-
Features
Democrats 2020
- Thread starter lpetrich
- Start date
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Tulsi Gabbard Says She Would Drop Julian Assange Charges and Pardon Edward Snowden
She's good on too many things. Her not being bad is a major impediment to her effort to get the nomination. Better go with someone like Biden instead. He's safe.
Nothing was learned in 2016.
She's good on too many things. Her not being bad is a major impediment to her effort to get the nomination. Better go with someone like Biden instead. He's safe.
Nothing was learned in 2016.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Gabbard: US must not go to war with Iran
Now she lost the support of the defense industry. I think I would cross party lines to vote for her, which is a sure sign she'd never make it. And this is with the knowledge that her economic positions are standard Democrat insanity.
Now she lost the support of the defense industry. I think I would cross party lines to vote for her, which is a sure sign she'd never make it. And this is with the knowledge that her economic positions are standard Democrat insanity.
Derec
Contributor
AOC is not constitutionally eligible.
I am pretty sure that if she were eligible, she'd already have joined the race.
Derec
Contributor
What's that? Like 40?
Harry Bosch
Contributor
I wouldn't favor dropping charges against Assange until we find out why he helped Trump and was there any Quid Pro Quo.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
If telling the truth is so bad that it helps Trump, we've got bigger problems than if there was any quid pro quo.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 45,982
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
We still aren’t certain what happened. Gary Hart, George Allen, and Howard Dean were completely uncertain what happened.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Well ... some people aren't sure what happened in 2016.
Angra Mainyu
Veteran Member
She is irrationally and strongly anti-nuclear energy, as I pointed out in a previous post. She has further irrational and disastrous energy proposals (see this post).
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Most Democrats are against nuclear power. That sets them apart from all environmentalists outside the US who know better.
The thing is, the US president may have absolute power outside the US, but still has some checks and balances inside the US. She's the only one with a good foreign policy. The US foreign policy for more than a few decades now is going to destroy the US.
Her foreign policy positions are why she won't win, not that she joins her fellow democrats on domestic energy stupidity. She's still the best of a very sorry lot.
Angra Mainyu
Veteran Member
Yes, but not all of them are, and not all of those against nuclear power are against it with the same degree of commitment. In fact, some of them might just be saying it for the votes, whereas others are true believers.Jason Harvestdancer said:
I wish, but no. Germany is phasing out its nuclear reactors, and generally, there is fierce opposition from organizations like Greenpeace. It's a serious problem in many and perhaps most democracies. Autocracies do not seem to care, so some are doing better in that regard.Jason Harvestdancer said:
They don't have absolute power outside the US. They need Congress for treaties (for example). Also, energy policy has repercussions for foreign policy. In particular, if she gets away with her energy policies, the loss of nuclear energy and the limitations to natural gas (she intends to ban fracking) would make the US need a lot of energy from foreign sources, in the form of fossil fuels. Hopefully, Norway and others can provide. But it looks like a really bad recipe, for the long-term future.Jason Harvestdancer said:
I think she would very probably not win with any foreign policy positions. But why is she the least bad of the candidates? If it's foreign policy, Yang's seems no worse (of course, he will not win, either).Jason Harvestdancer said:
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
As I have stated, it is her foreign policy positions that make her the best of a sorry lot. I also said that her foreign policy positions are why she won't win.
Angra Mainyu
Veteran Member
Why do you think her foreign policy positions make her a better candidate than Yang?
PyramidHead
Contributor
Tulsi's foreign policy rhetoric is one thing, her record is another. For a candidate whose foreign policy is the same as Tulsi's but has been consistent and and is predicated on actual principles (i.e. not killing innocent people versus Tulsi's primary concern being harming U.S. troops and their families--which is why she has no problem with drone warfare), allow me to introduce you to my good man Bernard.
Derec
Contributor
In war sometimes innocent people are killed. That does not mean that we must refrain from fighting our enemies just because there may be collateral damage.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Yang has practically no foreign policy positions.
You tell funny joke.
Get back to me when he's not pushing the silly Russia narrative and wants to end the persecution of Assange.
Derec
Contributor
Kristen Gillibrand, the also-ran candidate that may not even clear the very low hurdle DNC set for participation in the first debates, has found an issue.
While other candidates talk about things like climate change, foreign policy, etc., Gillibrand is going all in on ... wait for it ... Game of Thrones!
Gillibrand 'very unhappy' with 'Game of Thrones' finale
Seriously - it's not Onion or anything! I guess she hopes there are enough disgruntled HBO subscribers and those who torrent the show to put her over 1%.
While other candidates talk about things like climate change, foreign policy, etc., Gillibrand is going all in on ... wait for it ... Game of Thrones!
Gillibrand 'very unhappy' with 'Game of Thrones' finale
Seriously - it's not Onion or anything! I guess she hopes there are enough disgruntled HBO subscribers and those who torrent the show to put her over 1%.
Derec
Contributor
As far as I know, Assange helped Manning hack into some government servers. Why should he not be prosecuted for that?