slug.com slug.com

13 14

I said this back in the Spring: Tulsi Gabbard was a serious threat to Trump in the November election - but she is smart and serious and therefore not likely to be let anywhere NEAR a position of power in the Dem Party.

She continues to prove that over and over again. She is a far better woman than Kamala Harris EVER could be. She has more common sense and intelligence than Biden and Harris combined.

I'm glad she didn't run against Trump - she might have gotten the 80mil votes that Biden's cadre faked.

tracycoyle 8 Dec 15
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

13 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

All the qualities that make people good friends and generally good human beings (openness, empathy, low aggression, honesty etc.) are the opposite of what it takes to get ahead in politics.

I reckon Tulsi Gabbard would make great president, able to actually unite people...but she is too "good" a person to stand a chance against the sinister people who control political parties.

1

I think POTUS ought to call Major Gabbord to active duty now that she's no longer in Congress and set her down with the cabinet to pick her brain on how the few remaining Democrats who are not full out communist think. He could promote her to LtCOL while he's at it. That would give him a balance to the "old guard" Republicans who resist him all the way.

0

Consider this information. [bit.ly]

1

Democrat supporters, actually read this article. Don't call it names or try to sling slander at the author, just read it and consider the facts. Your corrupt MSM will not provide you with the entire story. Do you ever question why?

[slantedright2.blogspot.com]

You (?), the author of the article makes an indepth argue to my comment the other day that Trump may need to make an UNConstitutional act in order to save the Union - much like Lincoln did. My problem with it is....I don't know what the consequences of that act will be - good or bad, in the long run. And that makes me hesitate to either support or even suggest it. I tend to look at risk profiles when I can evaluate the consequences and not being able to in this case, consider the risk HIGH. Trump IS a risk taker, but I haven't seen him take one that was outsized to the reward.... But, he might have a different read than I do at this time - I believe he has a greater amount of information in which to consider the risk/reward consequences.... I just don't know.

@tracycoyle For those of you supporting the Communist NWO enemy in this war against Trump's Patriot Alliance, read this and think again.

[facebook.com]

@jakuboj I read it previously (yesterday or the day before - I don't have good temporal awareness of the past). And? And if you were lumping me in with the NWO sycophants, bzzzzt, wrong.

@tracycoyle You speak of the consequences of Trump fighting for a legal election like it is somehow a bad thing. Yet you ignore the consequences of allowing Biden to steal the election, which are much, much worse.

@jakuboj No, I suggested that it is possible that Trump may need to make an UnConstitutional act to save the Union - just like Lincoln did. I just don't know if that is the ONLY option left, or even if it is a good one. I don't know how I will react if he does so. I assume I will have an opinion once he does act - but I can't, right now, suggest what he should do.

I'd rather not get into a civil war - I'm willing to fight in one, but I recognize what will be left after one will be unrecognizable to us now.

@tracycoyle It is not a civil war it is WW3. China and their NWO partners vs Trump's Patriot Alliance. Once you understand that then everything makes sense.

1

She's an insane left wing Democrat and you are trying to sell her as "smart and serious". Are you "smart and serious"?

I don't have to agree with her positions, I can think they are destructive to MY positions, but I can, and do recognize that at least she understands the consequences of her positions and they appear, even if contrary to my own "common sense", rational. She stands in contrary to me - I don't assume that means evil intent - as many of the Left do...

@tracycoyle So has she come out publicly and said she supports the CCP? Her party does, so she must. If not, has she told the public that she doesn't? Why would she remain in a party that she doesn't agree with? If she doesn't admit it then she is just another lying Democrat and not worthy of any respect or praise.

@jakuboj I don't demand of Democrats what I don't do myself - which is to specifically say I support or don't some pleb's positions just because someone else does. If she supports the CCP, then she can say so or not - demands to virtue signal tend to be just as obnoxious as the virtue signal themselves.

YOU are asking the equivalent of the Post Office asking if I am sending anything harmful in the mail. Or the TSA agent asking if I am packing anything hazardous in my luggage.

@tracycoyle Your choice, but I don't speak glowingly about anyone until I know the important things about them, and being a Communist supporter or not is about as important as it gets for a politician. Of course many base their opinions on nice hair or nice talker or correct skin colour or nationality or nice dresser or correct gender, which brings us to the situation we face today.

@jakuboj I hardly think making an observation about someone is 'speaking glowingly'. But if you hear that voice in your head...ok.

I made no commentary about her appearance - though apparently you think it happened with some one (not me). I do make judgments about people based on their appearances - but it is about their appearance and what it suggests. I don't think GOOD people dress nicely and BAD people dress poorly. It is often the reverse in our society.

You don't have to think she is a person of good character because she is of the Left - I happen to think many people of good character are there - and many of bad character are on the Right. Politics does not drive me or my analysis of a PERSON. I know that is something substantially out of favor the last couple of decades...

@tracycoyle there is no room for fence sitters. We are in WW3 and enemy infiltration is their strongest weapon. But you keep living in your bubble world and virtue signal away.

@jakuboj you know what is the problem with absolutes, they seldom are in reality.

@tracycoyle you can't support both sides in a war, that makes you a traitor x2.

@jakuboj I don't - but I also can note that the general on the opposing side is honorable, even if we both want to kill each other. Only the Left thinks the 'opposition is evil BECAUSE they are the opposition'.

@tracycoyle I see, so the CCP is honourable? At least you admit where you stand.

@jakuboj I like how Tulsi Gabbard has morphed into the CCP - your desire to associate the two fails on the grounds that you have no grounds....

@tracycoyle So you don't understand that the CCP controls the Democrat Party? Really? How much evidence do you need?

@jakuboj Oh, I don't know - EVIDENCE that Gabbard is as corrupt and bought as Biden is? Gabbard is not making friends in the Dem Party. Doesn't mean she is a friend to the GOP either...

@tracycoyle She is a member of the most corrupt political party in history but other than that she is great. What kind of logic is that? Her ideology is obvious by her action of joining and staying with a criminal organization. People who support this are either of the same low level morality or just have not thought through their position enough.

@jakuboj <arrrrgh> Done.

@tracycoyle Back to your bubble where you are always correct.

@jakuboj 98.3% of the time....

@tracycoyle In your world maybe.

1

Tulsi Gabbard might well have won in 2016 IMHO.

2

*She is a far better woman than Kamala Harris EVER could be. She has more common sense and intelligence than Biden and Harris combined.

hardly a glowing endorsement...ha! just kidding.

I agree w/ your assessment of T Gabbard.

4

I agree Trump couldn't stand a chance against Tulsi, however the DNC couldn't alow her to run as she wants to drain the swamp and agreed with some of the good policy Trump was laying out. Proving the DNC doesn't have the best intentions for Americans at heart. They are a party of liars, and cheaters

Tulsi was eliminated from the run for presidential nominee of the DNC because they could not control her. That was quite clear in the debates running up to the nomination.

1

Another usless cunt DEMORAt

Vulgarity wasn't necessary to make your point - but, you offered it anyway...

2

Why do you think the went censorship crazy? She would have beat Trump easily without th3 need to cheat whatever Americas doomed

1

Love Tulsi, she's a bit too Progressive on some things but hey miles ahead of the rest of the Dems... and the older she gets the less Progressive she'll get.

A DINO in our midst?

@GaryMysels and old school Democrat. Supports abortion, among other things.

4

Common sense is not required for joining the Democrat Party. It might even be a liability.

6

She won't get far in the swamp if she doesn't become part of the crony establishment.

This seems to be the case inside both of the major or primary political partying groups.

@AnomalousAnon1 Yep. I think once they reach a certain level, they might fight for power amongst each other but we are their enemy.

@Tom81 A long place ago in a time far away I had occasion to work with Barbara Vucanovich <sp> when she was representing Nevada. Due to her placement at the top of the list of offenders for the then current cackle of corrupt and complicit congress critters bouncing checks and over-spending sans penalties applied to the little people, she was soon replaced by the next elected official, a guy by the name of Harry Reid ... who I must say was quite concerned about us Nevadans at the time and sincerely worked for their benefit ... for about half his first term. We all know how that story ended, as he had absolutely no regard for the unwashed masses before his retirement.

Both the American Aristocracy and Establishment Elite claim to be kind and benevolent rulers, but make no mistake, they all seek to rule over us. None seek to serve the people.

@AnomalousAnon1 absolutely! Even if they had good intentions to begin with they either get corrupted or kicked out. Makes a strong argument for term limits. Although the problem with term limits is short sightedness (short term gains leading to long term problems).

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:162007
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.