The left doesn't support GabbardThere are some people online who rather have a homophobe than a "moderate".
someone in this thread advocated for her to be Bernie's running mate
No one supports Gabbard she's irrelevant
and that person doesn't represent the left.someone in this thread advocated for her to be Bernie's running mate
We're on to you.Pro-Tip: one can think Tulsi Gabbard fucking sucks and also enjoy her taking Kamala to task on national tv.
Shit, I think I just outed myself as a Putin plant. 😰
someone in this thread advocated for her to be Bernie's running mate
Her character serves the purpose of nullifying legitimate criticisms of Kamala Harris's record.it's ironic that the people complaining about signal boosting tulsi and the ones who have kept her in the discussion since the debate
A Putin 😤😤😤 Plant 🌱🌱🌱Pro-Tip: one can think Tulsi Gabbard fucking sucks and also enjoy her taking Kamala to task on national tv.
Shit, I think I just outed myself as a Putin plant. 😰
It's the same thought process that led to dozens on here actually thinking that someone saying "Hey, maybe the US putting boots on the ground in Venezuela isn't a good idea" means "OH SO YOU SUPPORT MADURO HUH? YOU LOVE YOU SOME MADURO, DON'TCHA?"What I'm taking from some of this "y'all are low key Tulsi boosters" is if you so much as hold the same opinion as Tulsi or say "she has a point here", you're actually rooting for Tulsi and her homophobia.
You have people in this thread fawning over her. Not just "she has a point", but people outright cheering for her. Hence the pushback in this thread.
Hmmm, named after the breed of Russian dog in your avatar Quite suspicious! He's a cute lil doggo tho.
Tulsi being terrible doesn't nullify legitimate criticisms of Kamala. And actually it's been helpful for people who apparently don't care about attacks on LGBTQ people to out themselves in the process.Her character serves the purpose of nullifying legitimate criticisms of Kamala Harris's record.
Tulsi shouldn't be close to the Presidency or be considered for VP.Tulsi being terrible doesn't nullify legitimate criticisms of Kamala. And actually it's been helpful for people who apparently don't care about attacks on LGBTQ people to out themselves in the process.
Tulsi being terrible doesn't nullify legitimate criticisms of Kamala. And actually it's been helpful for people who apparently don't care about attacks on LGBTQ people to out themselves in the process.
"God I want to have sex with his Climate Plan"I honestly wonder what the defense from Kamala supporters would be if like, Jay Inslee was the one that called her out on stage.
I honestly wonder what the defense from Kamala supporters would be if like, Jay Inslee was the one that called her out on stage.
I dunno, does Inslee support radical Christian sects that push for reparative therapy?I honestly wonder what the defense from Kamala supporters would be if like, Jay Inslee was the one that called her out on stage.
He doesn't. Gabbard does and yes she is a piece of shit for that.I dunno, does Inslee support radical Christian sects that push for reparative therapy?
I feel like it has to be that, name recognition, the sort of "cool Joe" image that was built up towards the end of Obama's presidency and a desire to go back to how things were.What the fuck do voters see in Joe Biden? Is it love for president Obama?
kHe doesn't. Gabbard does and yes she is a piece of shit for that.
Literally all of this is
The fact that people think that Tulsi is still a Homophobe just shows how blatantly misinformed they are.
The caucus cited a 2015 interview that Gabbard had done with Ozy, in which she stated that she did not want to emulate a theocratic government "imposing its will" on its people.
"She tells me that, no, her personal views haven't changed, but she doesn't figure it's her job to do as the Iraqis did and force her own beliefs on others," Ozy's Sanjena Sathian and Tom Gorman wrote.
The fact that people think that Tulsi is still a Homophobe just shows how blatantly misinformed they are.
And what makes this more annoying is that the people criticising Tulsi for something she no longer believes in are the same people who support Clinton despite her also previously being a homophobe.
The term 'moving the goal post' comes to mind
I mean, we could talk about how Bernie and Warren killed it on night 1 and how Jake Tapper is an ass.Tulsi isn't going to be president, Kamala likely won't be either, at least not next year. It's sad to me that after two night of debates, THIS is what is apparently the only thing topical.
Yes please!I mean, we could talk about how Bernie and Warren killed it on night 1 and how Jake Tapper is an ass.
The fact that people think that Tulsi is still a Homophobe just shows how blatantly misinformed they are.
And what makes this more annoying is that the people criticising Tulsi for something she no longer believes in are the same people who support Clinton despite her also previously being a homophobe.
The term 'moving the goal post' comes to mind
Are you suggesting that Tulsi is being called out because she's a woman of color and that a white man would get a pass if he held her bizarre, violently homophobic views?
The fact that people think that Tulsi is still a Homophobe just shows how blatantly misinformed they are.
And what makes this more annoying is that the people criticising Tulsi for something she no longer believes in are the same people who support Clinton despite her also previously being a homophobe.
The term 'moving the goal post' comes to mind
Did Hillary Clinton used homophobic slurs in public to attack gay people? Nope. Tulsi did!
Did Hillary Clinton ever say we need to ban all gay historic figures from history classrooms because it might brainwash kids into being gay? Nope. Tulsi did!
It's really dumb to make this about Clinton but if people want to play that, she was also the first First Lady to show up and march in a gay pride parade back in 2000. She was late as was just about everyone else on marriage equality. Personally, I almost skipped voting in '08 for Obama's homophobic comments about gay marriage.As a queer person, I find the Bigotry Olympics argument to be devoid of any real value. Hillary was against same-sex marriage for far longer than she should have been, and she doesn't get a pass just because other bigots were more harmful with their words and/or actions. Nevertheless, I take her at her word that her views have changed as long as she supports the LGBTQ+ community with her actions now, even though you can never really know a person (the extent to which Hillary disliked gay people is unknowable to us). Likewise, as vile as Tulsi used to be with her homophobia, she has apologized, and as of 2019, has stated that her views have changed, and by way of her role in Congress, she continues to support the LGBTQ+ community, so I will take her at her word as well, and continue to not use bad faith arguments to put down a candidate that I don't like.
It's really dumb to make this about Clinton but if people want to play that, she was also the first First Lady to show up and march in a gay pride parade back in 2000. She was late as was just about everyone else on marriage equality. Personally, I almost skipped voting in '08 for Obama's homophobic comments about gay marriage.
The left should remember that Tulsi is not their friend. She's a useful idiot, at best.
She will always have Tom
I'm not making this about Clinton. I just don't like the argument that x person wasn't as bigoted as y person, even though they were still bigoted, as if they should get a cookie for not being as patently shitty as someone else.
Same with Obama. He didn't get a pass from me either.
It took way WAY too goddamn long for politicians to turn around on gay marriage. Also fuck all the Dems still in congress that voted for DOMA. Here's an outdated list of who's still in officeIt's really dumb to make this about Clinton but if people want to play that, she was also the first First Lady to show up and march in a gay pride parade back in 2000. She was late as was just about everyone else on marriage equality. Personally, I almost skipped voting in '08 for Obama's homophobic comments about gay marriage.
I don't really get why that would be an issue if she votes in a way that is pro LGBT though. Which she has done so, and consistently. It's not like any of us know her personally, so the only way she would affect any of us is through her policy positions. At least when it comes to LGBT issues, I would assume she's in line with pretty much everyone on this forum. I don't see why Gabbard really needs to be someone who morally agrees with us on everything if the way she votes is the same way we would.In 2015 just 4 years ago she said her personal views against homosexuality have not changed. That she still morally opposes homosexuality.
But, timing is important.
In the US at least, attitudes on homosexuality have had a compressed period of evolution. Yes, gays were on the whole more accepted as time went on, but we've seen a massive shift in just the last 10 years or so.
So to me, as unsavory as it seems, I'm willing to accept Hillary's public waffling on gay issues (even though Her Darn Emails proved she had been for gay rights for years) in the 90s and early 2000s.
Tulsi was holding anti-gay views as recently as 2015.