It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tulsi Gabbard could beat Trump.(Why is she trailing in the primaries? I can't understand it.)

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Think about it. She has not one, but two boobs!! What else does she need?

Maybe a bit of melatonin in her skin? Check!

A nonstandard religious affiliation that isn't Islam? Check!


And on top of that, her stand against Hillary would SURELY get her at least a few swing votes from the Republican side of the aisle.

(I think many, if not most, of the people who voted for Trump in the last election were really voting "Not Hillary")


If she won the primary, we might actually get to choose between the greater of two goods, instead of the lesser of two evils.

(for the first time in goodness only knows how long!!??!)



So I'm wondering: why can't that happen????




posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Yeah , but is she a Good Snatchgrabber ? I am gonna Vote for the BEST One ......



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Because she lacks the leadership that is required. Her 'present' vote during the impeachment vote sank her chances of competing.

By playing it 'safe' riding the middle of the road for the sake of her campaign she disenfranchised her constituents back in Hawaii.



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Have you ever seen a woman run a country? Australia, New Zealand, Germany etc ?



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

So someone who polls in the 1 to 3% range and can't even win the Democratic Primary is going to best Trump?

Puhleeze.


I Like Tulsi, compared to other Democrats. But she never caught the imagination of the Public. She needs a real economic policy that sets her apart from the Crowd.




edit on 3-3-2020 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Because she is a flip-flop double-talking supposedly "former" CFR member that cannot be trusted?



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3sixand9


Because she lacks the leadership that is required. Her 'present' vote during the impeachment vote sank her chances of competing.

By playing it 'safe' riding the middle of the road for the sake of her campaign she disenfranchised her constituents back in Hawaii.



People on the other side of the fence might see that, not as "playing it safe". But rather "playing it sane."

The impeachment never had any real credibility. Everyone who voted for it merely showed they were a groupie.

"If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump off it too?"

Democrats seems to want to elect somebody would would say "yes" to that question.




originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

So someone who polls in the 1 to 3% range and can't even win the Democratic Primary is going to best Trump?

Puhleeze.


If she got the nomination all the dems in the country would still vote for her.

The trick to winning an election is to grab all the votes on your own side, and a few votes on the other side.

No other running democrat has a likely chance of grabbing the cross aisle votes.




I Like Tulsi, compared to other Democrats. But she never caught the imagination of the Public. She needs a real economic policy that sets her apart from the Crowd.





That's the problem. Everyone wants an extremist instead of a moderate.


And perhaps that is the best way to describe what has gone wrong with the left.

Moderates win elections. (And also usually govern better.) But they don't "capture" anyone's "imagination", because moderate policies are kind of dull and boring.




originally posted by: scubagravy
Have you ever seen a woman run a country? Australia, New Zealand, Germany etc ?


England had Margaret Thatcher for a little while, didn't they?



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

Think about it. She has not one, but two boobs!! What else does she need? Maybe a bit of melatonin in her skin? Check! A nonstandard religious affiliation that isn't Islam? Check! And on top of that, her stand against Hillary would SURELY get her at least a few swing votes from the Republican side of the aisle. (I think many, if not most, of the people who voted for Trump in the last election were really voting "Not Hillary") If she won the primary, we might actually get to choose between the greater of two goods, instead of the lesser of two evils. (for the first time in goodness only knows how long!!??!) So I'm wondering: why can't that happen????


Reminds me of the dog food sales convention. CEO gets up and says, "Don't we have the best sales force on the planet?" Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! "Don't we have the best distribution system in the country?" Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! " Don't we have the best manufacturing system in existence?" Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! "Then why are sales down?"

Voice from he back of the room: "Because dogs don't like it!"



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

Think about it. She has not one, but two boobs!! What else does she need?

Maybe a bit of melatonin in her skin? Check!

A nonstandard religious affiliation that isn't Islam? Check!


And on top of that, her stand against Hillary would SURELY get her at least a few swing votes from the Republican side of the aisle.

(I think many, if not most, of the people who voted for Trump in the last election were really voting "Not Hillary")


If she won the primary, we might actually get to choose between the greater of two goods, instead of the lesser of two evils.

(for the first time in goodness only knows how long!!??!)



So I'm wondering: why can't that happen????


Because for the dnc and gop is not about winning its about getting the RIGHT candidate elected .

There is no point of winning if you dont own the candidate.


edit on 16331America/ChicagoTue, 03 Mar 2020 21:16:05 -0600000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

This should give you an idea why Gabbard can’t beat anyone.
Mike Bloomberg won American Samoa tonight, beating Gabbard by 20% there.
Strange thing is, Gabbard was born in American Samoa.
Go figure.



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

How about the Democrat Party is in a civil war with itself. How about the looming chances of a brokered convention. How about the new dem rules that allow a first ballot free of super-delegte voting block. How about those two sides needing to agree on someone other than the two major front runners. How about Gabbard.

Her campaign is no relying upon the liberal mainstream media, they actually avoid her. She is campaigning on a low budget supporter funded grass roots money raising. She is respecting term limits by not running again for her seat in the House.

Within the party,she is one of two targets of the Clinton Machine, Sanders being the other. She supported Sanders in 16 and backed a number of his comments during the debates she was allowed to enter. When we look at the surface of the Dems, no one is quoting Clinton, no one is inviting her to join them on the campaign trail or asking for her endorsement. No one.

This suggests that the war within the party between those who want to move into the future and those who want to stick with the Clintons may be coming to a head and if it does if that war comes to the over throw of the Clinton Machine Gabbard could be high on the list of people to listen to and consider when the voting happens at the convention.



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42

Because for the dnc and gop is not about winning its about getting the RIGHT candidate elected .

There is no point of winning if you dont own the candidate.




I think you mean "getting the right candidate nominated".

There isn't a snow ball's chance in Hades that any of the other candidates would get "elected".


I always hear people say that voting for a third party candidate, like Ralph Nader, is "throwing away your vote". (Although I think he's not running this time.)

But I've done it in the past if I didn't like either of the main candidates.



But still I need to understand: Does this mean the democrats hate Trump LESS than Tulsi?

Because those two are, realistically, the only two choices you have.


edit on 3-3-2020 by bloodymarvelous because: wanted to signal what quote I was responding to



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Yeah , but is she a Good Snatchgrabber ? I am gonna Vote for the BEST One ......



Having one her self, she'd know the best way to grab 'em..

Just elect one will yas... good lord, it's like the longest boring sport event ever.. everyone is chasing the ball but they're all just standing still..



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
Have you ever seen a woman run a country? Australia, New Zealand, Germany etc ?


...The Iron Lady?



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Maybe a bit of melatonin in her skin? Check!


Low energy and sleepy? I take enough melatonin and I’ll sleep through half the day while having lucid dreams.

Not anything I want the President to be a part of.



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Maybe a bit of melatonin in her skin? Check!


Low energy and sleepy? I take enough melatonin and I’ll sleep through half the day while having lucid dreams.

Not anything I want the President to be a part of.


Ahh... I see where I've been going wrong. I've been taking melanin supplements. No wonder I'm turning into Will Smith, and still unable to maintain a regular sleep pattern..



posted on Mar, 3 2020 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: scubagravy
Have you ever seen a woman run a country? Australia, New Zealand, Germany etc ?


...The Iron Lady?


That’s all old school mate, the world has changed.... not for the better either



posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 12:04 AM
link   
A better question would be why is still in the race..
But hey, she finally got a delegate....
One delegate...

By the way, having boobs isnt really an advantage when it comes to presidential races. As the last election showed, if given a choice between a women and a man child, the screwy voters will pick the man child...



posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: interupt42

Because for the dnc and gop is not about winning its about getting the RIGHT candidate elected .

There is no point of winning if you dont own the candidate.







But still I need to understand: Does this mean the democrats hate Trump LESS than Tulsi?

Because those two are, realistically, the only two choices you have.



Its business not about hate. Imo i think they dont have enough dirt on her to control her. So if she wins it doesnt do anything for them. So they are pushing biden



posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 12:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: drewlander

Because she is a flip-flop double-talking supposedly "former" CFR member that cannot be trusted?


Are you talking about Biden...holy crap does he flip flop. If that was an Olympic event he would win a gold medal



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join