RNC put out a press release to attack Tulsi Gabbard on Friday.Then, the next day, RNC tweeted out a "cheet sheet" infographic to attack her again. As far as I can tell, the RNC has not done the same to Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris after she had announced her bid. The GOP only mentioned Warren and Harris on their Twitter feed, only one time for each of the two. The RNC certainly has not taken the time to put out a press release to attack either Warren or Harris. The fact the GOP took the time to put out a press release and put together an infographic to attack Tulsi Gabbard in the two days immediately after she had said she would run is very telling. BTW, unlike Warren and Harris, Tulsi has not yet made the official announcement yet. The reactions from the RNC says a lot about the potential of Tulsi's candidacy. Edited January 13, 2019 by ktchong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raithe Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 Now This - Sen. Jon Tester asks colleagues to stand up to Trump on the shutdown "Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raithe Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 3 "Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 What if that number he has his finger over is actually 2000, not whatever it actually is? That kind of ruins the meme I think, or it would have been better without the card numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadySands Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is going to Canada for surgery https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/14/rand-paul-neighbor-attack-senator-have-surgery-canada/2568200002/ Free games updated 3/4/21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Yeah, I lol'd hard when I saw that one just because of the irony of it. Yes, he's paying for it, but still... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volourn Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 (edited) Kinda like the Kanadians who got to the US for medical treatment despite us Kanadians claiming our health care system is 'free' and 'superior'. LMAO Plus, read the article. That hospital is not a shining symbol of 'social medicine'. L0L For starters, it is PRIVATELY owned and accepts payments from the uinsured from all over the globe. Yeah, 'free health care' . Edited January 15, 2019 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts