*** OFFICIAL 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Race Thread ***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

SJW aren't scammers. They are people that are constantly looking for reasons to attack the "other side" and aren't aware of their obvious bias - any time a minority is attacked they jump to the conclusion that it must be because of racism/bigotry.

You are constantly looking for reasons to attack "the other side" and you're not aware of your obvious bias - any time White, Straight Males are attacked, you jump to the conclusion that it must be because of SJWs. That makes you a SJWW.

Sometimes you're right.

Sometimes the SJWs are right.

But you're both blinded by your bias and an equal cancer to the industry.

---

What are you talking about? I never blindly defend white straight males. I will only defend them if I feel they're actually right. Can you show even one example where I wrongly claimed that a white, straight male was being attacked for simply being a white, straight male? The times I've blamed SJWs are when it's obvious they're heavily involved.

Yes, I criticize Democrats a lot, but don't you criticize Republicans all the time? What does that make you? Everything you're saying about me could also apply to you and any other partisan on the forum.

---

i think your criticism of the snl skit, which was god, is an example of your reflexive anti-sjw stance that you can't see.

i don't discount it entirely, but buttgieg being gay is about 5% of the reason he's polling so poorly with black people. snl's "just look at me" joke was basically correct.

you do seem unwilling to criticize republicans, which is odd. i didn't think you were like this before. i also didn't think trump would be a president you'd like, so my read on you is way waaay off.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's support among Democratic primary voters nationwide plunged 50 percent over the past month, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll, signaling that the shake-ups in the primary field are far from over.

Former Vice President Joe Biden has retaken the lead in the poll after an autumn that saw him surrender his solid frontrunner status, climbing 3 points to earn 24 percent in the poll. Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., surged into second, rising 6 points to 16 percent, with Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders not far behind at 14 and 13 percent, respectively.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/1...bs-poll-074054

UHOH MUMBLES

black twitters hostility towards buttl is awe inspiring in its single minded stupidity.

like literally they hate him because he had the audacity to suggest young black people need to see evidence that giving a shit about school is in their best interests and they just dont.

that was too spicy a take for black twitter.

this reminds me some other situation and i forget what the particulars were but it involved oprah saying 'black america has a real problem with non-black people airing its dirty laundry' and its literally whats sinking his campaign rn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

black twitters hostility towards buttl is awe inspiring in its single minded stupidity.

like literally they hate him because he had the audacity to suggest young black people need to see evidence that giving a shit about school is in their best interests and they just dont.

that was too spicy a take for black twitter.

this reminds me some other situation and i forget what the particulars were but it involved oprah saying 'black america has a real problem with non-black people airing its dirty laundry' and its literally whats sinking his campaign rn.

---

surprising follow up


https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigi...ned-1840055464

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

black twitters hostility towards buttl is awe inspiring in its single minded stupidity.

like literally they hate him because he had the audacity to suggest young black people need to see evidence that giving a shit about school is in their best interests and they just dont.

that was too spicy a take for black twitter.

this reminds me some other situation and i forget what the particulars were but it involved oprah saying 'black america has a real problem with non-black people airing its dirty laundry' and its literally whats sinking his campaign rn.

---

His campaign is surging not sinking. Lizzy Warren is absolutely dreadful and old weird Bernie has no chance.

It's still Biden's race to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

black twitters hostility towards buttl is awe inspiring in its single minded stupidity.

like literally they hate him because he had the audacity to suggest young black people need to see evidence that giving a shit about school is in their best interests and they just dont.

that was too spicy a take for black twitter.

this reminds me some other situation and i forget what the particulars were but it involved oprah saying 'black america has a real problem with non-black people airing its dirty laundry' and its literally whats sinking his campaign rn.

---

surprising follow up


https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigi...ned-1840055464

---

Smart move for Buttigieg himself to call the author. Immediately diffuses the situation. It's easier to trash a major political candidate until the person calls you and speaks to you calmly and respectfully. At that point, the fire leaves your belly.

Buttigieg didn't get this far by being stupid.

If militant black twitter hates Buttigeg than that is good enough for me.

He is my front-runner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

surprising follow up


https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigi...ned-1840055464

---

Smart move for Buttigieg himself to call the author. Immediately diffuses the situation. It's easier to trash a major political candidate until the person calls you and speaks to you calmly and respectfully. At that point, the fire leaves your belly.

Buttigieg didn't get this far by being stupid.

---

This guy is a sensationalist obnoxious piece of shit. The statistics he mention about Black unemployment being 2x more than white unemployment is listed as such:

In 2016, the unemployment rate for White graduates ages 35 to 44 whose highest degree was a bachelor’s degree was lower than that for Black graduates (2.7 percent and 5.1 percent, respectively).

Last time I checked most graduate at age 21, so these numbers are from people who are 14-23 years removed from college. That can take a lot into consideration and I question these statistics.

I don't know about his other claims about access to technology, but in NY, minority schools get tons and tons of funding. Kids as early as Elementary School have tons of access to new technology and learning materials. They have fucking 3D printers for Christ sakes. They have additional tutoring opportunities outside of class and professionals they can talk to. These are 11 and 12 year olds. I know this because my best friends fiancee is an AP at a school with a large minority student population.

“A mediocre white kid with mediocre intelligence and mediocre parents can easily make it in America,” I explained, blackly. “A smart black kid with smart parents and a supportive community still has to fight every day to hope to reach the levels of what a mediocre white man accomplishes. And, odds are, they still might not make it.”

This is horseshit and it insults all the successful black guys that I know that did what they were supposed to and got ahead. Capitalism is the antithesis to racism.

The way he ended the article is even asinine. But tine is 100% right. Black people don't want to hear shit from white people if it isn't how racism is the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

What are you talking about? I never blindly defend white straight males. I will only defend them if I feel they're actually right. Can you show even one example where I wrongly claimed that a white, straight male was being attacked for simply being a white, straight male? The times I've blamed SJWs are when it's obvious they're heavily involved.

Yes, I criticize Democrats a lot, but don't you criticize Republicans all the time? What does that make you? Everything you're saying about me could also apply to you and any other partisan on the forum.

---

i think your criticism of the snl skit, which was god, is an example of your reflexive anti-sjw stance that you can't see.

i don't discount it entirely, but buttgieg being gay is about 5% of the reason he's polling so poorly with black people. snl's "just look at me" joke was basically correct.

you do seem unwilling to criticize republicans, which is odd. i didn't think you were like this before. i also didn't think trump would be a president you'd like, so my read on you is way waaay off.

---

They did focus groups where many of the black people said that they wouldn't vote for Buttigieg because he's gay.

I'm not saying that he'd be doing well with blacks if he were straight, but to get 0% support when you're one of the four major candidates is incredible. That goes beyond him just being a folksy midwest white guy.

Warren is also extremely white and unrelatable to black people, but she's not at 0%.

Anyway, if you watched that SNL skit and didn't think there was left bias to how they treated some of the candidates, I don't know what to tell you. I think you were just mesmerized by the celebrity lineup and some of the funny jokes.

I don't watch SNL. I saw the skit and thought it was good. As far as I know SNL is entertainment by left-leaning people for left-leaning people, so I dont really see where the outrage is coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blake

i think your criticism of the snl skit, which was god, is an example of your reflexive anti-sjw stance that you can't see.

i don't discount it entirely, but buttgieg being gay is about 5% of the reason he's polling so poorly with black people. snl's "just look at me" joke was basically correct.

you do seem unwilling to criticize republicans, which is odd. i didn't think you were like this before. i also didn't think trump would be a president you'd like, so my read on you is way waaay off.

---

They did focus groups where many of the black people said that they wouldn't vote for Buttigieg because he's gay.

I'm not saying that he'd be doing well with blacks if he were straight, but to get 0% support when you're one of the four major candidates is incredible. That goes beyond him just being a folksy midwest white guy.

Warren is also extremely white and unrelatable to black people, but she's not at 0%.

Anyway, if you watched that SNL skit and didn't think there was left bias to how they treated some of the candidates, I don't know what to tell you. I think you were just mesmerized by the celebrity lineup and some of the funny jokes.

---

Fuck focus groups, you people forgot 2008 and Black peoples turnout to Prop 8 in Cali?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5Gxs9YhwPY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OSA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

They did focus groups where many of the black people said that they wouldn't vote for Buttigieg because he's gay.

I'm not saying that he'd be doing well with blacks if he were straight, but to get 0% support when you're one of the four major candidates is incredible. That goes beyond him just being a folksy midwest white guy.

Warren is also extremely white and unrelatable to black people, but she's not at 0%.

Anyway, if you watched that SNL skit and didn't think there was left bias to how they treated some of the candidates, I don't know what to tell you. I think you were just mesmerized by the celebrity lineup and some of the funny jokes.

---

Fuck focus groups, you people forgot 2008 and Black peoples turnout to Prop 8 in Cali?

---

I didn't forget at all, but if I brought that up, people would say that attitudes towards gay people have changed in society since 2008. Which is true, but in the black community it's not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OSA

Fuck focus groups, you people forgot 2008 and Black peoples turnout to Prop 8 in Cali?

---

I didn't forget at all, but if I brought that up, people would say that attitudes towards gay people have changed in society since 2008. Which is true, but in the black community it's not true.

---

I didn't think that was the case too until I started talking to the 18-22 yr old twinks that I fucked about it. I don't know if the education system being conducive to kids coming out but there are so many kids who are out a lot younger than they used to be and as a result their peers are a lot more supportive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by verminaard

I don't watch SNL. I saw the skit and thought it was good. As far as I know SNL is entertainment by left-leaning people for left-leaning people, so I dont really see where the outrage is coming from.

---

No outrage, and in fact I'm not seeing anyone on the right bitching about it. This is because whenever people on the right see any parody making fun of only Democrats, they think it's "hilarious", and don't bother asking themselves if the parodying was especially gentle in order to not make the subjects look too bad (as opposed to any parody of Republicans, where it's vicious.)

I didn't say it was a bad skit, only that it could have been a lot better if they didn't tread so carefully.

But I'm not surprised. I expected it.

The only pleasant surprise coming from an SNL skit was the one where two black guys mock a bunch of white SJW liberals on 2016 election night, as they cry over the results. It was one of SNL's few moments where they ever seriously mocked modern white leftists for their often tone-deaf and hypocritical behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHG0ezLiVGc

Most people didn't realize it when watching, but segment was almost surely derivative of a memorable All in the Family episode, when two larcenous but otherwise nonviolent and lovable black guys break into the Bunker house, hold them there while they wait for the police to leave the area, and mock both Archie (for his racism) and Mike (for his white apologism and insufferable liberal haughtineess.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

The only pleasant surprise coming from an SNL skit was the one where two black guys mock a bunch of white SJW liberals on 2016 election night, as they cry over the results.

---

The punchline was that America is racist and the Whites didn't realize it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

The only pleasant surprise coming from an SNL skit was the one where two black guys mock a bunch of white SJW liberals on 2016 election night, as they cry over the results.

---

The punchline was that America is racist and the Whites didn't realize it.

---

That was not even close to the entire punchline.

The sketch was a (surprising) indictment of the woke white left, which inaccurately sees itself as having the finger on the pulse of social justice and racial sensitivity.

It also mocks the hypersensitivity and exaggerative qualities of today's left, especially with the last line of, "This is the worst thing America has ever done" (referring to electing Trump), followed by the two black characters looking at each other and busting up laughing.

Anyway, it was a great sketch. Next they need to make one about male feminists.

https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/

This is exactly in line w/ what Tulsi's been saying. Another OPCW (Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons) scientist has accused management of doctoring Syrian chemical weapons reports to justify US/Saudi intervention and attacks.

Exactly the same as what happened in Iraq in 2003. A war waged under false pretenses.

How is Tucker Carlson the only person bringing this up? https://twitter.com/sofiaxzaldivar/s...67053183307776 - because corporate MSM is completely owned and controlled by the Military Industrial Complex.

A couple days ago:

Tulsi was on Joe Rogan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/

This is exactly in line w/ what Tulsi's been saying. Another OPCW (Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons) scientist has accused management of doctoring Syrian chemical weapons reports to justify US/Saudi intervention and attacks.

Exactly the same as what happened in Iraq in 2003. A war waged under false pretenses.

How is Tucker Carlson the only person bringing this up? https://twitter.com/sofiaxzaldivar/s...67053183307776 - because corporate MSM is completely owned and controlled by the Military Industrial Complex.

---

Sure, except no in every conceivable way.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2019...crucial-facts/

One person had an issue with a draft version of the report. Shit got fixed in the final report. That final report was issued in March. What you could do is start thinking why is this news. Why is this pushed as news. March was a while ago. Are we talking laziness, intellectual dishonesty, general stupidity, intentional manipulation or all of the above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

How is Tucker Carlson the only person bringing this up?

---

honestly you answered your own question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

The punchline was that America is racist and the Whites didn't realize it.

---

That was not even close to the entire punchline.

The sketch was a (surprising) indictment of the woke white left, which inaccurately sees itself as having the finger on the pulse of social justice and racial sensitivity.

It also mocks the hypersensitivity and exaggerative qualities of today's left, especially with the last line of, "This is the worst thing America has ever done" (referring to electing Trump), followed by the two black characters looking at each other and busting up laughing.

Anyway, it was a great sketch. Next they need to make one about male feminists.

---

While I agree with part of your second point, you are completely missing what the Black characters know to be teu, and which you are woefully blind to yourself, and that it the point duped made: A *lot* of American whites are racist, and it’s not jut restricted to Southern states. The white women in the skit were assuming they were now living in a an Obama-style post-racial world, and the last great fight for equality in America was women’s rights. So, while they were deluded, it wasn’t their the racial sensitivity; it was there bias towards their own gender issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

That was not even close to the entire punchline.

The sketch was a (surprising) indictment of the woke white left, which inaccurately sees itself as having the finger on the pulse of social justice and racial sensitivity.

It also mocks the hypersensitivity and exaggerative qualities of today's left, especially with the last line of, "This is the worst thing America has ever done" (referring to electing Trump), followed by the two black characters looking at each other and busting up laughing.

Anyway, it was a great sketch. Next they need to make one about male feminists.

---

While I agree with part of your second point, you are completely missing what the Black characters know to be teu, and which you are woefully blind to yourself, and that it the point duped made: A *lot* of American whites are racist, and it’s not jut restricted to Southern states. The white women in the skit were assuming they were now living in a an Obama-style post-racial world, and the last great fight for equality in America was women’s rights. So, while they were deluded, it wasn’t their the racial sensitivity; it was there bias towards their own gender issues.

---

:no

I have no idea where you got women's rights out of that sketch.

It was very clearly done to mock white SJWs who were overreacting to Trump being elected. Yes, racism was a big part of the sketch, but more in the "You ignorant white liberals think you understand our struggles, and you don't. Oh, and regardless of who is President, our community is still going to have all of the same problems, so we don't really give much of a shit who won this election, so stop crying for us for all the wrong reasons."

Notice that the sketch featured no Republican characters, despite the fact that it was about a Trump victory. SNL could have gone a lot of different directions with that one, such as choosing to show boorish Trump supporters and lampooning them. Instead, they decided to jab at the pseudo-woke white liberal, and their tone-deaf overreaction to Trump being elected. It was a rare moment of introspection from modern SNL, which usually goes for the low hanging right wing fruit.

Doesn't surprise me that white liberals such as yourself are finding ways to make it about something else, rather than finally looking in the mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/

This is exactly in line w/ what Tulsi's been saying. Another OPCW (Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons) scientist has accused management of doctoring Syrian chemical weapons reports to justify US/Saudi intervention and attacks.

Exactly the same as what happened in Iraq in 2003. A war waged under false pretenses.

How is Tucker Carlson the only person bringing this up? https://twitter.com/sofiaxzaldivar/s...67053183307776 - because corporate MSM is completely owned and controlled by the Military Industrial Complex.

---

Sure, except no in every conceivable way.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2019...crucial-facts/

One person had an issue with a draft version of the report. Shit got fixed in the final report. That final report was issued in March. What you could do is start thinking why is this news. Why is this pushed as news. March was a while ago. Are we talking laziness, intellectual dishonesty, general stupidity, intentional manipulation or all of the above.

---

Incorrect. This is a new, second whistleblower. You are conflating the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

How is Tucker Carlson the only person bringing this up?

---

honestly you answered your own question.

---

A totally cowardly / disingenuous / vacuous rebuttal from you, as expected.

This is also the biggest story in independent media and is being pushed under the rug by American, French, and British MSM, because it exposes the narrative/war they were attempting to push. No idea why you, an ostensibly independent citizen who wants the best for his country, would be a cheerleader for mainstream, corporate news and the wars/lies they push. This is Iraq War 2.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Sure, except no in every conceivable way.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2019...crucial-facts/

One person had an issue with a draft version of the report. Shit got fixed in the final report. That final report was issued in March. What you could do is start thinking why is this news. Why is this pushed as news. March was a while ago. Are we talking laziness, intellectual dishonesty, general stupidity, intentional manipulation or all of the above.

---

Incorrect. This is a new, second whistleblower. You are conflating the two.

---

Mmmm, no. Look at your link of the november 23rd "whistleblower" and then look at mine from november 25th referring to that same email. Also there's no whistleblower. It's just hacked old emails.

Oh also while we're at false equivalency business, there was 2 countries that were convinced of Iraqs WMDs and now there's 2 countries that have any doubt about Syria's WMDs. And in both cases it's just the public facing profile, intelligence agencies knew/know what's up.

Billionaire's give away very little of their personal wealth while devising new ways to fuck over their customers.

Politicans take their money and fuck over the people.

The system will NEVER change.

Embedded Tweet

https://dcbarroco.files.wordpress.co...-bloomberg.jpg

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

Incorrect. This is a new, second whistleblower. You are conflating the two.

---

Mmmm, no. Look at your link of the november 23rd "whistleblower" and then look at mine from november 25th referring to that same email. Also there's no whistleblower. It's just hacked old emails.

---

You're right - it's a new leak of an older complaint. This does not, in the slightest, discount what is being alleged: https://www.foxnews.com/world/syria-...leading-report . Even pro-war Fox News is reporting on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Mmmm, no. Look at your link of the november 23rd "whistleblower" and then look at mine from november 25th referring to that same email. Also there's no whistleblower. It's just hacked old emails.

---

You're right - it's a new leak of an older complaint. This does not, in the slightest, discount what is being alleged: https://www.foxnews.com/world/syria-...leading-report . Even pro-war Fox News is reporting on this.

---

Ok. Do you ever read the shit you keep linking?

"The author takes issue with the draft version"... and then shit got fixed. That's kinda how this always goes. That's more or less the purpose of drafts and showing said drafts to different departments working on these reports is a part of it. It would literally be pointless if people didn't let other individuals know their gripes about inaccuracies, inconsistencies, wording and whole lot other boring crap.

OPCW ability to assign blame is currently in a grey area. It depends how frisky they feel and how blatant the guilty party was. No country that's involved in Syria relies on their work. Syria was bombed well before the draft report. After that report US has withdrawn troops from Syria. There's no correlation nor causality.

For this to be Iraq 2.0 this report should have been used for something (it wasn't) and maybe you can guess what the direction American troops should have been.

But hey maybe i'm wrong and you can start by telling what do you think is being alleged. I have no idea. Thought chain tends to be so fucking stupid that i don't really even bother guessing anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

---

---

so basically youre just going to stick your head in the sand and ignore that the overwhelming majority of accounts pushing that hashtag are sock puppets, most of which were created in the last month or two?

or are you just running out of ways to defend your <%1 "candidate"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

---

so basically youre just going to stick your head in the sand and ignore that the overwhelming majority of accounts pushing that hashtag are sock puppets, most of which were created in the last month or two?

or are you just running out of ways to defend your <%1 "candidate"?

---

I have seen zero evidence of that, and have seen much evidence of growing, bipartisan support for Tulsi. If you haven't noticed, go look at any YouTube video w/ her, including the most recent Rogan episode, and you'll see huge support from all across the political spectrum.

Note: I've also seen huge support in person, as I've been volunteering in NH and in NYC. I know your MSM would have you believe it's all Russian bots (in an effort to discredit Tulsi's message w/out actually addressing it), but we are real people.

So please, provide any evidence.

That, and you (as a representative/shill for the corporate/DNC establishment) seem to be overly obsessed with a "<% 1 candidate" (strange how she is about to make the December debates, which require four polls w/ 4% or higher).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diggydow

You're right - it's a new leak of an older complaint. This does not, in the slightest, discount what is being alleged: https://www.foxnews.com/world/syria-...leading-report . Even pro-war Fox News is reporting on this.

---

Ok. Do you ever read the shit you keep linking?

"The author takes issue with the draft version"... and then shit got fixed. That's kinda how this always goes. That's more or less the purpose of drafts and showing said drafts to different departments working on these reports is a part of it. It would literally be pointless if people didn't let other individuals know their gripes about inaccuracies, inconsistencies, wording and whole lot other boring crap.

OPCW ability to assign blame is currently in a grey area. It depends how frisky they feel and how blatant the guilty party was. No country that's involved in Syria relies on their work. Syria was bombed well before the draft report. After that report US has withdrawn troops from Syria. There's no correlation nor causality.

For this to be Iraq 2.0 this report should have been used for something (it wasn't) and maybe you can guess what the direction American troops should have been.

But hey maybe i'm wrong and you can start by telling what do you think is being alleged. I have no idea. Thought chain tends to be so fucking stupid that i don't really even bother guessing anymore.

---

It was not corrected. The report that was released was heavily redacted and distorted to fit the narrative of a gas attack, and the OPCW workers were pressured by anonymous US government workers to release the falsified report. Here is an interview with the reporter covering the recent Wikileaks revelations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMSy...ature=youtu.be

The "gas attacks" have been used as reason for the US to continue its presence in Syria + its heisting of the Syrian gov't's oil. They've also been used to justify the US's continue regime-change effort/war that's been in effect since 2012: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore. This is where the US gov't armed terrorists to get rid of Assad, and the terrorists ended up forming ISIS - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/w...ain-trump.html

ok, head in the sand it is, i guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

---

why would it surprise you that russia supports a candidate that is against the traditional policies of american internventionalism. under a traditional democrat or republican presidency, we're a threat to russia (and a million other countries). why wouldn't they support a candidate that is running on an anti-war platform?

i guess i'm missing the machiavellian plot twist here. should tulsi be ashamed of the fact that countries that prefer to exist support her?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

ok, head in the sand it is, i guess.

---

There it is, this little bitch / cowardly behavior you exhibit when asked to present any evidence to back up your claims. You crumble immediately and lob an insult to deflect from the fact that you have no evidence for the smears/innuendos you parrot.

Either back up your claims or don't make them at all. This is very basic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

---

why would it surprise you that russia supports a candidate that is against the traditional policies of american internventionalism. under a traditional democrat or republican presidency, we're a threat to russia (and a million other countries). why wouldn't they support a candidate that is running on an anti-war platform?

i guess i'm missing the machiavellian plot twist here. should tulsi be ashamed of the fact that countries that prefer to exist support her?

---

Maybe they don't want to see someone elected in the US who might escalate towards war with them.

Watch this at 5:42:
https://youtu.be/d_B3f9w8F5c

"One fact blows up this entire, nonsense propaganda, as well: you know who Russia favored in 2008 and 2012?

Barack Obama.

And it wasn't close. They much, much more preferred Obama."

I wonder if MSNBC will bring that up as well? LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

tulsi could win a lot of points with approximately everyone if she spoke up against the russian twitterbot fleet currently pushing the #tuslsimediablackout hashtag.

---

why would it surprise you that russia supports a candidate that is against the traditional policies of american internventionalism. under a traditional democrat or republican presidency, we're a threat to russia (and a million other countries). why wouldn't they support a candidate that is running on an anti-war platform?

i guess i'm missing the machiavellian plot twist here. should tulsi be ashamed of the fact that countries that prefer to exist support her?

---

why would you say im surprised? ive been pointing this out for months. whats shocking is tulsi's response. this is a woman with clearance from a military background followed by a highly successful run in government. so when she ignores all of this, allowing the narrative to essentially overwhelm her actual message, its eyebrow raising. the 'shocking' part i suppose is when she responds by exploding like some wine drunk soccer mom, crying about how people are accusing her of treason, instead of calmly pointing out the obvious;

yes, a lot of energy is being spent manipulating her message to damage our democracy, and a lot of it is coming from russia.

but hey, who can blame her for playing the victim card when its working so well? she has a 'bipartisan' cult and a financially promising future on fox news, where she will continue to marginalize moderate left voices while remaining mysteriously silent about the people doing the other 98% of the damage.