Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Post removed [View all]


(24,979 posts)
65. Irrelevant either way. See 61 or 58.
Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:33 PM
Jan 2019

Ancient history about a young person - as relevant today as Clinton's time as a Goldwater girl - who has completely changed her views, voted flawlessly in recent years including to repeal DOMA, and has the same endorsement from HRC that HRC does. Sorry, this is not cricket. You want to disagree or attack Tulsi, use her actual positions, not projected false positions picked up from whatever source. Thank you.

Post removed [View all] Post removed Jan 2019 OP
"Gabbard scrambles ideological assumptions" JackRiddler Jan 2019 #1
Post removed Post removed Jan 2019 #53
She's her own worst enemy and will not be competitive IMO, so no need to debate hlthe2b Jan 2019 #2
Respectfully disagree JackRiddler Jan 2019 #4
THat is probably true as well... hlthe2b Jan 2019 #5
I can't say much because I'm sick of hides, Codeine Jan 2019 #3
Yeah. ismnotwasm Jan 2019 #7
Another look - from Charlie............. MyOwnPeace Jan 2019 #6
"more like calculated mischief" JackRiddler Jan 2019 #17
"Is this a case of Democratic candidate bashing? Hmmmm." MyOwnPeace Jan 2019 #45
to quote the kids of today... qazplm135 Jan 2019 #8
Too late. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #14
non sequitor qazplm135 Jan 2019 #16
She never gets pushed around on the news shows. She is too confident. irresistable Jan 2019 #19
+1 JackRiddler Jan 2019 #22
+2 Devil Child Jan 2019 #30
It's not a canard. backabby-blue Jan 2019 #9
See post below on common Tulsi-bashing tropes. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #15
I disagree. backabby-blue Jan 2019 #20
No doubt someone will ask her that and we will see what she says then. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #23
Yes and the very people who support Tulsi backabby-blue Jan 2019 #26
Did you do a poll of 100% of them? JackRiddler Jan 2019 #29
If it were the only reason but it's not. backabby-blue Jan 2019 #32
I'm glad we will be testing that out. Thank you. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #33
Yes. backabby-blue Jan 2019 #36
Hillary by the time she ran had the support of the GBLTQ community ismnotwasm Jan 2019 #44
UPDATED: Here's why the Hawaii LGBT Caucus doesn't support Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's reelection campaign Cha Jan 2019 #62
That is exactly how to frame it in terms red state voters will grasp immediately NotASurfer Jan 2019 #10
Yes, it is. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #13
Well said. It is how to frame it. Achilleaze Jan 2019 #37
I appreciate her entering the race. David__77 Jan 2019 #11
To some of her critics, Hindu is synonymous with "Hindu Nationalist". irresistable Jan 2019 #21
Thank you for this informative post! Devil Child Jan 2019 #27
... BannonsLiver Jan 2019 #18
If that's the level of objection, I like her chances. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #24
That's just about all the above twaddle is worth BannonsLiver Jan 2019 #39
...and being Putin's bitch does not enoble the republicans either Achilleaze Jan 2019 #25
The article you cited seems to insinuate there was a legitimate diplomatic purpose... Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2019 #28
Wow. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #31
Trump meeting Kim Jung Un backabby-blue Jan 2019 #34
Please don't purport to speak for "We" JackRiddler Jan 2019 #40
I don't believe NK has good intentions backabby-blue Jan 2019 #41
Then you should take your complaint to SK. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #43
This is gonna be a long primary season, Tommy obamanut2012 Jan 2019 #35
Tulsi Gabbard: Same-Sex marriage advocated by "homosexual extremists" brooklynite Jan 2019 #38
Why does your attack graphic omit the date? JackRiddler Jan 2019 #42
they both favored civil unions dsc Jan 2019 #46
That's how it appeared in Twitter brooklynite Jan 2019 #47
Well then why do you reproduce it here? JackRiddler Jan 2019 #49
I'll place a measure of trust in CNN... brooklynite Jan 2019 #52
You are not answering the question. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #59
No they weren't like other Democrats at the time dsc Jan 2019 #66
That was in 2004, when she was a State Legislator. OilemFirchen Jan 2019 #54
2004 also means she was 24 years old and in a different family situation she has left. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #57
Unresponsive. OilemFirchen Jan 2019 #63
Irrelevant either way. See 61 or 58. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #65
that is out and out false dsc Jan 2019 #64
False. Tulsi Gabbard on LGBT TODAY. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #61
God this place is going to suck for two years straight Codeine Jan 2019 #48
Thank you for kicking this important thread. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #50
Oh noes, I've repeated myself. Codeine Jan 2019 #51
No, it's quite alright. Please do it again. JackRiddler Jan 2019 #60
yup obamanut2012 Jan 2019 #55
I'm keeping an open mind about 2020 candidates NastyRiffraff Jan 2019 #56
"Tulsi Gabbard on LGBT" JackRiddler Jan 2019 #58
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Post removed»Reply #65