Tulsi is too anti-gun imo to really run as a Republican. Her fatal weakness. Her religion is way less of a sticking point since Hindus are not seen as being hostile, like Islam, to the evangelicals. That said she could pull moderates like crazy if the Dems ran her. She would win an election against Trump hands down because she is the only one young enough and sharp enough to properly handle his verbal assaults. Plus the optics would destroy him. But no the Dems want a far left person so have fun with that. Side note, anyone else notice Mark Zuckerberg sucking up to the right lately? He knows Trump is likely to win reelection so he's already getting his ducks in a row. The left is in trouble when big tech starts hedging against it.
What makes you think Tulsi isn't "far left"? Where does she get the moderate tag from? (What policies are particularly moderate from her?) https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/tulsi-gabbard/ I'm pretty sure everybody outside of Bernie, Warren and debatably Yang are further right then her. I'd say Tulsi has mostly leaned as you would describe "far left". That being said, much like Yang, her overall policies and how serious she is about them are pretty damn difficult to get a read on, as those two candidates are mostly one-trick pony's (one policy candidates). Tulsi is strictly focused on being anti-regime change war, Yang focused on automation/UBI.
She isn't stupid. Her IQ is likely high. However she has been in a bubble for over 30 years and no longer in in touch with "normal people". Couple that with her having become a very resentful and self entitled person. Even 25 years ago she would have gotten away with it because of the internet, podcasts and the 24 hour news cycle did not exist then. I don't know that she really cares if the democrats win unless it somehow makes her look important or relevant.
Come on, now. I know the dude-hate on HRC is especially high, even on the left, but come on, now. To not care if a Democrat wins is to not care if Trump gets a second term. A lying criminal "pompous stuck-up giant scumbag f*****ce a****le" (Otto, A Fish Called Wanda). Which is scary beyond belief.
Tulsi Gabbard had a very strange childhood. If you do not know her background, you should. She is a hottie, though.
I was contemplating make a post about just this one smear because of how ridiculous it is. How is it that so many media sites make the same irrelevant claim. She can't control who endorses her. This is obviously a concerted effort and one of the talking points. Even Stephen Colbert, instead of giving her a light-hearted interview, smeared her, including bringing up David Duke. And the funny thing, Duke never endorsed her. https://davidduke.com/dr-david-duke-no-i-did-not-endorse-tulsi-gabbard-for-president/. But you can't let that get in the way of a good smear campaign. This reminds me of the Craig James killed 5 hookers meme, except they say it straight to her face. She can call him a dick over and over, but it makes her look bad just by mentioning it. Its no wonder she is losing it. The smear campaign is more interesting than her candidacy. Who is directing it and why?
I’m not personally smearing her, I’m just mocking a terrible candidate. And Duke reversed his stance on the endorsement? Sounds like he took a page out of Tulsi’s book. I don’t think there’s any sort of mass conspiracy to smear or dismiss a candidate that’s polling at 1% nationally. She’s irrelevant. Hillary mentioning her name gets her some headlines, so she is probably loving this. She’s polling at 1% nationally and in jeopardy of losing re-election in her own district for a reason.
The "smear campaign" sounds like it's being run by the powers that be in the DNC and its monetary support who don't like being challenged over who gets to select the nominee. Sorta like Trump did to Republicans except Trump tapped into voter frustration better and had a MUCH higher public profile. But just the amount of attention and attacks a 1% candidate is receiving tells me how big of a threat she is seen as being.
Are you really equating Hillary to Trump? Yes she comes of as sleazy and patronizing but she is nothing like Trump. Its easy to see why she lost some people have an irrational hate toward her and thought that Trump could be no worse.
Or there is actually no smear campaign and she is a terrible candidate that's not projecting a good look. I admit the smear campaign and useful idiots are both conspiracy theories at this point but one has a lot more smoke.