• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,992
I can very easily understand why one might pray to Democrats as Gods considering most of them take every possible measure to make such a thing appear true

Unfortunately it doesn't seem they're really in the business of answering just anyone's prayers :/
 
Dec 6, 2018
574
she is not. but he's probably not going to choose her.

But damn who my man gon pick for real. i cant think of anybody younger woman politician that would work for him in a general
I've said it before, but Senator Tammy Baldwin should be considered. Bernie rallies for her, and she's pretty progressive and well liked. Plus she's in Wisconsin. The worry of losing her seat is averted at least temporarily with the new Dem Governor so I think she stands a good chance.

Edit: just reminded myself that Wisconsin has different rules for their senators so it's slightly risky but may still be worth it
 
Last edited:

TheLucasLite

Member
Aug 27, 2018
1,446
I hate to agree with anything Steve Bannon says, but I think he's at least somewhat correct when he talks about populism being the name of the game now. We can either deny this reality or we can tailor a populist message based in policies of compassion instead of fear, and that's what I see Bernie doing. It's essentially why he went on FOX to reach out and give people who are voting on populist energy an alternative to trumps message of hate and blaming minorities.
 

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
I hate to agree with anything Steve Bannon says, but I think he's at least somewhat correct when he talks about populism being the name of the game now. We can either deny this reality or we can tailor a populist message based in policies of compassion instead of fear, and that's what I see Bernie doing. It's essentially why he went on FOX to reach out and give people who are voting on populist energy an alternative to trumps message of hate and blaming minorities.
Economic populism is, imo, how you cut the Gordion knot of "how do you appeal to these racist voters without compromising your social progressive values".

The solution will never be "subtle racism and Democratic status quo" because they can't even stand the status quo-ers on their own side.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
She's definitely a homophobe.

Don't handwave homophobia ffs.

Again, Sanders has a pattern of making ridiculously bad staffing choices. It's logical to imagine that could easily extend to a theoretical VP pick. Not sure why people are so sure it won't be Gabbard. She's already cozy with the Sanders camp and she checks boxes he's mentioned for a VP.

Please *anybody* but Bernie. Please please please Democratic gods.
It's not about wishing. It's about donating, organizing and promoting the candidate you like. Sanders is awful but there's a nice field of other candidates this cycle.
 

TheLucasLite

Member
Aug 27, 2018
1,446
Economic populism is, imo, how you cut the Gordion knot of "how do you appeal to these racist voters without compromising your social progressive values".

The solution will never be "subtle racism and status quo" because they can't even stand the status quo-ers on their own side.
Right, it comes down locating where the proper grievance lies and then delivering the narrative that connects and makes sense. In this case the alternative Bernie is giving them is simply 'Your material lacks are not caused by the most oppressed and lacking people in our society, but by the people who are benefitting the most and have the most' Someone like Clinton could never deliver this sort of message and come off genuine because of how deeply she is embedded within that part of society who are benefitting the most.
 

Prodigal Son

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,791
She's definitely a homophobe.

Don't handwave homophobia ffs.

Again, Sanders has a pattern of making ridiculously bad staffing choices. It's logical to imagine that could easily extend to a theoretical VP pick. Not sure why people are so sure it won't be Gabbard. She's already cozy with the Sanders camp and she checks boxes he's mentioned for a VP.
.

save your 'for fucks sakes' for situations where it applies at all.

just call her Islamophobic and be done with it. Or assume she's a crypto-homophobe or some shit. you dont have to pretend she's still some actively raging bigot on this issue for the horrible shit she said in her 20s. Her voting record on LGBT issues is good. There's so much to criticize with her and this is really where you wanna go? You're a comedian
 

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
save your 'for fucks sakes' for situations where it applies at all.

just call her Islamophobic and be done with it. Or assume she's a crypto-homophobe or some shit. you dont have to pretend she's still some actively raging bigot on the issue for the horrible shit she said in her 20s. Her voting record on LGBT issues is good. There's so much to criticize with her and this is really where you wanna go? You're a comedian

Ew.

Don't. Minimize. Homophobia.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
save your 'for fucks sakes' for situations where it applies at all.

just call her Islamophobic and be done with it. Or assume she's a crypto-homophobe or some shit. you dont have to pretend she's still some actively raging bigot on this issue for the horrible shit she said in her 20s. Her voting record on LGBT issues is good. There's so much to criticize with her and this is really where you wanna go? You're a comedian
No. She hasn't changed. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...17ecdc-1467-11e9-90a8-136fa44b80ba_story.html

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a potential 2020 White House contender, is accusing some of her fellow Democrats of "religious bigotry" in their questioning of one of President Trump's judicial nominees.

Gabbard's claim, made in an op-ed in the Hill newspaper, drew a rebuke Wednesday from another Hawaii Democrat, Sen. Mazie Hirono.

In the op-ed, Gabbard did not name any names. But she argued that some lawmakers had gone too far in their questioning of Brian Buescher, whom Trump nominated in October to serve as a district judge.

"While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher's Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus," Gabbard said in the op-ed.

Buescher was a Republican candidate for Nebraska attorney general in 2014.

During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in November, and in written questions that he answered in early December, Buescher was asked about his public statements during his 2014 campaign, his position on issues such as abortion as well as his membership in the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal society.

The organization has in recent years taken steps into the political realm, funding anti-same-sex marriage initiatives in a number of states.

Among those questioning Buescher over his membership in the Knights of Columbus were Hirono and Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.). In response to one question, Buescher defended his membership in the organization, which he said "does not have the authority to take personal political positions on behalf of all of its approximately 2 million members."

In recent weeks, the senators' grilling of Buescher has become the topic of a number of pieces in conservative media, with some comparing it to California Democrat Dianne Feinstein's questioning of the religious beliefs of another Trump nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, in 2017.

Gabbard in her Tuesday op-ed argued that if Buescher's religion and membership in the Knights of Columbus were disqualifying, then President Kennedy and the late senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) "would have been 'unqualified' for the same reasons."

"Whether we think of ourselves as Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikh, Buddhists, Jews, atheists, agnostics, or anything else, it is imperative that we stand united in our commitment to protect religious freedom and the right to worship or not worship, safely and without the fear of retribution," Gabbard said.
Once again, she's joining in with conservatives to attack Democrats. She keeps doing it because she is one.
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
Bernie's Fox Town Hall night end up his biggest hit during the whole pre campaign.

Hope his campaign finds a way to capitalize and potentialize it. The town hall showed Bernie can actually cut the bullshit through Trump's antics.
Yeah, even a toddler can debate Trump. The problem isn't debating him, but out-bullying him on TV and exposing him. Bernie is the only candidate that can really pull that off besides Biden.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
Once again, she's joining in with conservatives to attack Democrats. She keeps doing it because she is one.

Conservatives don't have anywhere near as liberal a voting record as Gabbard. I don't even like her, but you need to stop spreading lies.

People said this same bullshit about Clinton and it was just as disingenuous.

EDIT:

You can see the ranking of conservative voting record here:

https://votesmart.org/interest-group/2412/rating/10540#.XLbeo-hKhEY

Gabbard sits at a whopping 18% as of 2018 (less than Sanders, who is at 21%)
 
Last edited:

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Conservatives don't have anywhere near as liberal a voting record as Gabbard. I don't even like her, but you need to stop spreading lies.

People said this same bullshit about Clinton and it was just as disingenuous.

EDIT:

You can see the ranking of conservative voting record here:

https://votesmart.org/interest-group/2412/rating/10540#.XLbeo-hKhEY

Gabbard sits at a whopping 18% as of 2018 (less than Sanders, who is at 21%)
She goes on Fox News to attack Obama during his Presidency for being too lenient on "Radical Islam". She attacks Hirono for getting at a guy's membership in an explicitly anti-gay organization That you would invoke Clinton here is absolutely goddamn ridiculous given the absolutely massive discrepancy in their histories. Like, seriously- do you understand who you're defending past raw numbers?

Social Conservatives can still vote for economically liberal things, just look at Marie Le Pen and similar types' love of welfare AND apartheid states. Do you really not understand that these types will throw everyone else under the bus the moment they're not of use to them? And everything we've seen from Gabbard's actions indicates that the only reason she ever takes a socially left position is because of raw necessity. Her family became Democrats because they couldn't win power in Hawaii and Gabbard claims to be ok with LGBT people now that you can't really win power as a Dem if you don't. But then she goes right after people for "Religious Freedom", a goddamn conservative dog whistle a la States Rights that means "The freedom to discriminate and do hateful things to groups I don't like. Especially the LGBT ones."

Thankfully she has a strong primary challenger this cycle and I hope he knocks her hateful ass out of her seat next spring.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
She goes on Fox News to attack Obama during his Presidency for being too lenient on "Radical Islam". She attacks Hirono for getting at a guy's membership in an explicitly anti-gay organization That you would invoke Clinton here is absolutely goddamn ridiculous given the absolutely massive discrepancy in their histories. Like, seriously- do you understand who you're defending past raw numbers?

Social Conservatives can still vote for economically liberal things, just look at Marie Le Pen and similar types' love of welfare AND apartheid states. Do you really not understand that these types will throw everyone else under the bus the moment they're not of use to them? And everything we've seen from Gabbard's actions indicates that the only reason she ever takes a socially left position is because of raw necessity. Her family became Democrats because they couldn't win power in Hawaii and Gabbard claims to be ok with LGBT people now that you can't really win power as a Dem if you don't. But then she goes right after people for "Religious Freedom", a goddamn conservative dog whistle a la States Rights that means "The freedom to discriminate and do hateful things to groups I don't like. Especially the LGBT ones."

Thankfully she has a strong primary challenger this cycle and I hope he knocks her hateful ass out of her seat next spring.

I'm not defending Gabbard's awful history, I'm refuting your lies. Objectively, she has a more liberal voting record than any economically liberal social conservative, and the voting record is the most meaningful and objective metric we have for determining how conservative or liberal an elected official is, so you can't just handwave away the 'raw numbers' like they don't mean anything. You're just patently wrong on this issue and it isn't even debatable.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
I'm not defending Gabbard's awful history, I'm refuting your lies. Objectively, she has a more liberal voting record than any economically liberal social conservative, and the voting record is the most meaningful and objective metric we have for determining how conservative or liberal an elected official is, so you can't just handwave away the 'raw numbers' like they don't mean anything. You're just patently wrong on this issue and it isn't even debatable.
And here you were complaining about hard vs soft sciences yet you're using a metric to pretend that Tulsi Gabbard isn't a bigoted piece of shit. Good lord. "Lies?" There is not a single goddamn lie in my posts here. This is my take based on my observations of her documented behavior.

A D-nominate score doesn't mean anything when it comes to her being socially conservative when she attacks people in her own party from right-wing positions like "not hard enough on Radical Islam" or "going too hard on questioning someone's involvement in anti-gay activities". Her actions speak far, far louder than her voting record. It is not a "history" of ages past, her Fox appearances were in Obama's second term, the Post article about the Hirono confrontation? January. This is very much a current, living part of her that keeps bubbling up over and over because it's who she is. People can change. She never truly has.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
And here you were complaining about hard vs soft sciences yet you're using a metric to pretend that Tulsi Gabbard isn't a bigoted piece of shit. Good lord. "Lies?" There is not a single goddamn lie in my posts here. This is my take based on my observations of her documented behavior.

A D-nominate score doesn't mean anything when it comes to her being socially conservative when she attacks people in her own party from right-wing positions like "not hard enough on Radical Islam" or "going too hard on questioning someone's involvement in anti-gay activities". Her actions speak far, far louder than her voting record. It is not a "history" of ages past, her Fox appearances were in Obama's second term, the Post article about the Hirono confrontation? January. This is very much a current, living part of her that keeps bubbling up over and over because it's who she is. People can change. She never truly has.

I'll get back to this post when it isn't full of bad faith argumentation and lies. Until then, I'm moving on.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Clearly, this is a person who's absolutely a social liberal and would have the best interests of minorities at heart. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

Before she became a progressive darling for endorsing Sanders, Gabbard became a conservative darling for relentlessly hawking the idea — later popularized by Trump — that Obama's foreign policy was failing because he refused to use the term "Islamic extremism," or some variation of it.

From 2014 onward, Gabbard appeared regularly on Fox News to lambast the Obama administration for avoiding the phrase. In one interview, she told the host that "the vast majority of terrorist attacks conducted around the world for over the last decade have been conducted by groups who are fueled by this radical Islamic ideology," a statement that may be technically true due to the violence and instability plaguing Middle Eastern countries, but is wildly misleading considering that non-Muslims make up the vast, vast majority of terrorist perpetrators in both Europe and the United States.

In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shootings in January 2015, Gabbard complained on Fox News that by "not using this term 'Islamic extremism' and clearly identifying our enemies," the administration couldn't "come up with a very effective strategy to defeat that enemy." She told Neil Cavuto that "this isn't about one specific group," but about "this radical Islamic ideology that is fueling this," and that it needed to be defeated "militarily and ideologically." She characterized Obama's refusal to "recognize" the enemy as "mind-boggling" and "troubling."

And it wasn't just on Fox. Gabbard took her message to any network or outlet that would have her. On CNN, she called Kerry's refusal to use the term "unfortunate and disturbing." In an interview with the Hill, she stressed that radical Islam was at the heart of the problem, necessitating "a simultaneous ideological strategy" to defeat terrorists.

The Right was smitten. Breitbart ran article after article trumpeting her criticisms, and former US representative Allen West praised Gabbard for "dar[ing] to challenge Obama."

In February 2015, Gabbard had the chance to question Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Vincent Stewart. She asked him (while clearly fishing for a particular answer) about the debate over "how this ideology, how this motivation, must be identified" and what "common elements" existed among different Islamic terrorist groups, including ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram. She then went on Fox and reported that Stewart had "identified very clearly that it is this radical Islamic ideology that is fueling" these groups.

But Gabbard had heavily distorted what Stewart actually said. While he did call ISIS "a radical ideology that must be countered with a moderate ideology," he also pointed out that the common elements that had produced such groups were "ungoverned states, weak government institution, economic instability, poverty."

This was par for the course for Gabbard, who regularly used her TV appearances to brush off, even mock, alternative explanations for terrorism. After Kerry gave a speech at Davos stressing the importance of acknowledging the various drivers of extremism — noting that some extremist fighters "are lured by basic, material considerations" like "the promise of regular meals, a paycheck," while others are motivated by the chance "to escape boredom" and "be lured by a false sense of success" — Gabbard tore into him on CNN.

"This is completely missing the point," she said, calling it a "huge mistake" to think "that somehow, okay, well, look if we give them $10,000 and give them a nice place to live, that somehow they're not going to be engaged in this fighting." She cited Osama bin Laden as an example, a "multi-millionaire who left his mansions, went and lived in the desert because of this radical ideology." She reappeared on CNN a month later, denying that "if we just go in and alleviate poverty, if we go in and create jobs and increase opportunity," it would help solve the problem.

Naturally, it wasn't long before she appeared on Bill Maher's program, where the two bonded over their mutual distrust of "Islamic extremism" and their disagreement with Kerry's comments. After agreeing with Maher that it was "crazy" Obama didn't want to use the two magic words, Gabbard reiterated her point: "Give them a big house, give them a skateboard, send them on their way. You think that's going to solve the problem? It's not."
 

Entryhazard

One Winged Slayer
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,843
This isn't a deal breaker for me at all. It's early in the process. He is the type of guy to listen and learn. His stance could change when he gets more advisors and gets filled in completely on the situation. He doesn't like Netanyahu so that's a plus.

I'm not saying he's the guy. I haven't even made up my mind yet. It's way too early to settle on one candidate.
There are however other things that made me have a complete turnaround on him like what is accounted in this thread

Some of this is pretty egregious
 

Tukarrs

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,814
There are however other things that made me have a complete turnaround on him like what is accounted in this thread

Some of this is pretty egregious


At least with the second tweet, the chief broke wiretapping laws and was turned in to the feds when they found out. Because cops look after their own, they agreed to drop the charges in exchange for demoting the chief.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
The tapes thing is way, way, way, way, way more complicated than any tweet can encompass. It's still tied up in litigation to this day.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,638
All the good will Tulsi has garnered since 2016 is from endorsing Bernie - she is despicable and disgusting in many, many ways, she's a non-interventionist only when it suits her beliefs, and was a raging homophobe until it was basically so unpopular to be one that even she had to pivot.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
There are however other things that made me have a complete turnaround on him like what is accounted in this thread

Some of this is pretty egregious


I heard about the poverty situation. Yikes.

But yeah, there are definitely things he's said that give me pause, like this:

"If you're turned off, as I am, by the political behavior of Chick-fil-A or their executives — if that leaves a bad taste in your mouth, so to speak, and you decide not to shop there, I'd certainly get it and I'd support that. But the reality is, we, I think, sometimes slip into a sort of virtue signaling in some cases where we're not really being consistent. I mean, what about all the other places we get our chicken from?"

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/pete-buttigieg-chick-fil-a-gaydar

It was just so unnecessary and completely misses the point.
 

tommy7154

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,370
I'm mad that I liked Pete. I'd like to think I'm not easily fooled but I really liked him for the last month or two and feel a little duped.

Little by little though he's shown himself for what he really is. He's clearly smart but his garbage take on Manning was my first red flag that this guy was no Bernie Sanders.

There's also been a couple things that tell me he never lived a poor or even working class life and he either doesn't understand, and/or just doesn't care about underprivileged people.
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
I remain skeptical of Pete. He talks a good talk, but there are a few red flags like some of the phrasing he uses at times. I have to wonder if he's one of those "I'm a liberal but not one of those crazy SJW liberals." He seems very blue collar, which is good for his chances, but not what I'm looking for.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
I remain skeptical of Pete. He talks a good talk, but there are a few red flags like some of the phrasing he uses at times. I have to wonder if he's one of those "I'm a liberal but not one of those crazy SJW liberals." He seems very blue collar, which is good for his chances, but not what I'm looking for.

He actually used 'social justice warriors' as a pejorative, btw.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,992
Pete was a good wake up call for me to remember to do a better job at paying attention to candidates beyond first impressions. I've really just done a complete 180 on him in a matter of weeks. All the fluffy shit that's been trotted out about him has certainly helped with that.

Actually it makes me sick to my stomach when I'm told one of the things I should like about him is "his intelligence" like I'm supposed to ignore everything else because he's privileged enough to have studied multiple languages. The fact that "ivy-league educated" is immediately supposed to make me respect a candidate (or a person) more is making me more and more grossed out.
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
He actually used 'social justice warriors' as a pejorative, btw.
Yep. He also used the phrase "all lives matter".

He seems like the type of person who tries to sugar coat liberal views to make them more palatable to conservatives/Christians. Obama did the same thing. It's a terrible, short sighted strategy.
 

RoKKeR

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,375
Yep. He also used the phrase "all lives matter
And he's since acknowledged that after understanding what the phrase meant in context to stop using it. He's clearly able to listen and learn and I think that should be valued in a candidate over just canceling them for something they said once.

My biggest concern with Pete right now are his stances on Israel and his ability (or potential lack thereof) to connect with POC/minority voters outside of the Midwest.
 

Goat Mimicry

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
Clearly, this is a person who's absolutely a social liberal and would have the best interests of minorities at heart. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

Seriously, if this were any other Democrat, they would be getting nothing but shit from some posters here (rightfully so).

Steve Bannon and David Duke don't like her for her voting record, they like her for her rhetoric. She goes harder on that shit than Joe fucking Manchin. Making excuses for an obvious bigot is really not a good look.
 

JVID

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,196
Chicagoland
Seriously, if this were any other Democrat, they would be getting nothing but shit from some posters here (rightfully so).

Steve Bannon and David Duke don't like her for her voting record, they like her for her rhetoric. She goes harder on that shit than Joe fucking Manchin. Making excuses for an obvious bigot is really not a good look.
bUt ShE eNdOrSeD bErNiE.
That endorsement bought her plenty of blind loyalty.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
When did Hearty Stew Pete day that?

In his book:

In April 2001, a student group called the Progressive Student Labor Movement took over the offices of the university's president, demanding a living wage for Harvard janitors and food workers. That spring, a daily diversion on the way to class was to see which national figure—Cornel West or Ted Kennedy one day, John Kerry or Robert Reich another—had turned up in the Yard to encourage the protesters.

Striding past the protesters and the politicians addressing them, on my way to a "Pizza and Politics" session with a journalist like Matt Bai or a governor like Howard Dean, I did not guess that the students poised to have the greatest near-term impact were not the social justice warriors at the protests […] but a few mostly apolitical geeks who were quietly at work in Kirkland House [Zuckerberg et al.]
 

kambaybolongo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,029
The real question surrounding Pete is who the next golden boy will be. Originally, it looked like it was going to be Harris, then Beto, and now Pete.

I highly doubt he stays ahead of the other second stringers.
 

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,478
I read that when it got published. Some of the others hear dismissed it out of hand for reasons, but I think it's a good write-up.

It's an excellent write-up and the author's points were well-reasoned and balanced. He's plenty critical of the other candidates as well in his other pieces, so it's not like he's picking on Pete, but I'm not surprised it was dismissed out of hand here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.