Why is Tulsi Gabbard bashed far more than Bernie Sanders?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

According to some here the ONLY reason Tulsi gets as much as hate as she does is she endorsed Sanders and only gets it from die-hard Clinton hacks, (including some who are as such despite voting for Sanders.)

So why doesn't Sanders himself get anywhere near this much? I mean if endorsing Bernie Sanders is so terrible, you'd think being him would be the worst thing ever.

Bernie has been bashed at least as much, although he's mentioned more, so in a lower percentage of the cases he's mentioned. Also, Bernie would probably get more sh**t from the establishment posters if he'd mentioned foreign policy more.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As I said yesterday and will repeat today in a simplified down manner, she's dovish in the sense she's the opposite of the neocons but also comes across as a bit wreckless, as evident by her foreign policy trip to Syria and is a Hindu nationalist. I don't mind her terribly in Congress but I wouldn't trust her as POTUS.

Her foreign policy is much less reckless than the establishment foreign policy which supported arming every random jihadist in Syria.

And this whole Hindu nationalist thing has been blown out of proportion. Yes, she has met the members of the ruling party of India, BJP. She has also met INC members.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As I said yesterday and will repeat today in a simplified down manner, she's dovish in the sense she's the opposite of the neocons but also comes across as a bit wreckless, as evident by her foreign policy trip to Syria and is a Hindu nationalist. I don't mind her terribly in Congress but I wouldn't trust her as POTUS.

Her foreign policy is much less reckless than the establishment foreign policy which supported arming every random jihadist in Syria.

And this whole Hindu nationalist thing has been blown out of proportion. Yes, she has met the members of the ruling party of India, BJP. She has also met INC members.

I don't disagree with you on the first bit, but I'd rather have someone who would arm as close to no one as possible (which is what Sanders/Gillibrand/Warren would be more likely to do than Gabbard).

As for the Hindu nationalist thing, https://qz.com/628124/tulsi-gabbard-the-first-hindu-in-the-us-congress-on-modi-hinduism-and-linking-islam-to-terror/ makes me think it's not exactly a nothingberger.

Warren is definitely more hawkish. She voted for the $80 billion military increase. Gabbard voted against that.

Modi does suck, but no one cared when Obama met him again 2 months ago in Delhi.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Wait, so you now support a more hawkish stance on Iran?

Whoosh. Schumer opposed the Iran deal and Gabbard supports it.

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Has anybody claimed that Schumer is a dove?
If not, then your whataboutism is asinine.

And by the way, go seek medical help.

Why don't you attack Schumer instead, then?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As I said yesterday and will repeat today in a simplified down manner, she's dovish in the sense she's the opposite of the neocons but also comes across as a bit wreckless, as evident by her foreign policy trip to Syria and is a Hindu nationalist. I don't mind her terribly in Congress but I wouldn't trust her as POTUS.

Her foreign policy is much less reckless than the establishment foreign policy which supported arming every random jihadist in Syria.

And this whole Hindu nationalist thing has been blown out of proportion. Yes, she has met the members of the ruling party of India, BJP. She has also met INC members.

I don't disagree with you on the first bit, but I'd rather have someone who would arm as close to no one as possible (which is what Sanders/Gillibrand/Warren would be more likely to do than Gabbard).

As for the Hindu nationalist thing, https://qz.com/628124/tulsi-gabbard-the-first-hindu-in-the-us-congress-on-modi-hinduism-and-linking-islam-to-terror/ makes me think it's not exactly a nothingberger.

Warren is definitely more hawkish. She voted for the $80 billion military increase. Gabbard voted against that.

Modi does suck, but no one cared when Obama met him again 2 months ago in Delhi.

Because it's not like meeting with leaders of other countries is the president's job or anything.

Obama wasn't President 2 months ago.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Remember when Hawaii had that false missle alarm and Tulsi Gabbard's response was to go on Twitter and demand retaliatory strikes on North Korea?

did she actually say that?

if she did I have a new respect for her

join us
for what it's worth, I don't support Gabbard, though

Are you guys serious? Publicunofficial was clearly joking, since she was one of the first to say it was a false alarm.