-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
tulsi gabbard responds to hillary clinton (NYT corrects reporting, Clinton said Republicans and not Russians are grooming her for a 3rd party run)
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
OK I see. If Clinton said republicans there (the second time) then that makes what Clinton said much less batshit crazy. In fact, Clinton is probably right if she did in fact say Stein is "also a republican asset".
I'd have to see or hear the whole thing but it sounds like no, she did not call Tulsi a "Russian asset". She called Stein (and Gabbard) a "republican asset".
Just from remembering after reading the transcript, she did call Tulsi an asset because she called Stein one and said Tulsi is one as well, but, I'll defer to others that probably have the transcript on hand. She started talking about Republicans then switched to Russia rather quickly when talking about Stein.
Based on what? Do Republicans promote Stein for regularly pushing policies or conspiracy theories that benefit them?
This whole episode is bizarre. Why didn't Clinton come out and clarify earlier? Is the NYT just taking the fall for Clinton or what?
again, this is the quote:
"I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and they're grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton said in an interview for Plouffe's Campaign HQ podcast. "She's the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far and that's assuming Jill Stein will give it up because she's also a Russian asset."
The mistake in reporting was saying that Clinton was talking about Russians in the first sentence, where she said "they're grooming her to be the third party candidate". She did say (implied) Tulsi was a favorite of the Russians and said Jill Stein was also a Russian asset.
This is the original (apparently misquoted) quote though. Clinton (apparently) actually said ..."that's assuming Jill Stein will give it up because she's also a republican asset".
Anyway I don't really even want to say anything else about this. Everyone involved here (Gabbard/Clinton/NYT)...all just garbage lol
yes. poor tulsi. boo fucking hoo. she has a 34 page thread on Era instead of a mention every other page in PoliEra.
fucking owned Tulsi, log off.
fucking owned Tulsi, log off.
no, this is the correct quote. I listened to the segment on the podcast and verified myself. The error was publications taking "they" in "they're grooming her" to mean the russians, when Clinton was talking about what republicans would do to win the election. She explicitly said a certain unnamed democratic candidate was a favorite of the russians and that Stein was a russian asset.
I think asset is a good word for it. It leaves open the possibility of knowing cooperation in the Trump sense, like knowing where the info is coming from and using it anyway.
Any chance the title could get another update? It's kind of leaving people with the wrong impression. Clinton is definitely still saying Tulsi is a Russian asset and being supported by bots and others. The only action mistakenly attributed to the Russians is the grooming for a third party bit.
Ugh, then what in gods name is the thread title talking about? If Clinton did in fact say "Russian asset" then nothing has changed here and the thread title is false. I guess I'm lost on what was corrected then.
Last edited:
Let's be honest. If Clinton corrected the NYT herself it would do nothing to calm down the people dunking on her.
You think her saying anything would be construte as anything more then Hillary vs the Media, yet again?
oh man I lowkey would take Tulsi over an Obama/Clinton bootlicker.
idk cults are kinda dope dude have you seen Midsommar? that shit is wild.
Nice for you to say outright instead of continuing to create ex post facto rationales to cover for the tribal motivations.
well 2 of those 4 people didn't send people to ACTUAL war.
like yeah Tulsi will do some dumb shit like meet with a dictator but she hasn't and never will be in a position to kill a bunch of brown people just because it's politically convenient.
like yeah Tulsi will do some dumb shit like meet with a dictator but she hasn't and never will be in a position to kill a bunch of brown people just because it's politically convenient.
You'd really take Tulsi? That's not so low key ridiculous. Obama and Clinton weren't bad at all. Being convinced by GOP talking points is some poor judgement.
what path do you see for Tulsi to start a war lol? check the polls, she's doing Marianne level numbers.
there's plenty to dislike about Obama and Clinton even if you're not a conservative, be it incrementalism, their ties to large corporations or the way they handled military conflict. Obviously they're both still a gazillion times better than any republican.
Why are you cool with homophobia?
Some progressive you are...
User warned: accusations of shilling
Bot network or bought?
Hillary and Obama's foreign policy was a disaster and our inaction in Syria let the worst human displacement crisis since the holocaust happen under our watch. What's funny about Tulsi's foreign policy is that she would have helped it happen faster and be even worse than it was
her cult shit is whack but her platform is definitely *not* homophobic.
I'm sorry when did Clinton decide same sex marriage was cool again? or Obama?
Uh huh. Well, she may be a homophobe but that's not what she's running on! When your hate for Hillary Clinton causes you to cheerlead trash that loves to get boosted by Russia and White Supremacists.
As somebody that still supports Bernie as a second, I hope he just shuts up about Tulsi now.
As somebody that still supports Bernie as a second, I hope he just shuts up about Tulsi now.
[EDIT: Ignore this paragraph, as I was mistaken.] Hold on, am I crazy? I swear I heard the audio on The View when they did a segment on it and she said the Russians? I swear the whole View discussion was about Russians, too. Was I just primed to hear Russians, or is this tweet fake?
EDIT: I see that Russia came up as part of the comments but not specifically the "grooming" part. Looking at The View segment, the audio began after the Republican part, and I now recall that they did discuss both Russians and Republicans as part of the discussion. I rushed to post. My apologies.
Last edited:
Again, she was talking about republicans initially, in particular when talking about the 3rd party grooming. Then she switched to Stein and quickly changed the conversation to Russia which she then called Tulsi an asset as well.
Yeah I was hopeful Bernie would ditch the 2016 baggage and focus on being anyone but Biden. He needs to drop this and focus on the nomination and not feed the dumpster fire.
You know the core of her platform? Her own beliefs. Are you (really, seriously) about to argue Tulsi Gabbard isn't anti-LGBQT?
she did mention russia but her reference to "grooming" wasn't about russia. a lot of outlets ran headlines saying "Clinton suggests Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard".
gonna post more tweets from that thread which is from a clinton spokesperson:
"Tulsi has been given a 100% for her voting record and endorsed by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBT lobby organization in the country"
fuck idk man, but at the very least her record seems good.
- Status