NATION

PASSWORD

2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Which Candidate do you support?

Bernie
102
33%
Beto
3
1%
Biden
15
5%
Buttigieg
27
9%
Harris
4
1%
Warren
17
6%
Yang
24
8%
Trump
88
29%
Weld
3
1%
Other
25
8%
 
Total votes : 308

User avatar
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29753
Founded: Dec 18, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:40 am

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:
Sorry, I've never been a great speller.


Thank yourself that you do not live in the world of Harry Potter then!

(Goddamn leftists and their endless Harry Potter comparisons...)


Never got that much into Harry Potter, but I liked what little I saw of it.

Thermodolia wrote:Unlike the SJWs I don’t give a shit about what someone said almost 8+ years ago.


This and to be honest I'm so sick of Trump fucking up the US that I just want someone sensible to be the next president.
❤BITTEN BY THE VAMPIRE QUEEN OF COOKIES❤ NSwiki WA Ambassador: Silver Zephyr. NS's sexyest user 2016 Male 18-29 NSG 2016 Award for Humour 2018 award for most friendly poster (tied with Luminesa)
WBC 38 Postseason team, WBC 40 Postseason Quarterfinalist team, WBC 41 Semifinalists, WBC 42 Third place
Feel the Bern 2020 Trump disrespected fallen heroes beacuse of a little rain
Rainbow dash Is best pony.Scootalove is best love.A love letter to NS

User avatar
United States of Natan
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5727
Founded: Jul 21, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby United States of Natan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:06 am

Thermodolia wrote:
United States of Natan wrote: :rofl: Dude, you're literally claiming that Tulsi is allowed to change her mind (when in fact, she admitted she hasn't changed her personal stance, she just claims that she thinks the government shouldn't interfere, and only changed it for political expedience)

So? I’m fine if people don’t personally agree with things but believe that the government shouldn’t interfere. I’m that way with abortion.

but that somehow, Hillary isn't (and in fact, Hillary has always been supportive of gay rights, as per this tweet thread that goes into extensive detail on her record: https://twitter.com/LisaTalmadge/status ... 2505559044). This is my problem with far leftists like yourself. They act far more like republicans than Democrats. The line is surprisingly blurry.

No she hasn’t been. She’s only been pro-gay since the mid 2010s.

You are living proof that the horseshoe theory is true. The extremes are far closer than they seem.

You aren’t in the center dude.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Oh my God, this is too funny. You're a laugh riot. Hillary is a bigot in the same way the Sun orbits around the Earth. Maybe get your head out of the right-wing propaganda machine for once and do some research. If Hillary is a bigot, then you're basically saying almost everyone else in the world is one.

She makes racist jokes about people and she only changed to pro gay because it was politically expedient to do so.

As for Tulsi Gabbard's antisemitism, it's pretty blatant, and if you can't see it, then you don't know what antisemitism is.

Ya this Jew isn’t seeing. Maybe you could support your bullshit claim?

Anyway dude, if you want to support far-right conservative like Tulsi, go right ahead. I'm just telling you what her record is. If you ignore it, that's on you. You'll have to live with knowing you'd rather just ignore facts and support a right-wing extremist masquerading as a leftist than actually do the research and learn the facts. I know I wouldn't want that kind of life.

She’s not a right wing extremist masquerading as a leftist. She’s just not a super liberal SJW.

Keep your head in the sand all you want. It still won't make you right.

And as a Jew, I know antisemitism when I see it. Tulsi has it in spades.

And I know I'm not in the center. But I also know that I'm not far left. I'm more in between the two; in other words, a Progressive.
Then it's a lie. Everything Fox News says is a lie.
Even true things once said on Fox News become lies.
(Family Guy: Excellence in Broadcasting)

Come check out the Natan Region, a fun, democratic region|Harris/O'Rourke 2020|
Liberal|Progressive|Hillary Supporter|Jew|Pro-Israel|Anti-Trump|Anti-Sanders|Anti-Bigotry

User avatar
Western Vale Confederacy
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9219
Founded: Nov 09, 2014
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:08 am

United States of Natan wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:So? I’m fine if people don’t personally agree with things but believe that the government shouldn’t interfere. I’m that way with abortion.


No she hasn’t been. She’s only been pro-gay since the mid 2010s.


You aren’t in the center dude.


She makes racist jokes about people and she only changed to pro gay because it was politically expedient to do so.


Ya this Jew isn’t seeing. Maybe you could support your bullshit claim?


She’s not a right wing extremist masquerading as a leftist. She’s just not a super liberal SJW.

Keep your head in the sand all you want. It still won't make you right.

And as a Jew, I know antisemitism when I see it. Tulsi has it in spades.

And I know I'm not in the center. But I also know that I'm not far left. I'm more in between the two; in other words, a Progressive.


Therm, another Jew, doesn't see any anti-semitism.

Ya gonna provide actual hard proof or not?

User avatar
Bahktar
Envoy
 
Posts: 298
Founded: Mar 16, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bahktar » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:08 am

United States of Natan wrote:Keep your head in the sand all you want. It still won't make you right.

And as a Jew, I know antisemitism when I see it. Tulsi has it in spades.

And I know I'm not in the center. But I also know that I'm not far left. I'm more in between the two; in other words, a Progressive.


I think there are better candidates than Gabbard which is obvious considering my statements the past 2 pages, but I would really want to see in what way Tulsi Gabbard is supposedly anti-semitic. Please provide some sort of factual evidence, rather than, "I'm a Jew, so I know it."
Is it be cause of Syria?
Last edited by Bahktar on Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The South Falls
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10741
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The South Falls » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:11 am

Yea. natan, are we in agreement that if Sanders wins the primary, we are to let him run?
This is an MT or PMT nation that reflects some of my beliefs, trade deals and debate always welcome! Call me TeaSF. A level 8, according to This Index.
Satsuki is in fact the edgiest I could get without breaking site rules.
You have seen a wild South Fallus Fallusi Texaso nativa. Your Friendly Neighborhood Black Kid. Social Democrat,
sometimes breaks rules. Sorry! I've got myself a nice situation with tea, so I'm doing good there.

Political Compass Results:

Economic: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.28

I make dumb jokes. I'm really serious about that. Yes, we're pretty much a different Australia.

User avatar
Shrillland
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9231
Founded: Apr 12, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Shrillland » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:17 am

Bahktar wrote:
United States of Natan wrote:Keep your head in the sand all you want. It still won't make you right.

And as a Jew, I know antisemitism when I see it. Tulsi has it in spades.

And I know I'm not in the center. But I also know that I'm not far left. I'm more in between the two; in other words, a Progressive.


I think there are better candidates than Gabbard which is obvious considering my statements the past 2 pages, but I would really want to see in what way Tulsi Gabbard is supposedly anti-semitic. Please provide some sort of factual evidence, rather than, "I'm a Jew, so I know it."
Is it be cause of Syria?


It could be because she's more critical of Israel than some others , but criticising Israel's separation policies doesn't, IMO, equate to outright antisemitism.
Help a fellow NSGer(Eternal Lotharia) become a city councillor!
Factbook
Embassy
2 Days since the 2020 Megathread was 2016-jacked Maximum Period without 2016-jack: 17 Days
In 1963, Doctor Who taught us all we need to know about politics when a cave woman said, "Old men see no further than tomorrow's meat".

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8916
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:29 am

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
United States of Natan wrote:Keep your head in the sand all you want. It still won't make you right.

And as a Jew, I know antisemitism when I see it. Tulsi has it in spades.

And I know I'm not in the center. But I also know that I'm not far left. I'm more in between the two; in other words, a Progressive.


Therm, another Jew, doesn't see any anti-semitism.

Ya gonna provide actual hard proof or not?


As a fan of indie music, I can tell that Tulsi has a vociferous hatred of indie music in spades.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Civil Liberties, Pragmatism.

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8916
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:29 am

Also, Castro has announced he will be running. I don't see him exactly inspiring that many voters, though I'm sure he can wrangle together a sizable amount of fundraising.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Civil Liberties, Pragmatism.

User avatar
Ism
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5486
Founded: Oct 14, 2011
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ism » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:52 am

Shrillland wrote:
Bahktar wrote:
I think there are better candidates than Gabbard which is obvious considering my statements the past 2 pages, but I would really want to see in what way Tulsi Gabbard is supposedly anti-semitic. Please provide some sort of factual evidence, rather than, "I'm a Jew, so I know it."
Is it be cause of Syria?


It could be because she's more critical of Israel than some others , but criticising Israel's separation policies doesn't, IMO, equate to outright antisemitism.


Yeah I checked around a bit, but I didn't see anything. The closest things I saw were criticizing Israel, which is not in and of itself anti-semitic, and having her trip to Syria paid for by a group that might have ties to anti-semitic groups, which even without the uncertainty of it, doesn't prove anything either. There's nothing that's pointing to Gabbard being anti-semitic, not that I can see anyway.

User avatar
Ngelmish
Minister
 
Posts: 2168
Founded: Dec 06, 2009
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ngelmish » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:42 pm

Major-Tom wrote:Also, Castro has announced he will be running. I don't see him exactly inspiring that many voters, though I'm sure he can wrangle together a sizable amount of fundraising.


Presumably he's trying to get out in front of a potential O'Rourke candidacy. I doubt it'll be much help for him one way or the other.

User avatar
The Black Party
Minister
 
Posts: 2566
Founded: Oct 31, 2017
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby The Black Party » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:44 pm

I'm sorry guys but if Donald Trump could win, Kanye West definitely could, and definitely will.
The Sovereign Nation-State of The Black Party
"The Black Flag Will Rule Forever"
1919 - 1981

User avatar
Bahktar
Envoy
 
Posts: 298
Founded: Mar 16, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bahktar » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:50 pm

The Black Party wrote:I'm sorry guys but if Donald Trump could win, Kanye West definitely could, and definitely will.


What about Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson? :bow:
Last edited by Bahktar on Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Western Vale Confederacy
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9219
Founded: Nov 09, 2014
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:53 pm

Bahktar wrote:
The Black Party wrote:I'm sorry guys but if Donald Trump could win, Kanye West definitely could, and definitely will.


What about Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson? :bow:


How about you throw in Peter Griffin, Homer Simpson and Stan from American Dad just to crown the fucking pile of manure that are celebrities running for the position of President?

User avatar
Bahktar
Envoy
 
Posts: 298
Founded: Mar 16, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bahktar » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:58 pm

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:How about you throw in Peter Griffin, Homer Simpson and Stan from American Dad just to crown the fucking pile of manure that are celebrities running for the position of President?


Have you heard of a thing called sarcasm, or a joke? I wasn't being serious about Dwayne Johnson, it was a joke suggestion. Of course, if he gained political experience and got elected to office, and if I supported his policies, then I would consider it.

Personally, I'm rooting for O' Rourke, however, he hasn't announced his candidacy yet. I'm not a one-hundred percent sure either, but I've got my eye on him and I like what I've seen so far.

User avatar
Salandriagado
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17578
Founded: Apr 03, 2008
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Salandriagado » Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:00 pm

Shrillland wrote:
Bahktar wrote:
I think there are better candidates than Gabbard which is obvious considering my statements the past 2 pages, but I would really want to see in what way Tulsi Gabbard is supposedly anti-semitic. Please provide some sort of factual evidence, rather than, "I'm a Jew, so I know it."
Is it be cause of Syria?


It could be because she's more critical of Israel than some others , but criticising Israel's separation policies doesn't, IMO, equate to outright antisemitism.


I remind you that you're posting on a forum that has condemned people for antisemetism for making the statement "states don't have rights, people have rights" and not excluding Israel from the "states don't have rights" bit.
Cosara wrote:
Anachronous Rex wrote:Good thing most a majority of people aren't so small-minded, and frightened of other's sexuality.

Over 40% (including me), are, so I fixed the post for accuracy.

Vilatania wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
Notice that the link is to the notes from a university course on probability. You clearly have nothing beyond the most absurdly simplistic understanding of the subject.
By choosing 1, you no longer have 0 probability of choosing 1. End of subject.

(read up the quote stack)

Deal. £3000 do?[/quote]

Of course.[/quote]

User avatar
The Archregimancy
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 23039
Founded: Aug 01, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Archregimancy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:36 pm

Leaving aside the disagreements - and the slightly heated thread rhetoric - over her actual politics, I don't for a second think that Tulsi Gabbard has the slightest chance of being elected president in 2020.

I just don't think the United States is going to elect a 39-year-old* half-Polynesian vegetarian Hindu woman from American Samoa who represents Hawaii in Congress as its president.

Is that fair? Almost certainly not. Is it realistic? Likely yes.

Even leaving aside all of the other factors, she'd be the youngest person elected to the presidency by a good four years (beating Kennedy; Theodore Roosevelt was a year younger than Kennedy on assuming office, but wasn't elected). She'd also only the be the second person to be elected to to the presidency straight from the House; Garfield was the other, and even he was a senator-elect at the time. Surely she has an eye on either 2024 or the vice-presidency rather than seriously thinking she's going to win the Democratic nomination for 2020.


*Age at the 2020 election, if I'm calculating correctly.

User avatar
Bahktar
Envoy
 
Posts: 298
Founded: Mar 16, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bahktar » Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:43 pm

If Tulsi Gabbard was nominated by the Democratic Party as their presidential nominee for 2020, at that point I'd wager she does have a good chance of being elected, if national trends continue as they have or get worse, with Trump's approval rating being under 45% for most of the time.

However, the problem is her getting the nomination, which I believe is nearly impossible. I'd say if she was nominated, she'd have a good chance, but she doesn't really have a good chance at being President, because said nomination is in the way.
Last edited by Bahktar on Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8916
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:10 pm

Ngelmish wrote:
Major-Tom wrote:Also, Castro has announced he will be running. I don't see him exactly inspiring that many voters, though I'm sure he can wrangle together a sizable amount of fundraising.


Presumably he's trying to get out in front of a potential O'Rourke candidacy. I doubt it'll be much help for him one way or the other.


He'll fizzle sometime around the Iowa Caucus, provided he doesn't drop out before then. I know donors will go for him initially, given his role in the Obama administration, as well as his close ties to the DNC, etc etc, but what he lacks is name recognition and Beto levels of charisma.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Civil Liberties, Pragmatism.

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8916
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:11 pm

The Archregimancy wrote:Leaving aside the disagreements - and the slightly heated thread rhetoric - over her actual politics, I don't for a second think that Tulsi Gabbard has the slightest chance of being elected president in 2020.

I just don't think the United States is going to elect a 39-year-old* half-Polynesian vegetarian Hindu woman from American Samoa who represents Hawaii in Congress as its president.

Is that fair? Almost certainly not. Is it realistic? Likely yes.

Even leaving aside all of the other factors, she'd be the youngest person elected to the presidency by a good four years (beating Kennedy; Theodore Roosevelt was a year younger than Kennedy on assuming office, but wasn't elected). She'd also only the be the second person to be elected to to the presidency straight from the House; Garfield was the other, and even he was a senator-elect at the time. Surely she has an eye on either 2024 or the vice-presidency rather than seriously thinking she's going to win the Democratic nomination for 2020.


*Age at the 2020 election, if I'm calculating correctly.


I could see her potentially appealing to a niche group of voters and making it to New Hampshire, before running out of funds and essentially being forced to dropout. Middle America, Establishment Dems & Suburban Dems wouldn't go for her, for better or worse.
Last edited by Major-Tom on Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Civil Liberties, Pragmatism.

User avatar
Eternal Lotharia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5353
Founded: Dec 27, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Eternal Lotharia » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:19 pm

Major-Tom wrote:
Eternal Lotharia wrote:
1: There's a strong argument for it being opportunistic, seeing the winds change.
2: Modi is a crappy leader, and dangerous.
3: Yeah...supporting a genocidal dictator....I don't see her as qualified for being a politician, much less president, due to her record.
4:It's exactly who doesn't distrust her and for what reasons. It's not the fact some republicans thought she was ok, it's what they think she's ok for.



You could say the same about probably half of the prominent Democrats per your first point tbh.

Secondly, Modi is pretty shitty, dunno about dangerous.

Third, yeah, the Assad thing bugs me. As I said, I probably wouldn't vote for her. My point is really that I hate seeing people who I know to be pretty level-headed and reasonable (IE yourself) stooping to Tea Party levels of scare tactics (the nazi thing, full on bigot thing, dangerous for America etc).

It tends to irk me when people can't just focus on the issues they have with a person, and stick to that basis, instead of getting up in arms about it.


Well, in all honesty, I do see her as the closest thing we have to a Nazi in federal office.
And opportunism, granted, I'll give you that to an extent, but I feel like she's flip-flopped too hard and I'm skeptical that she actually believes her more liberal views. In India there's a bitter debate if Modi is dangerous, or possibly a dictator. I'm admittedly mixed but left it in there as a possibility for fairness reasons and caution.

And, while I do agree foreign policy disagreements should be encouraged, I still think the Assad thing fully disqualifies her for the Democrats. I just think she's not caring about human rights, and so I cannot help but see her as dangerous to our ideals.

And I cannot support a flip-flopper who supports a brutal genocidal dictator and has many views that are more republican, to an extent that some of the far-right like her.

I don't mind that they like her, but it's why they do that I have an issue with her, as well as the many other things. If some of the worst of the far-right like you, and many racists, for reasons that are similar to yours, I believe you should reconsider your beliefs and see if you truly are a Democrat. DINO's don't exist mostly, but I do see politicians who are dangerous to the party, mostly when it comes to human rights.


The Anti-Semitism and Assad things are to me a dealbreaker and to me disqualifies her from being a Democrat, not due to ideological differences, but due to concern about discrimination, prejudice, support or neglect of pursuing those who persecute those groups, and lack of human rights concerns.

United States of Natan wrote:
Eternal Lotharia wrote:

Yeah, let's not stoop to the low level of some Republicans with RINO/DINO accusations, or by nominating Gabbard. She is a horrible Nominee. Bigoted Antisemite who is the closest thing we have to an actual Nazi in the Democratic party, and believe me, the Republicans will take advantage of that.

EXACTLY what I've been saying! I'm Jewish, so hell will freeze over before I'm caught dead voting for an antisemite, or a bigot in general. If I have to, I'll write in Hillary.


I'm also part-jewish. Tulsi Gabbard is very worrying.
2020 congress rp/social experiment mix. Jump in!
Keyboard being a pain. Will take longer to do stuff until further notice.
This flag does not represent my nation being evil or nazi, fascist, etc., it's not. I'm also not any of those.
This nation's Policies partially represent my views, partially are experimental, same thing with how my nation is in RP.
Left-Wing Christian Pro-Life Pragmatic Populist. Oregonian.
Candidate for City Council of a large city.
The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:
Eternal Lotharia wrote:Just like your life.

Woah. Okay. Harsh. True, but harsh.

User avatar
The Archregimancy
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 23039
Founded: Aug 01, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Archregimancy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:19 pm

Major-Tom wrote:
The Archregimancy wrote:Leaving aside the disagreements - and the slightly heated thread rhetoric - over her actual politics, I don't for a second think that Tulsi Gabbard has the slightest chance of being elected president in 2020.

I just don't think the United States is going to elect a 39-year-old* half-Polynesian vegetarian Hindu woman from American Samoa who represents Hawaii in Congress as its president.

Is that fair? Almost certainly not. Is it realistic? Likely yes.

Even leaving aside all of the other factors, she'd be the youngest person elected to the presidency by a good four years (beating Kennedy; Theodore Roosevelt was a year younger than Kennedy on assuming office, but wasn't elected). She'd also only the be the second person to be elected to to the presidency straight from the House; Garfield was the other, and even he was a senator-elect at the time. Surely she has an eye on either 2024 or the vice-presidency rather than seriously thinking she's going to win the Democratic nomination for 2020.


*Age at the 2020 election, if I'm calculating correctly.


I could see her potentially appealing to a niche group of voters and making it to New Hampshire, before running out of funds and essentially being forced to dropout. Middle America, Establishment Dems & Suburban Dems wouldn't go for her, for better or worse.


As I said, she's surely positioning herself for the vice-presidency, and/or a more serious tilt at the presidency in 2024 or 2028 (when she'd still only be in her 40s).

What a shame that by then the combination of the Kingdom of Hawai'i overturning its illegal annexation by the United States, and [Western] Samoa's surprise 2025 invasion of American Samoa will have made her ineligible for the office.

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8916
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:21 pm

Eternal Lotharia wrote:
Major-Tom wrote:

You could say the same about probably half of the prominent Democrats per your first point tbh.

Secondly, Modi is pretty shitty, dunno about dangerous.

Third, yeah, the Assad thing bugs me. As I said, I probably wouldn't vote for her. My point is really that I hate seeing people who I know to be pretty level-headed and reasonable (IE yourself) stooping to Tea Party levels of scare tactics (the nazi thing, full on bigot thing, dangerous for America etc).

It tends to irk me when people can't just focus on the issues they have with a person, and stick to that basis, instead of getting up in arms about it.


Well, in all honesty, I do see her as the closest thing we have to a Nazi in federal office.
And opportunism, granted, I'll give you that to an extent, but I feel like she's flip-flopped too hard and I'm skeptical that she actually believes her more liberal views. In India there's a bitter debate if Modi is dangerous, or possibly a dictator. I'm admittedly mixed but left it in there as a possibility for fairness reasons and caution.

And, while I do agree foreign policy disagreements should be encouraged, I still think the Assad thing fully disqualifies her for the Democrats. I just think she's not caring about human rights, and so I cannot help but see her as dangerous to our ideals.

And I cannot support a flip-flopper who supports a brutal genocidal dictator and has many views that are more republican, to an extent that some of the far-right like her.

I don't mind that they like her, but it's why they do that I have an issue with her, as well as the many other things. If some of the worst of the far-right like you, and many racists, for reasons that are similar to yours, I believe you should reconsider your beliefs and see if you truly are a Democrat. DINO's don't exist mostly, but I do see politicians who are dangerous to the party, mostly when it comes to human rights.


The Anti-Semitism and Assad things are to me a dealbreaker and to me disqualifies her from being a Democrat, not due to ideological differences, but due to concern about discrimination, prejudice, support or neglect of pursuing those who persecute those groups, and lack of human rights concerns.

United States of Natan wrote:EXACTLY what I've been saying! I'm Jewish, so hell will freeze over before I'm caught dead voting for an antisemite, or a bigot in general. If I have to, I'll write in Hillary.


I'm also part-jewish. Tulsi Gabbard is very worrying.



Listen, this Gabbard argument that has flooded this particular topic has become redundant, the epitome of a dead horse getting it's shit kicked in. That said - my objection was really with the adjectives you had chosen to use. I myself really don't think I can convince you that some of your grievances are perhaps overstated and heavy-handed, and I generally enjoy your posts, so Imma just leave this one be.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Civil Liberties, Pragmatism.

User avatar
Varaskia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 6
Founded: Dec 28, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Varaskia » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:22 pm

Not very familiar with Gabbard, but I get the impression she's probably a little bit too dovish for the right of the Democratic party to be their first choice, and too suspect in terms of her views on Islam and her friendship with Narendra Modi to gain traction with the bulk of the emergent left. Everybody is put off by the admiration she's garnered among certain right-wing circles, from folk like Steve Bannon. Where's her base really going to come from?

User avatar
Telconi
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23104
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:23 pm

Varaskia wrote:Not very familiar with Gabbard, but I get the impression she's probably a little bit too dovish for the right of the Democratic party to be their first choice, and too suspect in terms of her views on Islam and her friendship with Narendra Modi to gain traction with the bulk of the emergent left. Everybody is put off by the admiration she's garnered among certain right-wing circles, from folk like Steve Bannon. Where's her base really going to come from?


Moderates who are thrilled to have a Democrat they can support.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Ism
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5486
Founded: Oct 14, 2011
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ism » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:23 pm

Major-Tom wrote:
The Archregimancy wrote:Leaving aside the disagreements - and the slightly heated thread rhetoric - over her actual politics, I don't for a second think that Tulsi Gabbard has the slightest chance of being elected president in 2020.

I just don't think the United States is going to elect a 39-year-old* half-Polynesian vegetarian Hindu woman from American Samoa who represents Hawaii in Congress as its president.

Is that fair? Almost certainly not. Is it realistic? Likely yes.

Even leaving aside all of the other factors, she'd be the youngest person elected to the presidency by a good four years (beating Kennedy; Theodore Roosevelt was a year younger than Kennedy on assuming office, but wasn't elected). She'd also only the be the second person to be elected to to the presidency straight from the House; Garfield was the other, and even he was a senator-elect at the time. Surely she has an eye on either 2024 or the vice-presidency rather than seriously thinking she's going to win the Democratic nomination for 2020.


*Age at the 2020 election, if I'm calculating correctly.


I could see her potentially appealing to a niche group of voters and making it to New Hampshire, before running out of funds and essentially being forced to dropout. Middle America, Establishment Dems & Suburban Dems wouldn't go for her, for better or worse.


I thought she was supposed to appeal to Middle America?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Hirota, Majestic-12 [Bot], Ostroeuropa, Shamhnan Insir, Slavakino, The Huskar Social Union

Advertisement

Remove ads