What is Tulsi Gabbard up to?

[KG1]

My bottom line here is can anyone say in all honesty that they look unfavorably upon Gabbard's campaign to join with Republicans in calling out the Democrat party for going hard bonkers bat**** crazy? I for one support her efforts. That still doesn't mean that I would necessarily vote for her if she ran again. I don't care what she looks like.

 

[Ingomike]

Can you point to any prior attention that she was given before people started taking notice of what she was saying? I mean she was just as attractive before then.

I pointed to it. Did you see that the earliest post I found had few if any words and three photos?

 

[BugI02]

I must say, I marvel at the degree of skepticism about Candace Owens on this board, relative to the skepticism of Gabbard - and Owens not being a politician should mean her tendencies toward being self-serving would be an order of magnitude less than Gabbard's

But one is derogated as a grifter and the other is taken seriously for some reason

 

[hoosiersasquatch]

Update, go to about 15 minutes in her podcast - she did not get into specifics unfortunately, but appears to be making a stand on the 2A and denouncing democrats hate of the 2A

 

[tmcindy]

I have consistently said INGO would give her little attention if not for the drooling. Never said they would vote for her, just commented on the phenomenon I noticed and rather than letting it die I see these feeble protestations.

You might want to look at yourself. You are the one who seems to have a problem. I can't believe you are still so worked up about this. Unreal.

 

[actaeon277]

Is everyone really THIS bored?

 

[KG1]

I pointed to it. Did you see that the earliest post I found had few if any words and three photos?

I can only speak for myself and didn't take notice of Tulsi Gabbard until I heard some of the things, she had to say against the Democrat party's hard left tact. I certainly was not in favor of voting for her because of some of her prior positions but like I said before I started to support her efforts against the Democrat party.

 

[RCB]

I'm open to anyone changing their minds. The issue I was most concerned about with Trump was 2A, him being a New Yorker. And he did slide on it several times, but he also understands political dynamics. I think we lucked out that the left decided to villainize him. If they had sucked up to him, I think they could have got more out of him on gun control. But since they attacked, it polarized him.

 

[buckwacker]

I have consistently said INGO would give her little attention if not for the drooling. Never said they would vote for her, just commented on the phenomenon I noticed and rather than letting it die I see these feeble protestations.

Careful, don't do a rooster.

 

[Ingomike]

You might want to look at yourself. You are the one who seems to have a problem. I can't believe you are still so worked up about this. Unreal.

If you believe I am worked up about this you are mistaken. If you will note, I did not bring it up, the defensive posters did. Now wipe the drool off your chin.

 

[KG1]

You might want to look at yourself. You are the one who seems to have a problem. I can't believe you are still so worked up about this. Unreal.

Time and time again he wants to make it about her looks while ignoring what people have had to say about their opinions on the substance of what she was saying in her policy shift departing from the Democrats. Just because someone finds her attractive doesn't mean they necessarily support and agree with all of her prior positions.

Anyone that openly joins in with taking on and calling out the Democrat party's lunacy will garner my attention regardless of looks.

 

[Ingomike]

I'm open to anyone changing their minds. The issue I was most concerned about with Trump was 2A, him being a New Yorker. And he did slide on it several times, but he also understands political dynamics. I think we lucked out that the left decided to villainize him. If they had sucked up to him, I think they could have got more out of him on gun control. But since they attacked, it polarized him.

You are spot on.

 

[PRasko]

Alls I'm saying is, we have enough rinos. Dont need another screwing up senate votes.

 

[Ingomike]

Time and time again he wants to make it about her looks while ignoring what people have had to say about their opinions on the substance of what she was saying in her policy shift departing from the Democrats. Just because someone finds her attractive doesn't mean they necessarily support and agree with all of her prior positions.

Anyone that openly joins in with taking on and calling out the Democrat party's lunacy will garner my attention regardless of looks.

Oh brother! I posted for you the first post on INGO that was just pictures and an opinion that she should be groomed for office. Nothing on substance, nothing on accomplishments (other than the suggestions a uniform may carry), nothing on positions ay all, just pictures that make her look attractive.

Then look at how many posts in her threads are about looks and being “hot” quite a few did not mention anything but looks. I simply point that out and folks get defensive. Do you disagree with the facts that first post was just pictures therefore about looks and the several posts referencing her looks I pointed out here?

Not sure a accused anyone in particular, just noted the phenomenon…

 

[KG1]

One other thing I would like to point out is when Jim Web was in a similar situation as Tulsi Gabbard when he ran. A number of people took notice and said if they were inclined to support a Democrat it would be someone like him that stood out for bucking the Democrats like Gabbard has and that didn't have anything to do with his physical looks.

 

[Ingomike]

I must say, I marvel at the degree of skepticism about Candace Owens on this board, relative to the skepticism of Gabbard - and Owens not being a politician should mean her tendencies toward being self-serving would be an order of magnitude less than Gabbard's

But one is derogated as a grifter and the other is taken seriously for some reason

It is quite interesting.

 

[KG1]

I must say, I marvel at the degree of skepticism about Candace Owens on this board, relative to the skepticism of Gabbard - and Owens not being a politician should mean her tendencies toward being self-serving would be an order of magnitude less than Gabbard's

But one is derogated as a grifter and the other is taken seriously for some reason

I believe it was Kut that mostly drove the conversation that constantly railed on Candace Owens as a grifter whenever anyone else brought up their suggestion of support for Owens departure from the left in her efforts to take on the left.

Not unlike what some are trying to do here against others when they voice an inkling of support for Gabbard for essentially doing the same.

I would even go so far as to say that Owens was even more radical as a leftist than Gabbard before Owens made the shift that many here embraced her for doing so despite her prior radical leftist positions.

 

[DadSmith]

She's jumping out of the sinking DNC ship. She is in survival mode and looking for a bunch of Republicans that vote in leftist RINOS to run to next. She may end up replacing Young

 

[tmcindy]

If you believe I am worked up about this you are mistaken. If you will note, I did not bring it up, the defensive posters did. Now wipe the drool off your chin.

LMAO! You're a nut.

 

[BugI02]

You might want to look at yourself. You are the one who seems to have a problem. I can't believe you are still so worked up about this. Unreal.

Now do 'Civil War or War of Northern Aggression'