aGENT Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 48 minutes ago, Kragar said: From what I understand, she is getting it from both sides. Tells me she's probably right in her (measured, thoughtful and centrist) stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 4 minutes ago, Shift-4 said: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 minute ago, aGENT said: Tells me she's probably right in her (measured, thoughtful and centrist) stance. Perhaps. Could also be argued there is no grey area here. If the charges are suitable for impeachment, and she believes he is guilty, she should vote "yes". If they are suitable charges, and she believes not guilty, she should vote "no". If the charges are not suitable for impeachment, IMO she should also vote "no". (FYI, this last is where I stand, since no actual crimes have been alleged, unlike the previous efforts at impeachment in our history). Censure was a more suitable option than impeachment, IMO. There's a lot not to like about the man. Taking Phil's quote of Tulsi's into account, voting "present" comes across to me as "I don't like what he has done as President, but I don't think the charges stand up". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 10 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: I dunno... Shifty looks outnumbered there. Maybe one of us should help him out? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kragar said: I wonder what CDC thinks of her now. I have an opinion and it's the correct one, but everyone is very divided and I don't like the way things are being done, so I wont act on my opinion until everyone changes to the way I expect them to act. Edited December 19, 2019 by bishopshodan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 7 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: I have an opinion and it's the correct one, but everyone is very divided and I don't like the way things are being done, so I wont act on my opinion until everyone changes to the way I expect them to act. Is she going to hold her breath, till people change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Kragar said: (FYI, this last is where I stand, since no actual crimes have been alleged, unlike the previous efforts at impeachment in our history). Censure was a more suitable option than impeachment, IMO. There's a lot not to like about the man. Taking Phil's quote of Tulsi's into account, voting "present" comes across to me as "I don't like what he has done as President, but I don't think the charges stand up". And this is probably not far off of accurate (also IMO). But I also believe that my post of right things, wrong reasons or wrong things for right reasons is also at play. Whether she thinks he should be impeached (or censured), the way both parties are dealing with is disgusting, divisive and in no way actually serves the country. Tulsi actually reminds me a lot of Lincoln's temperment and thinking. Doing what she feels is right, after a lot of thought and best serves the country whether that puts her at risk or is difficult or otherwise. I'm a fan. Edited December 19, 2019 by aGENT 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, gurn said: Is she going to hold her breath, till people change? I dunno. Is there any perceived partisan opinions or regulations regarding systems of oxygen impeachment that she may be opposed to? It wouldn't affect how she feels but may affect her willingness to breathe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canorth Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 And when she runs as a 3rd candidate to only end up bleeding off the Democratic vote? Sure, it’s her right to vote/not vote. But she is a representative of a constituent. She speaks for them. Do the majority of her voters also want their voices to not to be heard? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 7, 2020 Author Share Posted January 7, 2020 She'll gain momentum again, from this ill-advised, adventurism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonLever Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 From NBC news: Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard filed a defamation lawsuit Wednesday against Hillary Clinton seeking $50 million in damages, claiming the former Democratic presidential nominee "carelessly and recklessly impugned" her reputation when she suggested in October that one of the 2020 Democratic candidates is "the favorite of the Russians." The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, says it aims to hold Clinton and other "political elites" accountable for "distorting the truth in the middle of a critical Presidential election." It also says Gabbard suffered an economic loss to be proven at trial. Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill responded: "That's ridiculous." Gabbard, a dark horse candidate who represents Hawaii, was on the campaign trail Wednesday and unavailable for comment about the suit, according to her law firm, Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP. "Although Rep. Gabbard's presidential campaign continues to gain momentum, she has seen her political and personal reputation smeared and her candidacy intentionally damaged by Clinton's malicious and demonstrably false remarks," Brian Dunne, a partner at the law firm, said in a statement. Dunne added that Clinton had exhibited a "personal hostility" toward Gabbard last fall, and the former secretary of state "resorted to a damaging whisper campaign founded on lies, and when presented with the opportunity to retract her damaging remarks, she refused." According to the suit, Clinton felt slighted because Gabbard was one of the first Democrats to publicly endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for president in 2016 over her, "becoming the most prominent politician to do so at the time." Clinton's team did not immediately comment on the lawsuit. Clinton made her remarks during a podcast appearance on "Campaign HQ" with David Plouffe, a Democratic strategist. She did not identify the current Democratic candidate whom she was referring to, but also said Jill Stein was a "Russian asset" as a third-party candidate in the 2016 presidential election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 And Hillary was a Republican asset lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitecarnage Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 just when i thought i couldn't like her more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted October 12, 2022 Author Share Posted October 12, 2022 So she's walking away from the yank's irredeemable system? If so, good for her. First impressions(4 yrs back), she seemed to have integrity. Had to start this thread as tribute. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 11 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: So she's walking away from the yank's irredeemable system? If so, good for her. First impressions(4 yrs back), she seemed to have integrity. Had to start this thread as tribute. America desperately needs a middle ground in their politics. Gabbard served her country in uniform and in Congress. I am hoping she can create a centrist group that can lead that country. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 Never seemed blue. Hope she doesn't become orange. Purple would be best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 I read her statement on leaving the Dems and it is full on with the Repugs talking points. I like her but she has some serious head scratching moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 Hated her from the get go. Glad she's gone. Now actually go away and don't stick around forever like some human form of herpes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted October 14, 2022 Share Posted October 14, 2022 I don't blame her for leaving today's Democratic Party. It is not the Democratic Party of JFK. Not even of Bill Clinton. I'm not even sure what today's Democratic Party is. Seems like a great time for the US to start a real 3rd party with Tulsi. Never understood the two-party system. Even in Canada we have 3 parties. There is no room for radicals on either side. A pure centrist party representing all people should be the one that is in power. I believe JFK was that guy, nobody after him really came close. The divide is too great in this world right now. I don't even recognize it any more... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted October 14, 2022 Share Posted October 14, 2022 5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: I don't blame her for leaving today's Democratic Party. It is not the Democratic Party of JFK. Not even of Bill Clinton. I'm not even sure what today's Democratic Party is. Seems like a great time for the US to start a real 3rd party with Tulsi. Never understood the two-party system. Even in Canada we have 3 parties. There is no room for radicals on either side. A pure centrist party representing all people should be the one that is in power. I believe JFK was that guy, nobody after him really came close. The divide is too great in this world right now. I don't even recognize it any more... I think the role of geopolitics in the division inside the USA does not get recognized enough. Economic interests are divided into major geographic areas with the corresponding push and pull. If unity of purpose deteriorates then what? Texas, Florida and Atlanta are hollowing out Silicon Valley. Might be a positive. The 5 o'clock news doesn't unite anymore. ABC, CBS and NBC are ghosts of what they were. So many avenues in media can divert people. Yes JFK but all the POTUS with WW2 experience were grounded in a reality that we never saw. I think critical thinking has to reassert itself. I am sure it still exists in some 'think tanks'. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now