Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's honestly not that. My comment about wanting someone younger related to the fact that our politicians are dominated by old white men who don't relate to the needs and feelings of younger people, let alone young minority women. The image of Trump's White House health bill being composed entirely of a boardroom filled with white men, mostly old, making decisions about the healthcare of everyone including women, who comprise 51% of the population, will remain forever etched in my mind.
Besides, several comments have already addressed the fact that Tulsi is attractive. Like that has any bearing on her ability to do the job I doubt any such comment would come out of these posters' mouths if she were a man. As for all the posters such as yourself who constantly bash Obama's supposed inexperience or lack of qualifications, apparently you don't do much Googling. Obama was extremely qualified to be president. He was a graduate from Columbia University, a Harvard Law school graduate, a Constitutional law professor, and the first black president of Harvard Law Review. He was also a Congressman in Illinois for three terms. You may not have liked his policies, but he was not unqualified to be president by any means.
Well thanks for the candid reply, but you also avoided one of my main thrusts. That being, why do you not have PC alarm bells going off when you make sweeping negative comments about sex and race when it comes to white men?
Don't you think you'd have the bells going off if you typed or read negative feelings toward women, minorities, etc.?
For example that black woman professor who said white men are the problem with this country. Can you imagine any other race or women being generalized like that, and the person still retaining their position as an educator?
As to your thoughts about Trump and the image, you must not be up to speed on how many women Trump has put into positions of power and decision/policy making. He did so in his business, and has done so in his administration as well.
Lastly, your positive take on Obama is not warranted.
A solid education is hardly worthy of presidential qualifications. It is funny how many Democrats scoffed at Bush's education, but extolled Obama's.
He lacked leadership skills never having run a business, or been an executive in politics. He also never learned to give and take like Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan.
His big claim to fame was being a community organizer, aka a rabble rouser.
Hillary attacked his qualifications in 2008, so didn't you trust her point of view on the subject back then?
Obama himself said publicly he was not qualified to run for president, yet did so in less than a year after his own comment.
More than Kamala or Elizabeth, are you kidding?? She light years ahead than those two knuckleheads!
Kamala has the exact same arrogant and narcissistic disorder as Hillary, to a T, while E Warren is an air head & does bad beer advertisements!
That being said, not sure the Democrats would want Tulsi in there since they have gone to the extreme left in order to oust Trump and fire up their party. ( but nothing that would help or benefit the Country or working class people)
It will be interesting with the huge laundry list of democratic contenders of which Uncle Joe claimed to be the most qualified person for the job. Better than most recent movies, this will be entertainment at its best��
It's honestly not that. My comment about wanting someone younger related to the fact that our politicians are dominated by old white men who don't relate to the needs and feelings of younger people, let alone young minority women. The image of Trump's White House health bill being composed entirely of a boardroom filled with white men, mostly old, making decisions about the healthcare of everyone including women, who comprise 51% of the population, will remain forever etched in my mind.
Besides, several comments have already addressed the fact that Tulsi is attractive. Like that has any bearing on her ability to do the job I doubt any such comment would come out of these posters' mouths if she were a man.
Like it or not, it can be part of the equation.
JFK's looks probably helped get him elected. Some women who post to this board have openly swooned about his looks, and he's been dead for over 50 years.
Quote:
As for all the posters such as yourself who constantly bash Obama's supposed inexperience or lack of qualifications, apparently you don't do much Googling. Obama was extremely qualified to be president. He was a graduate from Columbia University, a Harvard Law school graduate, a Constitutional law professor, and the first black president of Harvard Law Review. He was also a Congressman in Illinois for three terms. You may not have liked his policies, but he was not unqualified to be president by any means.
Doesn't seem as though you do much Googling either.
Obama wasn't a 'Congressman in Illinois for three terms'.
Members of Congress are Federal representatives (U.S. Reps and U. S. Senators), and some refer to U.S. Reps as 'Congressmen' or 'Congresswomen'.
The Illinois General Assembly is the bicameral legislature of the State of Illinois. The Illinois General Assembly is is composed of the Illinois House of Representatives (the lower chamber), and the Illinois Senate (the upper chamber). Obama was a State Senator in the upper chamber for three terms.
The Democrats better worship this woman as their "Michelle Obama." She's way more refreshing than old rich white guys Biden, Sanders, or Bloomberg.
What are you talking about? I have no idea who told you Dems worship her as "their Michelle Obama' but those people were not Dem and nothing could be further than the truth.
She's nothing in the world like Michelle Obama.
She has a history of being homophobic with a love of autocrats and dictators, anti-Israel and pro-Assad. She could run with Trump, not against him. Nobody whose policies align with Trump's in favor of dictators, will be on the Dem ticket--people are tired of the orange guy's love of murdering autocrats.
Lol--no wonder the alt-right likes her--she's like Trump. She will not be on the Dem ticket most likely.
"...But Gabbard will stand out from her competitors not for her progressive domestic agenda, but for her support of nationalists and authoritarians abroad. At a time when members of both parties worry about the rise of autocrats, dictators, and nationalist movements around the world, Gabbard has embraced some of them...."
What are you talking about? I have no idea who told you Dems worship her as "their Michelle Obama' but those people were not Dem and nothing could be further than the truth.
She's nothing in the world like Michelle Obama.
She has a history of being homophobic with a love of autocrats and dictators, anti-Israel and pro-Assad. She could run with Trump, not against him. Nobody whose policies align with Trump's in favor of dictators, will be on the Dem ticket--people are tired of the orange guy's love of murdering autocrats.
Lol--no wonder the alt-right likes her--she's like Trump. She will not be on the Dem ticket most likely.
"...But Gabbard will stand out from her competitors not for her progressive domestic agenda, but for her support of nationalists and authoritarians abroad. At a time when members of both parties worry about the rise of autocrats, dictators, and nationalist movements around the world, Gabbard has embraced some of them...."
When mainstream politicians go bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, dine with the murderers of Angola and Sudan, and support far right governments in Poland and Indonesia, do you say anything?
Or is it just anti-establishment politicians who want to SPEAK with US foriegn enemies to end wars.
The difference between Obama and Gabbard is that one dines with dictators who they are aligned with, Tulsi speaks to one’s she is not to stop war.
What are you talking about? I have no idea who told you Dems worship her as "their Michelle Obama' but those people were not Dem and nothing could be further than the truth.
She's nothing in the world like Michelle Obama.
She has a history of being homophobic with a love of autocrats and dictators, anti-Israel and pro-Assad. She could run with Trump, not against him. Nobody whose policies align with Trump's in favor of dictators, will be on the Dem ticket--people are tired of the orange guy's love of murdering autocrats.
Lol--no wonder the alt-right likes her--she's like Trump. She will not be on the Dem ticket most likely.
"...But Gabbard will stand out from her competitors not for her progressive domestic agenda, but for her support of nationalists and authoritarians abroad. At a time when members of both parties worry about the rise of autocrats, dictators, and nationalist movements around the world, Gabbard has embraced some of them...."
Because you are not for getting yourself into useless wars does not mean you "embrace" anyone. Gabbard acknowledges that Assad aint a great guy, it's just not our place to do anything about it.
When mainstream politicians go bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, dine with the murderers of Angola and Sudan, and support far right governments in Poland and Indonesia, do you say anything?
Or is it just anti-establishment politicians who want to SPEAK with US foriegn enemies to end wars.
The difference between Obama and Gabbard is that one dines with dictators who they are aligned with, Tulsi speaks to one’s she is not to stop war.
She explicitly said she doesn’t support Assad.
Progressives love to eat their own trying to find a politician who perfectly aligns with their personal viewpoints. Meanwhile crooks like Trump and McConnell further their power grab of our governments by the year.
Progressives love to eat their own trying to find a politician who perfectly aligns with their personal viewpoints. Meanwhile crooks like Trump and McConnell further their power grab of our governments by the year.
1. I’m a leftist, not a progressive
2. Power is problematic, limiting your opposition to a political party that is part of the same power structure as the other is wrong
Progressives love to eat their own trying to find a politician who perfectly aligns with their personal viewpoints. Meanwhile crooks like Trump and McConnell further their power grab of our governments by the year.
I love them dearly, but some of the progressives in my own family are some of the pickiest, most persnickety people I have ever encountered.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I doubt any such comment would come out of these posters' mouths if she were a man. As for all the posters such as yourself who constantly bash Obama's supposed inexperience or lack of qualifications, apparently you don't do much Googling. Obama was extremely qualified to be president. He was a graduate from Columbia University, a Harvard Law school graduate, a Constitutional law professor, and the first black president of Harvard Law Review. He was also a Congressman in Illinois for three terms. You may not have liked his policies, but he was not unqualified to be president by any means.
