Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
Kriegsspiel
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Kriegsspiel » Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:15 pm

fell-like-rain wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:45 am
All the lefties I know have been shitting on Trump for not visiting the troops or for withdrawing from Syria, and I'm just here wondering when everyone in America became a neocon hawk when it comes to foreign policy. Nobody seems to care anymore about wasting lives and money on pointless wars, or extrajudicial killings, or blowing up American citizens...
In Tucker Carlson's book Ship Of Fools, pp 88-107, he illustrates how liberals used to be anti-war as a matter of course. He thinks that Bill Clinton watched as Democrats kept losing because voters thought they were weak (". . . from 1968 through 1988, Democrats decisively lost five presidential elections and narrowly won another.") . So after he was elected, he increased the military presence of the deployment he inherited, Somalia, and also ordered US troops into Haiti, started the air campaign in the Balkans (and later ordered thousands of troops there), dropped cruise missiles on Sudan and Afghanistan, and of started regularly bombing Iraq. "Since Clinton took the party back in a hawkish direction, the Democrats have lost the popular vote only once, in 2004."

"When then-senator Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, he positioned himself as the antiwar candidate. He attacked his top opponent, Hillary Clinton, for supporting the 2002 war resolution and pledged to get US troops out of Iraq. But after he was elected, he supported the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya, ordered drone strikes on thousands of people, "most of them in 'non-battlefield' areas like Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan. Some of the people killed were American citizens, struck down as 'enemy-combatants' despite being far away from US troops, in countries the US was not at war with. . . . By the end of the Obama years, America was not only bombing Syria, but had ground troops there, this time for the purposes of fighting the Islamic State."

"In 2008, three antiwar documentaries were nominated for Best Documentary at the Academy Awards, and Hollywood stars routinely bashed President Bush's foreign policy. . . . In 2016 there wasn't a single antiwar song in the top 100 pop hits."

"In one of those weird historical ironies that almost nobody seemed to appreciate at the time, the Republican in the race was running well to the left of his Democratic opponent on key foreign policy questions. Donald Trump gave speech after speech attacking the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the idea of nation building more broadly. Hillary Clinton was still defending the decision to kill Gaddafi."

Max Boot and Bill Kristol are also sampled as war hawks that influence politicians.

So that's his take.

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by BRUTE » Tue Jan 15, 2019 10:17 pm

the point that "own team is never wrong" is clearly true on both sides, so there's no surprise to the Obama-war-hypocrisy.

assuming the "perception of weakness" was really Clinton's motivation and "being strong" the strategy, is there a causation to the correlation?

brute wants to think not - he's pretty anti-war, and hopes humans aren't just for macho war talk.

is it really "perception of strength"? is it something about decadence? brute understands the feeling of many Red Team humans that the Democrats are focussing on arranging deck chairs when the ship is sinking, i.e. there are more important problems for many humans in this country than bathroom signs. since politics is a zero-sum game, any strong focus on issues not important to the individual will be perceived as a threat, because it takes resources away.

Democrats also have a tendency to imagine problems away instead of addressing them, e.g. on the border. loudly saying "there is no problem" invokes the image of aloof, unrealistic magical thinking. it is very easy to demonstrate that at least some problems exist - however minor they might be, or however outweighed by advantages they might be, or however badly the proposed Red Team solution might work to solve it. but simply declaring the problem away is perceived as "does not solve real problems", which maybe Clinton confused with "weak"? (btw, not that the Red Team doesn't have these tendencies, brute is only looking at one side here).

The Old Man
Posts: 376
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:55 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by The Old Man » Tue Jan 15, 2019 10:58 pm

Trump is in Putin's pocket. If Trump gets the wall built, then I am in favor of even more Russian influence. Let Putin decide the Democratic candidate. Then in 2020 it will be Putin versus Putin.

fell-like-rain
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:19 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by fell-like-rain » Wed Jan 16, 2019 8:23 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:15 pm
Huh, sounds like it might be worth a read. Which also reminds me that the novel Ship of Fools is on my to-read list; maybe I can get them as a package deal.

It seems like what the Dems really need to do is reframe pacifism as ultra-patriotism. "I respect the troops... in fact, I respect them so goddamn much that I won't send them to die unnecessarily in [impoverished country of the week]. Let's bring our precious soldiers home, so they can play baseball and eat apple pie and read the Constitution to their kids, or whatever."

Jean
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am
Location: Switzterland

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Jean » Wed Jan 16, 2019 12:15 pm

Ain't that what trump did?

Kriegsspiel
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Kriegsspiel » Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:16 pm

Jean wrote:
Wed Jan 16, 2019 12:15 pm
Ain't that what trump did?
I don't know about cause and effect WRT Trump framing wars how he does (Scott Adams' 'pacing and leading' theory applies), and Americans losing their appetite for them, but here's more from Tucker Carlson:
There was a GOP primary debate that night in Greenville, South Carolina, so every Republican in Washington was watching. Seemingly out of nowhere, Trump articulated something that no party leader had ever said out loud. "We should never have been in Iraq," Trump announced, his voice rising. "We have destabilized the Middle East."

Many in the crowd booed, but Trump kept going: "They lied, They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none. And they knew there were none."

Pandemonium seemed to erupt in the hall, and on television. Shocked political analysts declared that the Trump presidential effort had just euthanized itself. Republican voters, they said with certainty, would never accept attacks on policies their party had espoused and carried out.

Back in Washington, rival GOP campaigns frantically searched for ways to discredit what Trump had said. They found what they considered a silver bullet in a recording of an episode of the Howard Stern radio show from 2002, in which Trump seemed to approve of the idea of overthrowing Saddam.

By Washington standards, this qualified as a kill shot. The candidate had once uttered complimentary words about a war that had not yet started. Therefore, he had no right to criticize the same war fourteen years later, after it had proved disastrous. . . . Republican voters had a different reaction. They understood that adults sometimes change their minds based on evidence. They themselves had come to understand that the Iraq War was a mistake. They appreciated hearing something verboten but true. . . . Trump won the South Carolina primary, and shortly after that, the Republican nomination.
You can see some parallels with that story and with Tulsi Gabbard's . Like fell-like-rain, people are getting on her for not being enthusiastically pro-gay back in the early 2000s, because she wanted to represent her voters, who she didn't think were into it. But in 2012, she changes her mind after her military deployments to Muslim countries, and, to keep up with her district's wishes:
This political position held until 2012, when she made an about face and declared she supported gay rights— just in time for the election for Hawaii’s 2nd District. And that wasn’t the first time she had shed a piece of her past in order to make herself more palatable to voters. link

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by BRUTE » Wed Jan 16, 2019 9:28 pm

apparently a lot of troops were voting for Gary Johnson. maybe because Libertarians consistently have the best anti-war message?

Kriegsspiel
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Kriegsspiel » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:11 pm

I am a former troop and I voted for Gary Johnson. I had no idea this was popular, but you're right:
Conducted in September, it is the first scientific breakdown of voting preferences among service members, and includes more than 2,200 responses from active-duty troops. And it shows a very different race than the one playing out on the broader national stage.

Among the entire military force, Trump leads Johnson 37.6 percent to 36.5 percent, within the study’s 2 percent margin of error. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton trails as a distant third-place choice, with only 16.3 percent of troops' support.
. . .
Perhaps most notably, there is a sharp split between enlisted personnel and the military's officer corps, which directs day-to-day operations and implements policy. Among the officers surveyed, Johnson is the clear choice, commanding support from 38.6 percent of respondents. Clinton actually outpaces Trump in that group, with nearly 28 percent support for the former secretary of State compared to the New York business mogul’s 26 percent. link

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Mister Imperceptible » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:22 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:11 pm
I am a former troop and I voted for Gary Johnson.
On a completely irrational/emotional level, this is appealing to me.

I like the idea that the servicemen and women are committed to liberty, and might not want to crush the populace if ordered to do so.

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by BRUTE » Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:09 pm

from the interactions brute has had with service members (not that many interactions), it seems a surprising (to brute) amount of them really do it because they believe in the cause. maybe the combination of "not such great pay" and "not such great career opportunities" plus "social status has been better" selects for humans who do it for the right reasons?

Riggerjack
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:47 am

Let Putin decide the Democratic candidate. Then in 2020 it will be Putin versus Putin.
You mean like the last election, and the one before that, and all the rest? We haven't had an election free from Russian influence since the great depression. Which only seems fair, since there has never been a Russian election free from American influence. This outrage over politics as usual seems... Misplaced.

As for Johnson, I am a former troop, and I voted Johnson. But when I was enlisted, and it looked like I may be ordered to put on my jackboots to suppress the weak, it didn't occur to me to object. Good will and respect for freedom are a poor match for military discipline. Good intentions don't stand up to orders very well.

But if one knows what war is, it's hard to fit in a Blue or Red t-shirt.

IlliniDave
Posts: 2497
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by IlliniDave » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:10 am

Riggerjack wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:47 am
You mean like the last election, and the one before that, and all the rest? We haven't had an election free from Russian influence since the great depression. Which only seems fair, since there has never been a Russian election free from American influence. This outrage over politics as usual seems... Misplaced.
It actually goes back farther than that, Wilson attempted to intervene during the Bolshevik revolution against the Bolsheviks, so we meddled with Russia/Soviet Union from its gestation. And soon after Lenin was reaching out to the various socialist/communist political factions in the US. I agree with your statement about the outrage over the 100-year status quo.

fiby41
Posts: 950
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by fiby41 » Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:32 am

Tulsi was on the Joe Rogan podcast: https://youtu.be/oIb2lmHgd5s

Topics covered:
Who benefit from regime change wars
Nuclear threats
How is being in a war like
Foreign interference in social media
What's it like to be under 40 and in power
Crowdsourcing campaign funding to be less dependent on corporates
Vote tampering and prevention methods

jennypenny
Posts: 6193
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by jennypenny » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:40 am

Gabbard's candidacy is a positive step for Democrats. She brings in some fresh issues but also doesn't have much baggage (she definitely wasn't in the "I'm with her" crowd last time). I'm keeping a full list of potential candidates if anyone is interested. There are 20+ on it already.


In other news, there are persistent rumors of a Romney/Haley challenge in the primaries. Word is they are quietly surveying potential support and financial backing. I mention it because the type of Democratic candidate who would be successful running against Trump is different than the type who would be successful against Romney/Haley. If R/H mount a serious Republican challenge, Democrats might not know the opposing candidate when they vote in their primaries. That could make things interesting, and potentially much more difficult for Democrats.

fiby41
Posts: 950
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by fiby41 » Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:15 am

Tulsi v/s Nikki 2020

Jean
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am
Location: Switzterland

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Jean » Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:21 am

Is a Trump/Gabbard 2020 Ticket possible?

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by BRUTE » Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:08 pm

fiby41 wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:15 am
Tulsi v/s Nikki 2020
+1

Clarice
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:45 pm
Location: California

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Clarice » Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:49 am

Ladies and Gentlemen,
You didn't have to wait too long. Currently (and very unfortunately), in this country you can not be anti-war without being smeared as Putin puppet:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... rd-n964261

Kriegsspiel
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:54 am

Imagine that! Other countries like Americans who aren't in favor of war.

Kriegsspiel
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: Tulsi 2020: Anti-war Democrat says she’s running for US president

Post by Kriegsspiel » Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:52 pm

Clarice, listening to Tim Pool on Joe Rogan's podcast say that that story (Tulsi and the Russians) was a false flag operation on Twitter by the same Democratic group who false flagged Roy Moore in Alabama.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02ux1dKNPXo
1:32:35

"NYT reported there's a group that 'false flagged' the Republicans in Alabama, with fake Twitter accounts they made, to convince the media Russians were propping up the campaign of Roy Moore.

According to the NYT this is all fact; they've seen the documents, they've reported it, that Democratic operatives engaged in a false flag campaign to make it look like the Russians were propping up Republicans, and the national media in the US ran with it.

How that's not a crime is beyond me. That's interfering in elections. And we know it. And this group is still being cited, they're smearing Tulsi Gabbard. An NBC News article came out saying 'Russians have taken notice of her campaign' or promoting it... Same group. Still running the story."

This is from the NYT story I believe he's referencing
As Russia’s online election machinations came to light last year, a group of Democratic tech experts decided to try out similarly deceptive tactics in the fiercely contested Alabama Senate race, according to people familiar with the effort and a report on its results.

The secret project, carried out on Facebook and Twitter, was likely too small to have a significant effect on the race, in which the Democratic candidate it was designed to help, Doug Jones, edged out the Republican, Roy S. Moore. But it was a sign that American political operatives of both parties have paid close attention to the Russian methods, which some fear may come to taint elections in the United States.

One participant in the Alabama project, Jonathon Morgan, is the chief executive of New Knowledge, a small cyber security firm that wrote a scathing account of Russia’s social media operations in the 2016 election that was released this week by the Senate Intelligence Committee.

An internal report on the Alabama effort, obtained by The New York Times, says explicitly that it “experimented with many of the tactics now understood to have influenced the 2016 elections.”

The project’s operators created a Facebook page on which they posed as conservative Alabamians, using it to try to divide Republicans and even to endorse a write-in candidate to draw votes from Mr. Moore. It involved a scheme to link the Moore campaign to thousands of Russian accounts that suddenly began following the Republican candidate on Twitter, a development that drew national media attention.

“We orchestrated an elaborate ‘false flag’ operation that planted the idea that the Moore campaign was amplified on social media by a Russian botnet,” the report says.
New Knowledge in NBC's story:
Analysts at New Knowledge, the company the Senate Intelligence Committee used to track Russian activities in the 2016 election, told NBC News they've spotted "chatter" related to Gabbard in anonymous online message boards, including those known for fomenting right-wing troll campaigns. The chatter discussed Gabbard's usefulness.

Post Reply