High production value for Tulsi's new ad

[Blue3]

https://youtu.be/FPi4VAJtPL4

I really think she's going to be a dark horse.


She's been taking everything much more seriously than Castro, and she's come out hitting harder than even the big shots like Warren and Gillibrand and Harris so far.

[Hammy]

https://youtu.be/FPi4VAJtPL4

I really think she's going to be a dark horse.


She's been taking everything much more seriously than Castro, and she's come out hitting harder than even the big shots like Warren and Gillibrand and Harris so far.

Too bad the ad's the only part of her campaign that's of any value.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

I love her

[scutosaurus]

That would be a great ad if anyone not named Tulsi Gabbard was in it.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Tulsi is currently 2. on my list, after Elizabeth Warren, and my # 1 pick for VP for any candidate.

[Mr. Smith]

This ad did a lot more than the pretty little speech over at that rally that I probably could've broken the Sabbath for and spent the money to take the metro to get to if I wanted.

Still no Ojeda or Brown, but until Warren can smooth out some edges, she's the best we've got.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I guess all that money Assad and Putin sent were put in good use.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I guess all that money Assad and Putin sent were put in good use.

Proof? Even slightly weird/credible internet proof? Anything?

[John Dule]

That would be a great ad if anyone not named Tulsi Gabbard was in it.

Can someone explain to me the animosity towards Gabbard on this board? Is it literally just because establishment supporters fear the threat of the anti-establishment moderate?

[JA]

That would be a great ad if anyone not named Tulsi Gabbard was in it.

Can someone explain to me the animosity towards Gabbard on this board? Is it literally just because establishment supporters fear the threat of the anti-establishment moderate?

She’s a homophobic, conversion therapy supporting, Hindu rightwing nationalist loving, Assad coddling, Breitbart approved Islamophobe. Need any more reasons?

[Mr. Morden]

I prefer presidential campaign ads that have production values like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rZdAB4V_j8

[John Dule]

That would be a great ad if anyone not named Tulsi Gabbard was in it.

Can someone explain to me the animosity towards Gabbard on this board? Is it literally just because establishment supporters fear the threat of the anti-establishment moderate?

She’s a homophobic, conversion therapy supporting, Hindu rightwing nationalist loving, Assad coddling, Breitbart approved Islamophobe. Need any more reasons?

I assume you're referring to her closeness with Modi, who has done more for India in four years than the corrupt leftist Congress Party has done in 40. I assume that she, like everyone else, recognized that fact and supports Modi in spite of his fearmongering, not because of it. Regardless, India gets a pass for nationalism from me simply because its formation was so centered around ethnic/religious identity. What passes for far-right tribalism in the US is pretty moderate there.

As for the homophobia accusation, wasn't virtually every Democrat against gay marriage before 2010? Clinton and Obama were both pro-traditional marriage, and some of their statements would look radical today. And Gabbard is the only one of them whose pivot appears to be genuinely motivated by personal experience, rather than simply calculating that 51% of the voter base now supports gay marriage.

The Assad thing is a literal meme and I'm not gonna give it oxygen it doesn't deserve.

[7,052,770]

That would be a great ad if anyone not named Tulsi Gabbard was in it.

Can someone explain to me the animosity towards Gabbard on this board? Is it literally just because establishment supporters fear the threat of the anti-establishment moderate?

So now she's a moderate again? I've read here over and over she's one of the most progressive Democrats in Congress.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

I guess all that money Assad and Putin sent were put in good use.

[John Dule]

I guess all that money Assad and Putin sent were put in good use.

Everyone I don't like is a Russian troll.

[Deleted User #4049]

I guess all that money Assad and Putin sent were put in good use.

Everyone I don't like is a Russian troll.

Don't bother engaging with him. It's a waste of your time.

[Thatkat04]

Tulsi's trip to Syria to talk to Assad is disqualifying. Sorry.

[Kleine Scheiße]

Regardless, India gets a pass for nationalism from me simply because its formation was so centered around ethnic/religious identity. What passes for far-right tribalism in the US is pretty moderate there.

Gandhi would like a word with you.

[John Dule]

Regardless, India gets a pass for nationalism from me simply because its formation was so centered around ethnic/religious identity. What passes for far-right tribalism in the US is pretty moderate there.

Gandhi would like a word with you.

Gandhi, who looked down on black people and believed that the state should be subservient to the culture it rules over (thereby allowing for private discriminatory practices to continue in every community across the country)? The one who, despite all this, is now an icon of the left? That Gandhi?

[John Dule]

Tulsi's trip to Syria to talk to Assad is disqualifying. Sorry.

Uh-oh-- it's not just Gabbard. John Kerry is a secret Assad supporter too!



Wait, wait-- I'm getting some breaking news. Obama is a Russian spy. Yes, Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, met with a war criminal, a KGB officer, and a dictator responsible for silencing journalists and dissenters across his country. Obama confirmed for Kremlin troll account!



But there's more. Obama's not even the first US president to be in league with the Russians. Feast your eyes on this damning evidence!

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Yeah, I'm curious why someone who's running (partially) on her military experience would be disqualified by her ability to be diplomatic. Hawk Dem? Disqualifying. Diplomatic, willing to meet with hostile foreign leaders? Also disqualifying. Pick a lane.

[John Dule]

Yeah, I'm curious why someone who's running (partially) on her military experience would be disqualified by her ability to be diplomatic. Hawk Dem? Disqualifying. Diplomatic, willing to meet with hostile foreign leaders? Also disqualifying. Pick a lane.

I really can't fathom why simply meeting with Assad is suddenly seen as a disqualifier. When did Democrats start pushing for regime change in the Middle East? Has the world turned upside-down?

Twitter has been shilling all-out against Gabbard for two weeks straight. The backlash against her is disproportionate to say the least. It's gotten so bad that I've begun to think this is actually a smear campaign orchestrated by the establishment to get her to drop out and elevate Harris.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Yeah, I'm curious why someone who's running (partially) on her military experience would be disqualified by her ability to be diplomatic. Hawk Dem? Disqualifying. Diplomatic, willing to meet with hostile foreign leaders? Also disqualifying. Pick a lane.

I really can't fathom why simply meeting with Assad is suddenly seen as a disqualifier. When did Democrats start pushing for regime change in the Middle East? Has the world turned upside-down?

Twitter has been shilling all-out against Gabbard for two weeks straight. The backlash against her is disproportionate to say the least. It's gotten so bad that I've begun to think this is actually a smear campaign orchestrated by the establishment to get her to drop out and elevate Harris.

We have discussed ad nauseum why Gabbard is a stooge for Assad and Putin. We are not going to do it again for every new member. Do a search and read.

[Jags]

Yeah, I'm curious why someone who's running (partially) on her military experience would be disqualified by her ability to be diplomatic. Hawk Dem? Disqualifying. Diplomatic, willing to meet with hostile foreign leaders? Also disqualifying. Pick a lane.

I really can't fathom why simply meeting with Assad is suddenly seen as a disqualifier. When did Democrats start pushing for regime change in the Middle East? Has the world turned upside-down?

Twitter has been shilling all-out against Gabbard for two weeks straight. The backlash against her is disproportionate to say the least. It's gotten so bad that I've begun to think this is actually a smear campaign orchestrated by the establishment to get her to drop out and elevate Harris.

We have discussed ad nauseum why Gabbard is a stooge for Assad and Putin. We are not going to do it again for every new member. Do a search and read.

What a way to welcome new members, especially from someone with some of the most hilariously bad takes on this forum

[Kleine Scheiße]

Regardless, India gets a pass for nationalism from me simply because its formation was so centered around ethnic/religious identity. What passes for far-right tribalism in the US is pretty moderate there.

Gandhi would like a word with you.

Gandhi, who looked down on black people and believed that the state should be subservient to the culture it rules over (thereby allowing for private discriminatory practices to continue in every community across the country)? The one who, despite all this, is now an icon of the left? That Gandhi?

This isn't a conversation about left or right and it's certainly not a conversation about whether Gandhi was a good person. Gandhi is universally accepted as as a matter of fact as the father of the modern "India" and it's not really arguable his entire point in doing so was specifically to not form a nation around religious and ethnic identity. He initially didn't even want India to be independent, but instead to be treated as an equal part of the British empire to the mainland. Hardly ethno-religious nationalism.

It is universally accepted that Gandhi had racist views about black people, especially during his law practice in England. In large part, this worldview was shaken by his personal experiences with racial discrimination when he was in South Africa. He was certainly not a steadfast racist throughout his entire life, though he did struggle with practicing what he preached.

Of course, none of that is relevant to establishing whether India was intended to be an ethno-religious state, nor is that other bizarre and vague claim in the first half of your post.