Poll of the Day > Tulsi Gabbard on JRE

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR8UcnwLH24" data-time="

Pretty amazing. I wasn't interested in Tulsi before this but her and Andrew Yang are very close contenders for me (not like either of them are going to win sadly).
---

Every time they bring up Gabbard or Yang on news outlets it seems to be just to put them down or mock them instead of actually discuss the issues theyre running on
---

Cant wait to see her in the debates.

Every time I see Gabbard I just want to unzip my pants and rub one out.
---

I like her, but the only sane politician that stands a chance is Bernie.

Then there's just Joe busing-segregation, "throw me $250k and we can talk" Biden.

Mead posted...

Every time they bring up Gabbard or Yang on news outlets it seems to be just to put them down or mock them instead of actually discuss the issues theyre running on

Apparently "fighting the patriarchy" doesn't matter anymore.

"It's all about being real, man. Ending illegal wars is radical left bullshit. Stronger with her? Ehhh..."
---

Yellow posted...

I like her, but the only sane politician that stands a chance is Bernie.

There's about three separate contradictions in that single sentence.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Yellow posted...

I like her, but the only sane politician that stands a chance is Bernie.

There's about three separate contradictions in that single sentence.

Let me guess, neither her nor Bernie are sane, and Bernie doesn't stand a chance.

If you really are an intellectual, please help me understand why privatized healthcare is the solution, offensive wars are necessary, global warming is not a problem, lobbyists aren't a problem, public college will never work, and the minimum wage doesn't need to go up or become tied to inflation.

Also explain to me why Norway is a horrible crazy country, along with with the rest of the crazy first world, their highly rated healthcare systems, months of mandatory paid vacation, and highest rates of happiness in the world.

I'm not dumb, you know. I can see what they're doing over there.
---

Mead posted...

Every time they bring up Gabbard or Yang on news outlets it seems to be just to put them down or mock them instead of actually discuss the issues theyre running on

I don't even hear Yang brought up on news outlets. But yeah, Tulsi is almost always only mentioned in order to tear her down or criticize her, I've definitely noticed this.
I like both of them a lot, probably my favorites running along w/ Warren (who's probably only escaped their treatment because she's too well known to simply be character assassinated and discarded), and sadly it's not surprising that the powerful news groups seem to see them as a threat to be eliminated.

I've liked Gabbard since the 2016 election. She had a golden trail laid out for her to ascend the hierarchy of the Democratic party, being the DNC vice chair at such a young age and considered by many to be a "rising star." She was willing to throw away that easy ladder of success to vacate her position and be vocal about how the DNC was heavily biased against Bernie Sanders, angering the party leadership and almost certainly the reason she gets this treatment now.
Sanders/Gabbard would've been an amazing ticket in 2016, they basically cover each others' weaknesses perfectly, and 4-8 years experience as VP would help the young Gabbard rapidly obtain the experience to silence any critiques about her being too young/new to politics to be president.

i don't know who that is or what that is
---

Yellow posted...

Let me guess, neither her nor Bernie are sane, and Bernie doesn't stand a chance.

If you really are an intellectual, please help me understand why privatized healthcare is the solution, offensive wars are necessary, global warming is not a problem, lobbyists aren't a problem, public college will never work, and the minimum wage doesn't need to go up or become tied to inflation.

Also explain to me why Norway is a horrible crazy country, along with with the rest of the crazy first world, their highly rated healthcare systems, months of mandatory paid vacation, and highest rates of happiness in the world.

I'm not dumb, you know. I can see what they're doing over there.

You're missing the point, dude. The point is that America is fucked and that nobody can save it.
---

Sefrig posted...

i don't know who that is or what that is

Yeah, but you of all people really wouldnt.

Yellow posted...

I'm not dumb, you know.

Well......

Everyone that's not Biden (Neolib, mass support by the media) or Sanders (Has zero chance to win - a "pied piper" candidate if you will) have no chance to win because the media will make sure that Biden wins at all costs. This is just a repeat of 2016 - totally ignore the guy behind the curtain conducting all of this once again.

We have another 4 years of Trump because they're trying to once again elect a racist, child molesting silent generation to the presidency.
---

Gabbard- so I'm running for president
Joe- that's crazy man, have you ever tried DMT?
---

Half an hour in so far, gonna have to watch this in parts.

But good stuff so far. She's one of my top choices, easily.

EDIT: Ok, Joe's saying Facebook should be a public utility. Which...seems odd to me. But it's just annoying that saying that is ignoring the elephant in the room....that somehow internet access itself still isn't treated as a public utility!
Was hoping Tulsi would point that out, but they were just focused on the social media discussion.

Finished it, it was really good and re-affirmed that she's my favorite in the race.

The last like 25 minutes are especially good because they finally stop going back to foreign policy discussions and talk about Universal Basic Income, corporate tax inversion, opioid epidemic, etc... domestic topics that I honestly just...care about more.

Biggest issue I had w/ what she said was her view on Assange, and that she'd drop the U.S. efforts to try him here, even called him a "journalist." That was upsetting to hear, especially from a Democrat.
At first, sure he could be considered a journalist. But he turned into a political operative by the end. Getting illegally obtained information directly from Russia and directed when to strategically release it to the public in order to damage the cause of the Democrats as much as possible in the election. That's a clear crossing of the line from journalist to Russian operative, and he should be fucking thrown in prison for it.
Snowden, sure, he deserves a pardon. Assange? No.

Mead posted...

Every time they bring up Gabbard or Yang on news outlets it seems to be just to put them down or mock them instead of actually discuss the issues theyre running on

Well, they're not Hilary or Biden, that's why.
---

I don't even vote waste of time
---

I feel like Yang especially is just not getting a fair shake

Its a shame because even if universal basic income is something our country decides is not a good path, with the exponential increase in automation its a conversation we need to have but arent
---

streamofthesky posted...

Getting illegally obtained information directly from Russia and directed when to strategically release it to the public in order to damage the cause of the Democrats as much as possible in the election. That's a clear crossing of the line from journalist to Russian operative, and he should be fucking thrown in prison for it.
Snowden, sure, he deserves a pardon. Assange? No.

So what if it was illegally obtained or if it came from Russia? The information was true. Are you really pissed off about being told the truth about people who could become president? Are you really pissed off about it being made public that Hillary Clinton said she has public positions and private positions?

CaptainStrong posted...

streamofthesky posted...

Getting illegally obtained information directly from Russia and directed when to strategically release it to the public in order to damage the cause of the Democrats as much as possible in the election. That's a clear crossing of the line from journalist to Russian operative, and he should be fucking thrown in prison for it.
Snowden, sure, he deserves a pardon. Assange? No.

So what if it was illegally obtained or if it came from Russia? The information was true. Are you really pissed off about being told the truth about people who could become president? Are you really pissed off about it being made public that Hillary Clinton said she has public positions and private positions?

I voted for Bernie in the primary and refused to vote for either Hillary or Trump in the general, you're barking up the wrong tree. I have no particular love for Hillary Clinton.

But he is not a journalist. He acted as an operative of Russia, specifically to influence and decide our election, and conflating those actions with journalism is honestly a dangerous precedent to set.

Also....yes, Hillary was corrupt as shit. Couldn't stomach voting for her. But you act like Trump isn't even more corrupt. But the public only got the humiliating private email exchanges of the former. Because a hostile foreign power wanted the latter to win. I'm not going to fucking just "let that go," and it doesn't even matter which party happened to be the victim, I'd be pissed off if it happened the other way, too.

streamofthesky posted...

CaptainStrong posted...

streamofthesky posted...

Getting illegally obtained information directly from Russia and directed when to strategically release it to the public in order to damage the cause of the Democrats as much as possible in the election. That's a clear crossing of the line from journalist to Russian operative, and he should be fucking thrown in prison for it.
Snowden, sure, he deserves a pardon. Assange? No.

So what if it was illegally obtained or if it came from Russia? The information was true. Are you really pissed off about being told the truth about people who could become president? Are you really pissed off about it being made public that Hillary Clinton said she has public positions and private positions?

I voted for Bernie in the primary and refused to vote for either Hillary or Trump in the general, you're barking up the wrong tree. I have no particular love for Hillary Clinton.

But he is not a journalist. He acted as an operative of Russia, specifically to influence and decide our election, and conflating those actions with journalism is honestly a dangerous precedent to set.

Also....yes, Hillary was corrupt as shit. Couldn't stomach voting for her. But you act like Trump isn't even more corrupt. But the public only got the humiliating private email exchanges of the former. Because a hostile foreign power wanted the latter to win. I'm not going to fucking just "let that go," and it doesn't even matter which party happened to be the victim, I'd be pissed off if it happened the other way, too.

Hillary pretty much wanted to go to war with Russia with her Syrian no-fly zone bullshit. Can you really blame Russia for wanting Trump to win?

Mead posted...

I feel like Yang especially is just not getting a fair shake

Its a shame because even if universal basic income is something our country decides is not a good path, with the exponential increase in automation its a conversation we need to have but arent

Well before i heard of Yang, I was talking to friends about how the tax code should be changed. Get rid of ALL the loopholes and breaks. Raise the corporate tax rate. Tax based on the point of sale, not the "country the company claims it resides in."
But...provide tax breaks for companies based on how many employees they have that are legal residents of (and working in) the U.S. compared in a ratio to their annual profits. Doesn't matter if a company is earning tons of money w/ few U.S. employees because of outsourcing (whether to China, India, Mexico, whatever), abuse of illegal immigration, automation, whatever... If the company has huge profits off sales to the U.S. but isn't employing many people here...they get to eat a giant fucking tax bill!
(I'd also be open to a tax break for companies w/ a small ratio between the highest paid employees and the lowest paid...which encourages using temp agencies to fill low wage jobs, but then the company has less employees to count towards the first tax break, so...balances out?)

Then at least there's some aid for a company that wants to try and hire people even if it'd save more money to automate. We'll never be able to make it more lucrative to use people over AI, but we can at least staunch the transition a bit, and set up the concept of multi billion dollar companies w/ few employees paying huge taxes for going that route. Then as more companies opt for that route and the tax money rolls in, it can be used to fund a Universal Basic Income.

That's my idea...