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.
What is her border stance? I can never support anyone for wide open borders.
She isn't either, she wants better border security. She also wants a path for our current illegal aliens to become citizens, and wants "compassionate" immigration reform....whatever that is. She also supports DACA.
The tone of it would appeal to the Kool-Aid drinkers who are only superficially engaged in actual policy or politics.
So which of her statements do you consider to be false? You offer no counter-argument here. This current iteration of the Democrat party deserves every bit of this tone.
It took her some time to get it, but better late than never.
I have liked how she presents herself, and the ability to speak clearly and directly to people. I also appreciate her views on war, and her apparent embrace of “we the people”. She’s been one of the rare few democrats that seem to have maintained relative sanity, though I have long questioned her continued affiliation with a democrat party that marginalizes and smears her, and is inconsistent with many of her core positions.
However, where she loses me is the guns and the border issues. Regardless of personal opinion, there is the matter of adherence to the constitution, which is not a pick what you like and discard the rest, matter. You either defend it in its entirety, or you don’t. There is no middle ground, and those who want such middle ground seem to believe they are wiser than the founders.
I question the wisdom of someone who fails to recognize the significance of the 2nd Amendment, and why it’s there. Especially in this hard left push toward authoritarianism and the weaponizing of the state apparatus against its political opposition, such that we’ve seen play out recently, like never before. It exposes the reality that what you may not see a need for today, may become a painfully apparent need later, especially likely in the absence of protecting that right for the people to remain armed.
History has shown that every despotic regime places at the top of their agenda, the disarming of the people prior to fully engaging authoritarian measures.
The old saying is true … a government who wants to disarm the public is a government who intends to do something you’d shoot them for doing.
Glad she got rid of that label, whether she becomes a Republican or not. Now, maybe in '24 we can have a DeSantis/Gabbard ticket. I think it would be a winner. Both are relatively young, and both are highly intelligent - as opposed to the incumbents.
Tulsi Gabbard is not a friend of our constitutionally limited federalist system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JenaS62
Interesting video.
I've always liked Tulsi Gabbard so this is welcome news. I could never figure out why someone like her would align with the democrat party. Well no more. She's leaving it and she lists the reasons.
Maybe you cannot figure out why Tulsi aligns with the democrat party because you are not familiar with her policy positions.
If she ever got into the Republican Party, she would be worse than Mitt Romney and the worst ever RINO.
Tulsi Gabbard is not a friend of our Constitution and its defined and limited grants of power and she simply embraces socialist, un-American crap.
By her statement and rhetoric and terminology, it sounds like she is appealing to a growing segment of disaffected Trump voters. That would be an interesting strategy if it worked. Many of those folks are not true GOP conservatives anyway. The tone of it would appeal to the Kool-Aid drinkers who are only superficially engaged in actual policy or politics. She was the Vice-Chair of the DNC, so she had a hand in the problems she is complaining about.
Or it could be that she has just fallen and can't get up. She has some interesting and heavy baggage and won't be going much farther as a Democrat.
Maybe she is just good at simple observation and grade school math, like 2+2 = 4?
The only Kool aide drinkers are the ones who are enjoying high inflation, high gas prices, economic stagnation, racial and gender chaos, open borders, and a potential nuclear war by the maniacs who have taken charge of the asylum.
Awesome ! Good for her. If she goes Independent maybe this will actually be the start of a new valid party.
Actually, that's the last thing we need. All it does is split the conservative vote. Look what Ross Perot did in 1990 - split the vote and got Clinton elected. Third party candidates, no matter how much you might like them, will never win.
I have liked how she presents herself, and the ability to speak clearly and directly to people. I also appreciate her views on war, and her apparent embrace of “we the people”. She’s been one of the rare few democrats that seem to have maintained relative sanity, though I have long questioned her continued affiliation with a democrat party that marginalizes and smears her, and is inconsistent with many of her core positions.
However, where she loses me is the guns and the border issues. Regardless of personal opinion, there is the matter of adherence to the constitution, which is not a pick what you like and discard the rest, matter. You either defend it in its entirety, or you don’t. There is no middle ground, and those who want such middle ground seem to believe they are wiser than the founders.
I question the wisdom of someone who fails to recognize the significance of the 2nd Amendment, and why it’s there. Especially in this hard left push toward authoritarianism and the weaponizing of the state apparatus against its political opposition, such that we’ve seen play out recently, like never before. It exposes the reality that what you may not see a need for today, may become a painfully apparent need later, especially likely in the absence of protecting that right for the people to remain armed.
History has shown that every despotic regime places at the top of their agenda, the disarming of the people prior to fully engaging authoritarian measures.
The old saying is true … a government who wants to disarm the public is a government who intends to do something you’d shoot them for doing.
That has bothered me also but I am willing to give benefit that she may be reevaluating that stance. She did address that in the video. She deserves a place at the table, even the founders never agreed on everything, but their shared core guidance was for a common cause for the stability and future of the nation, we need that more than ever right now.
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.
Tulsi Gabbard is not a friend of our constitutionally limited federalist system.
