The Most Authoritarian Democratic Candidate

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Regular people: "Gabbard supports the US not putting boots on the ground in random conflicts and starting mindless wars that we have nothing to gain from."

Neolibs: "Gabbard is autocratic and loves dictators."

Just shut up, it's not even funny at this point.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Regular people: "Gabbard supports the US not putting boots on the ground in random conflicts and starting mindless wars that we have nothing to gain from."

Neolibs: "Gabbard is autocratic and loves dictators."

Just shut up, it's not even funny at this point.

You're citing a f[inks]ing blue avatar to support your candidate. Think about that.

Your obsession with the color of an avatar is telling, I care more about the values and principles of a candidate and Gabbard aligns with most of mine.

Seriously, you’ve never given me one concrete policy reason for your overwhelming hate of Tulsi besides some ‘Muh Assad! Muh Modi!’ virtue signaling.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I care more about the values and principles of a candidate and Gabbard aligns with most of mine.

If that's true then the Republican party awaits you with open arms.

Really? Tulsi is pro Medicare for All, pro Equality Act, pro $15 minimum wage, pro ending citizens united, pro tuition free public college, anti TPP, anti interventionist foreign wars... need I go on?

You’re so full of sh**t the toilets jealous.

Edit;
And I don’t expect a meaningful response from you, just the hit and run straw man attacks you and BRTD specialize at.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Sanders isn’t personally authortiarian but he has a tolerance for despotism that rivals Trump.

Oh please, the GOP / Neoconservatives only cares about democracy when foreigners vote for candidates approved by their corporate overlords. The second democracy starts to go sideways and voters start voting in people who will stand up to those monied interests — its all about regime change.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Regular people: "Gabbard supports the US not putting boots on the ground in random conflicts and starting mindless wars that we have nothing to gain from."

Neolibs: "Gabbard is autocratic and loves dictators."

Just shut up, it's not even funny at this point.

You're citing a f[inks]ing blue avatar to support your candidate. Think about that.

Your obsession with the color of an avatar is telling, I care more about the values and principles of a candidate and Gabbard aligns with most of mine.

Seriously, you’ve never given me one concrete policy reason for your overwhelming hate of Tulsi besides some ‘Muh Assad! Muh Modi!’ virtue signaling.

I care about the values and principles of a candidate too. And Republicans do not align with my values and principles. Therefore no candidate heavily supported by Republicans could ever do so. You know how my motto here is "all liberal, all the time"? It's obvious.

The latter bit is not virtue signalling. I hate Assad and Modi, and thus I hate any candidate friendly to them. I also hate Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Steve Bannon, Putin, saying "radical Islamic terrorism" (not because I care about it being offensive to Islam, seeing as how I believe it's a false religion, but because the term simply doesn't make any sense, period. "Radical Islamist terrorism" is a phrase that does and I wouldn't object to) and the Knights of Columbus (while I don't like Harris, she was absolutely completely right in attacking the KoC.) How can a candidate friendly to all those things align with my values?

I’ve asked you multiple times for a single concrete policy reason for your hate against Tulsi and time and again you come up short. Maybe it’s because you can’t actually point to anything besides her desire as a Hindu to have closer US-India relations. But perhaps I’d just rather quote the congresswoman herself, and you can choose to take her at face value or not:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But sure, rather than using Occam’s razor and assuming there are people out there who would try and attach themselves to Tulsi for their own purposes due to her outsized influence for a congresswoman on US-India relations, anti-interventionist foreign policy, etc, let’s just assume she’s secretly a Hindu fascist who hates all Muslims. Sure, that sounds about right to you, doesn’t it?

https://youtu.be/a0NVcUkO19A

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

There are many Hindus in America who feel they need to convert to Christianity

Uh, I'm supposed to think that's a problem and work against that?

I have no affiliation with the RSS. Sometimes people on both sides, for their own purposes, try to say I somehow favor, or am part, of the BJP or take photos of me at Indian events and circulate them for their own promotional reasons. But the fact is, I’m not partial to BJP, the Congress Party, or any other particular political party in India.

Ah, so she takes a ridiculous Moderate Hero position instead of actively supporting the center-left party. Not acceptable for a member of a center-left party.

Imagine if a Brazilian-American Congressperson had met with Bolsonaro to "have closer US-Brazil relations." Would that be OK? Of f[inks]ing course not.

What a stupid idea to say someone should actively support this or that political party in the largest democracy in the world. What Tulsi said isn’t moderate hero position, lmao — it’s basic diplomacy and why she would make such a great President. I also love how you changed the goal posts from ‘she’s basically a Hindu fascist!’ to ‘she’s a moderate hero!’

No point in arguing with you, you’ve already decided what you want to believe.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

There are many Hindus in America who feel they need to convert to Christianity

Uh, I'm supposed to think that's a problem and work against that?

I have no affiliation with the RSS. Sometimes people on both sides, for their own purposes, try to say I somehow favor, or am part, of the BJP or take photos of me at Indian events and circulate them for their own promotional reasons. But the fact is, I’m not partial to BJP, the Congress Party, or any other particular political party in India.

Ah, so she takes a ridiculous Moderate Hero position instead of actively supporting the center-left party. Not acceptable for a member of a center-left party.

Imagine if a Brazilian-American Congressperson had met with Bolsonaro to "have closer US-Brazil relations." Would that be OK? Of f[inks]ing course not.

What a stupid idea to say someone should actively support this or that political party in the largest democracy in the world. What Tulsi said isn’t moderate hero position, lmao — it’s basic diplomacy and why she would make such a great President. I also love how you changed the goal posts from ‘she’s basically a Hindu fascist!’ to ‘she’s a moderate hero!’

No point in arguing with you, you’ve already decided what you want to believe.

She also defended Wikileaks: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/tulsi-gabbard-wikileaks-spurred-some-necessary-change

I can’t keep up with you, I’m taking a break.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Oh please, the GOP / Neoconservatives only cares about democracy when foreigners vote for candidates approved by their corporate overlords. The second democracy starts to go sideways and voters start voting in people who will stand up to those monied interests — its all about regime change.

Cheney supported Apartheid South Africa.

So did the GOP lord and savior, Reagan. These people only care about democracy or human rights when it aligns with their geopolitical goals, usually involving blood oil, military assets and cold hard cash.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I'm not a Republican but I strongly approve of getting rid of world leaders I don't like. Obviously I don't agree with Republicans on such leaders. Would I support removing Bolsonaro, Modi, Putin and Duterte? Yes, just like I approved of the ouster of Yankovych in Ukraine.

Then send your own children to die in and fight those wars. Spend your own tax money to fund the million dollar missiles and trillion dollar fighter jet programs. I’d rather spend that money doing nation building at home instead of trying to overthrow democratically elected governments whether I agree with their policies or not. You’re no better than Republicans, not by a sliver, you just want to impose a different world view.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I'm not a Republican but I strongly approve of getting rid of world leaders I don't like. Obviously I don't agree with Republicans on such leaders. Would I support removing Bolsonaro, Modi, Putin and Duterte? Yes, just like I approved of the ouster of Yankovych in Ukraine.

Then send your own children to die in and fight those wars. Spend your own tax money to fund the million dollar missiles and trillion dollar fighter jet programs. I’d rather spend that money doing nation building at home instead of trying to overthrow democratically elected governments whether I agree with their policies or not. You’re no better than Republicans, not by a sliver, you just want to impose a different world view.

Who said I supported it via war? The US never invaded Ukraine.

I'm not a Republican but I strongly approve of getting rid of world leaders I don't like. Obviously I don't agree with Republicans on such leaders. Would I support removing Bolsonaro, Modi, Putin and Duterte? Yes, just like I approved of the ouster of Yankovych in Ukraine.

Yeah, that worked out really well for us in Iraq.

I opposed the Iraq War.

Okay, explain to me exactly how you want to go about removing democratically elected governments if not through force? And make no mistake, as much as I detest Bolsonaro and Duterte, and many of their policies, they are the democratically elected heads of sovereign nations — nations that remain staunch US allies, and trying to isolate them would only harm our interests and the people of those nations more.

God I’m glad you don’t run our foreign policy.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I'm not a Republican but I strongly approve of getting rid of world leaders I don't like. Obviously I don't agree with Republicans on such leaders. Would I support removing Bolsonaro, Modi, Putin and Duterte? Yes, just like I approved of the ouster of Yankovych in Ukraine.

Then send your own children to die in and fight those wars. Spend your own tax money to fund the million dollar missiles and trillion dollar fighter jet programs. I’d rather spend that money doing nation building at home instead of trying to overthrow democratically elected governments whether I agree with their policies or not. You’re no better than Republicans, not by a sliver, you just want to impose a different world view.

Yankovych wasn't removed via force. I support backing any such movements to oust terrible governments.

Your next point sounds like a Republican. "BUT OUR ALLIES AND INTERESTS" same logic leads to support for Saudi Arabia. I wouldn't invade Brazil or the Philippines (or Turkey for that matter) I would support ending all foreign aid to them, withdrawing all troops from those countries and sanctioning anyone who works for their governments.

You’re a parody of yourself, I don’t know what else to say, letting you talk is your own foil.

What exactly are you going to sanction them for? The results of their democratic elections? Are we going to continue those sanctions until new elections are held and you’re satisfied with the results? Should the European Union and Canada have sanctioned us for electing Donald Trump? Will all countries with ideologically opposed governments now begin to sanction each other each time democratic elections don’t go the way they want? Madness.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I'm not a Republican but I strongly approve of getting rid of world leaders I don't like. Obviously I don't agree with Republicans on such leaders. Would I support removing Bolsonaro, Modi, Putin and Duterte? Yes, just like I approved of the ouster of Yankovych in Ukraine.

Then send your own children to die in and fight those wars. Spend your own tax money to fund the million dollar missiles and trillion dollar fighter jet programs. I’d rather spend that money doing nation building at home instead of trying to overthrow democratically elected governments whether I agree with their policies or not. You’re no better than Republicans, not by a sliver, you just want to impose a different world view.

Yankovych wasn't removed via force. I support backing any such movements to oust terrible governments.

Your next point sounds like a Republican. "BUT OUR ALLIES AND INTERESTS" same logic leads to support for Saudi Arabia. I wouldn't invade Brazil or the Philippines (or Turkey for that matter) I would support ending all foreign aid to them, withdrawing all troops from those countries and sanctioning anyone who works for their governments.

You’re a parody of yourself, I don’t know what else to say, letting you talk is your own foil.

What exactly are you going to sanction them for? The results of their democratic elections? Are we going to continue those sanctions until new elections are held and you’re satisfied with the results? Should the European Union and Canada have sanctioned us for electing Donald Trump? Will all countries with ideologically opposed governments now begin to sanction each other each time democratic elections don’t go the way they want? Madness.

Not so much the results of those elections but the actions those elected governments have taken. And yes I would support Canada and the EU freezing assets and banning travel of Trump Admin officials.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Can’t even articulate a text comeback to BRTD. You are embarrassing yourself yet again.

Your presence on this forum is embarrassing

One more ad hominem attack and you shall be placed on my ignore list.

That would be a blessing.