Tulsi Gabbard 2020 campaign megathread

[John Dule]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

[Comrade Funk]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

[Deleted User #4049]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

She is the peace candidate for our time, and threatens to blow open the uniparty strangehold on foreign policy that has persisted for decades. Even though she has very little chance of winning, they are terrified of her in the same way that they were terrified of Ron Paul in 2012.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

Forget Kucinich. Tulsi Gabbard lost an Emerson College poll to Richard Ojeda.

[KaiserDave]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

Forget Kucinich. Tulsi Gabbard lost an Emerson College poll to Richard Ojeda.

What the last two here said, Gabbard is an irrelevant nobody and will perform as such (and that's good). Good logo though.

[John Dule]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

[Beet]

I used to really hate Gabbard in 2017 and thought what many think now, but over time it's become apparent that she is principled in her foreign policy views and that's something to really admire. She'll do well.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I used to really hate Gabbard in 2017 and thought what many think now, but over time it's become apparent that she is principled in her foreign policy views and that's something to really admire. She'll do well.

Didnt you used to have Gabbard in your Sig

[Beet]

I used to really hate Gabbard in 2017 and thought what many think now, but over time it's become apparent that she is principled in her foreign policy views and that's something to really admire. She'll do well.

Didnt you used to have Gabbard in your Sig

Yeah in 2018. In 2017 she was my least favored candidates date.

[John Dule]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

That is not the criticism I've seen of her. The posts on this site about Gabbard have criticized her based on the two points I just listed-- her electability is scarcely (if at all) mentioned as an issue.

[7,052,770]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

She is the peace candidate for our time, and threatens to blow open the uniparty strangehold on foreign policy that has persisted for decades. Even though she has very little chance of winning, they are terrified of her in the same way that they were terrified of Ron Paul in 2012.

No one has ever been afraid of Ron Paul or Tulsi.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Gillibrand and Gabbard should support either Warren or Harris, the frontrunners

No reliable poll has had Harris at the top. Enough.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

That is not the criticism I've seen of her. The posts on this site about Gabbard have criticized her based on the two points I just listed-- her electability is scarcely (if at all) mentioned as an issue.

I do think the Assad/Putin/Homophobic arguments are invalid - but that doesn't make her a great candidate.

Whether Politico is being hyperbolic or not, I don't see her making it to Iowa.

[Comrade Funk]

Gabbard belongs to a homophobic new age cult. Not her fault she was raised by loons, but she still follows and admires her cult leader.

[John Dule]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

That is not the criticism I've seen of her. The posts on this site about Gabbard have criticized her based on the two points I just listed-- her electability is scarcely (if at all) mentioned as an issue.

I do think the Assad/Putin/Homophobic arguments are invalid - but that doesn't make her a great candidate.

Whether Politico is being hyperbolic or not, I don't see her making it to Iowa.

Agreed. But at the very worst, she's still a better candidate than O'Rourke.

And if she doesn't make it to Iowa, all credit will go to fearmongering Twitter bots whining about her dislike for regime change in the Middle East.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

That is not the criticism I've seen of her. The posts on this site about Gabbard have criticized her based on the two points I just listed-- her electability is scarcely (if at all) mentioned as an issue.

I do think the Assad/Putin/Homophobic arguments are invalid - but that doesn't make her a great candidate.

Whether Politico is being hyperbolic or not, I don't see her making it to Iowa.

Agreed. But at the very worst, she's still a better candidate than O'Rourke.

And if she doesn't make it to Iowa, all credit will go to fearmongering Twitter bots whining about her dislike for regime change in the Middle East.

If she's such a great candidate, I think her campaign should be able to withstand Twitter trolls of all things. If she can't survive that, imagine things of actual relevance like negative ads.

[John Dule]

Third Gabbard hate thread today. Why is the establishment so afraid? This response is insanely disproportionate.

No one is afraid of someone who won't poll more than Kucinich '04/Kucinich '08 numbers combined.

If no one's afraid, then why the extreme response? Gabbard has done nothing to make her stand out from the pack as an objectionable candidate, but the Twittersphere has nevertheless exploded over her candidacy during the past two weeks. These are people who were fine with Hillary Clinton supporting traditional marriage as recently as 2008, as well as taking over $10 million from Saudi Arabia. Now I'm supposed to believe that they're mad about Gabbard criticizing "homosexual extremists" and having ONE meeting with Assad?

This is a shill campaign and it's painfully obvious.

Nobody is scared of her message. People welcome her message - people just prefer to hear it from Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren. Candidates who seem to be running actually good primary campaigns - not ones polling lower than a West Virginia State Senator.

That is not the criticism I've seen of her. The posts on this site about Gabbard have criticized her based on the two points I just listed-- her electability is scarcely (if at all) mentioned as an issue.

I do think the Assad/Putin/Homophobic arguments are invalid - but that doesn't make her a great candidate.

Whether Politico is being hyperbolic or not, I don't see her making it to Iowa.

Agreed. But at the very worst, she's still a better candidate than O'Rourke.

And if she doesn't make it to Iowa, all credit will go to fearmongering Twitter bots whining about her dislike for regime change in the Middle East.

If she's such a great candidate, I think her campaign should be able to withstand Twitter trolls of all things. If she can't survive that, imagine things of actual relevance like negative ads.

I don't think she's a great or electable candidate; in fact I disagree with her on a lot of issues. I'm just genuinely shocked by the rancor that's been directed at her.

[Blue3]

I have to admit... I emailed questions to 4 of the major candidates (not all 6 because Gillibrand and Buttigieg didn't have that option yet on their site). My results?
-Harris campaign has included me in one generic campaign message, just one, in the last 2 weeks (and no acknowledgement I asked a question)
-Warren campaign acknowledged my email, and sent me 2 campaign message emails
-Gabbard campaign acknowledged my email, and has sent me a campaign email a day
-Castro hasn't responded with anything... no listserv ad, no acknowledgment, nothing
-as I said, Gillibrand and Buttigieg don't even have that option yet

If her campaign is in disarray, it seems the strongest to me out of all them, between their email machinery and their ads, and the strong and direct apology on gay marriage. And I'm not a Tulsi fan, and was making fun of her running when she announced.

[Zaybay]

*Insert Shock Here*

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Can we let a month pass during the primary season before we start declaring this or that campaign as "being in disarray"?

[Hammy]

Can we let a month pass during the primary season before we start declaring this or that campaign as "being in disarray"?

Given that it's Atlas I'm surprised it took this long in the first place.

[Kleine Scheiße]

Gabbard belongs to a homophobic new age cult. Not her fault she was raised by loons, but she still follows and admires her cult leader.

EXTREMELY offensive and factually incorrect.

[Mr. Morden]

She's holding a campaign kickoff event on Saturday at 3pm local time in Hawaii:

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2019/01/31/gabbard-announces-venue-presidential-campaign-kickoff/