Tulsi Gabbard Completes MAGA Makeover by Endorsing Donald Trump
The former Hawaii congresswoman delivered a full-throated call to vote for Trump—a man she had once tried to run against as a Democrat.
You're viewing a single thread.
And... Hilary was right.
(not so coincidentally, that is the name of my wifi network in my red neighborhood, so it can be seen!)
Is it HILLARY WAS RIGHT or BASKET OF DEPLORABLES?
Hilary was right
Again.
Modern day Cassandra.
Indeed. Accurate prophecies, yet not believed.
Hilary was right.
About what?
That Republicans were grooming her. She was effectively a DINO when she ran in 2020 (though she did eventually endorse Biden).
Well, Republicans do know a LOT about grooming...
A great many things.
Edit2: words, format
The 2016 Russiagate smears because she lost to Trump...
The DNC and the politicians bought by the owner-class are the ones pushing out these long-time Democrats.
Tulsi was for Bernie Sanders; I wonder what could have caused such a big shift.
I suggest learning more from independent journalists and not just from owner-class media.
If you paid literally any attention to Tulsi Gabbard before she rebelled against the DNC, this new turn would not be so confusing to you. She was an anti-gay activist and pro-drone strike Fox News guest before she had a brief dalliance with the anti-establishment left.
Tulsi Gabbard before she rebelled against the DNC
"If you paid literally any attention" to the presidential debates, you would know she was pushing for Bernie Sanders policies as well.
Culture wars and identity politics will always divide the working class, and I will not disagree with you about that.
Tulsi said she was against regime change wars, but yes, she has the status quo policies on our forever wars and regime change wars. I agree again.
Oh, fuck off, man. It doesn't take a fucking genius, let alone someone as smug as you, to see how much of a piece of shit she's always been.
Following the owner-class talking points and smears.
It's not hard to tell who falls for the Blue MAGA talking points every four years, with their continuous fear mongerging to sway any dissidence.
I am against the duopoly, and I will proudly support third parties that are for the working class.
I will proudly support third parties
You could've just stopped there. This is all anybody needs to see to know that nobody should listen to you. In our shitty first past the post system, all this does is pull frustrated people away from the mostly reasonable but imperfect choice. You're either clueless or intentionally attempting to dissuade people from voting for democrats in order to help trump to win. In this system, a third party candidate cannot fucking win. There is no actual "blue maga" for you to whine about. Stop spreading bullshit. I'm glad your username is so stupid that it's easy to see on its face that your account's entire existence is predicated on sowing division or you might actually have a chance at convincing some people. Unfortunately for you, most of the people on lemmy are smarter than the people on reddit. If you actually cared about defending American democracy, you'd shut the fuck up instead of saying this dumbass bullshit that serves only to dismantle what crumbs of democracy we have left, whether your sabotaging words are intentional or not. If you keep posting this braindead shit, then I'll know for sure that you just want more fascism than we already have. So for the love of all that you are at least claiming to hold dear, shut the entire fuck up about this. Yes, capitalism bad, so actually maybe let's not hand the country over to donald fucking trump, famous asshole criminal capitalist.
It seems you want a community built upon self-censorship and echo chambers.
I disagree with your point of view and your talking points.
We just have a difference in opinion and how we see the world, due to our upbringing and what we read and watch.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the matter, even if we do not agree.
Understood. You just want more fascism than we already have. Thank you for clarifying.
Fascism has already been in the US for a while.
The duopoly is just pushing for more.
more fascism than we already have
I guess you couldn't read it the first two times.
Another one acting like Trump has been in every election cycle since the start of this country. Such obvious bad faith rhetoric. And Kudos for you for being gullible and being proud of it.
You do know that labels change...
Blue MAGA and MAGA did not just come out of nowhere.
Obama, Bush, Biden, Clinton, and many more were being called out way before the new labels appeared.
They are the status quo—more forever wars and socialism for the owner-class—while the working class continues to get crumbs.
You're not misbehaving, you're just strange and annoying.
Dude you're not supposed to go full-troll, gotta keep just a hint of sincerity in there or the normies will sniff you out. There's no coming back from that.
full-troll
The others may be doing that, but I do not agree with the status quo or the duopoly.
Why hide what you are for...
There you go again. If you tone it back some people will be able to take you more seriously.
I am who I am, I do not feel the need to hide my diverse ideas and thoughts.
Maybe you should entertain the idea.
Edit: wording
Yes, I try.
Thanks!
"Blue MAGA." What happened to "independent journalism" if you're pretending this idea from the far right exists in reality?
Why do you post...why are you here
Propaganda, obviously
Echo chambers and self-censorship do not help the working class.
Diverse ideas and thoughts are needed in Lemmy, even if they may be seen as controversial or extreme from the status quo point of view.
Most posts on Lemmy are from owner-class media and the duopoly talking points.
Lies don’t help either.
Being so dense as to lead folks off a cliff doesn’t help.
Calling the world “owner class” and then recommending horse shit is a poison pill.
You’re either malicious or too stupid to see the harm you create.
Regardless you keep equating Lemmy with media and showing everyone the “quality” of your argument.
Thanks for joining in.
I disagree, but feel free to continue your status quo world views.
I will continue to share my diverse ideas.
I’ve been here for a while.
Your posts have been continuously rejected. You are almost unanimously rejected every time you show up and shit one sided bs.
Why do you call that diversity?
Other diverse folks get persecuted by the same people you refuse to criticize. Why do you claim yourself as diverse?
rejected every time you show up
That is to be expected when you go against the status quo and the duopoly.
Other diverse folks get persecuted by the same people you refuse to criticize.
You are just assuming now, I call out the duopoly, not just one or the other.
You reminded me of these quotes:
"I don’t criticize Democrats cuz I side with Republicans, I criticize Democrats Cuz THEY side with Republicans."
"Our fight is not Left/Right anymore, it is Us vs.Them."
"We have 2 corporate party’s that serve Wall St/War Machine/Corporations & crush everyone else. #UniParty @0rf"
diversity
"diversity -- A variety or assortment."
Again, I try to share things not seen in Lemmy, so it is expected that people only wanting the status quo will push against anything outside of that view point.
So basically accuse people of “the duopoly” or whatever. Great quotes:
“People are different and this is why everyone is wrong”
“Citing “Class war” means I don’t have to be accurate or even remotely correct”
“My fisher-price understanding of politics means there’s no room for debate…”
Something something about wrestling with a pig and how much they like getting everyone dirty…
Going back to these quotes:
“I don’t criticize Democrats cuz I side with Republicans, I criticize Democrats Cuz THEY side with Republicans.”
“Our fight is not Left/Right anymore, it is Us vs.Them.”
“We have 2 corporate party’s that serve Wall St/War Machine/Corporations & crush everyone else. #UniParty @0rf”
Just by reading these quotes, it should tell you more than plenty of our difference in world views.
It is just a difference in opinion, no need to put words in my mouth or assume anything that I am or am not for.
I don’t think anyone on Lemmy is ever downvoting you because of difference of intention.
Sorry to be the messenger BUT YOU ARE CONSTANTLY DISMISSED BECASE OF THE WEAKNESS OF YOUR ARGUMENT.
You aren’t really different in intention from anyone else you just end up with the shittiest take that no one can understand or relate to.
Like consider yourself in a room of liberal manifesto folks and all you can do is spout Hillary Clinton conspiracies… maybe the issue isn’t protecting kids… maybe it’s you?
One thing that the dishonest debaters like to do is come in and claim they really represent a group of people while proposing ideas that would result in serious harm to that group of people if implemented.
I pointed out how votes can be poisoned through the Schoolhouse Example elsewhere in this thread. A few votes in a weak location can result in all of us being 'represented' by people who mean to harm our interests.
There are two major factions vying for political control in the USA. Democrats are our 'Left' party, and yes, it'd be pretty darn Right in another country, but the US isn't a Left-Leaning country by any measure, so the Dems are the best we can get. They represent a slow-walk towards the cliff of civil rights destruction, and yes, I'd love an alternative to them. But we must remember the Other Side -- an Alt-Right Authoritarian Dictatorship in waiting, led by a convicted felon with a need for this office and a plan (Project 2025) for when he gets in that will result in real harms to workers and minorities -- a full-tilt run at that cliff I mentioned before.
How can you claim to be pro-worker while depressing the turnout for the major party most favourable to workers? How can you claim to be pro-minority by making minorities stay home or vote third party? How can you do this knowing that Cheerleader will win 48/30/16 if you listen to the bogus memes being put out by Team Bookish Girl? You can't...unless your goal is to ensure that the Democrats lose and thus giving the election to the Republicans and subjecting all of us to Project 2025.
I'd like to call these users out, but Rule 3 prevents me, even as these users refers to me and the rest of the actual pro-worker and pro-minorities 'Blue MAGA', but maybe this rational discussion can highlight what the threat from these dishonest debaters actually are.
Delete your account and don't come back.
Feel free to join in self-censorship, but I don't think that is healthy for the working class.
Creeps like you thinking they speak for the workers isn't healthy for them either.
Edit2: words, phrasing
Your label of smearing those that do not agree with everything you say says more about you than it does of what I share.
Gatekeeping the working class, nice.
We just have a difference in opinion; there is no need to project or assume the worst of people that do not fall in line with your way of seeing the world.
says you shouldn't assume Makes a bunch of assumptions
Most coherent Jimmy Dore fan.
Edit: wording
Thank you, but we all can learn from those we do not agree with.
We must continue to learn and improve ourselves, or try to.
This is something I have to comment on. This user says that it represents the working class, while advocating for switching votes from the political party closest to its platform to a third party.
A reminder of how politics works in the USA. Suppose you have a school with 100 kids voting for class president. The school is equally divided between the Jocks and the Nerds. The Jocks are represented by a pretty and charismatic, but quite vain and assholish, cheerleader. The Nerds are represented by a dull nerdy kid, complete with boxy glasses and a pocket protector. And the School is preparing these young Americans for life in the USA, so the election is First Past the Post.
The school has a slight lean towards the Nerds. As in 51 kids would vote for the dull nerdy kid rather than the pretty jerkish cheerleader. 49 would prefer the cheerleader. Now, the cheerleader has a single nerd in her orbit, a bookish girl who's good with maths. She sits down with the cheerleader and points out 'if the election were held today, you'd lose 51 to 49.' The cheerleader throws a temper tantrum, and then demands to know how to win, because her pappy didn't raise no loser. Bookish girl tells her 'You need to suppress the vote and distract the voters on the other side. If you peel off at least 3 voters, you'll win 49 to 48. Make a scandal up, present the other side with an alternative, and convince those nerds to stay home or vote third party, and you can win this.' The cheerleader and the bookish girl come up with a plan -- a scandal and a third party candidate.
The scandals are easy. One of the cheerleaders, friends with THE cheerleader, comes up with a rumour that the nerdy boy came on to her at prom. This gets the feminists in the boy's coalition up in arms, and they scream they won't vote for him because he's a skeesy boy who puts his hands on girls uninvited, despite no proof that he actually ever did something like that. And the distraction? Bookish girl. Cheerleader pretties her up, and positions her as an alternative to dull nerdy boy. And they also set up a few other distractions for election day, which will be outside of school hours. Enter a book club meeting and a video game tournament...during voting hours.
Election day comes. 4 gamers are playing at the tournament and two bookish kids are at the book club meeting, and not voting. 51 votes becomes 45 votes. Another 15 kids vote for Bookish Girl Candidate, in a mix of 'she's pretty' and 'Dull Nerd Candidate is a skirt-chaser!' That takes Team Nerd down to 30 votes. Of course, Bookish Girl Candidate was never in it to win, so she would have voted Team Cheerleader if it was closer, but between her and the 15 kids, Team Bookish Girl got 16 votes. But First Past the Post means Team Jock wins with 48 votes, and all 51 Nerds get the exact opposite of what they want for the next schoolyear as the Book and Game club get closed down in favour of more Jock activities.
Accounts like jimmydoreisalefty and others are the Bookish Nerd Girl in this example. They are here to convince us to stay home or vote Third Party, while screaming that Dull Nerd Boy shouldn't ever get our vote for a litany of reasons. Listen to them at your peril. They do not have your best interests in mind. They want Cheerleader to win, and to take away your Book Club and your Game Club. Or put more realistically, they want Team Trump to win and take away your civil rights and subject you to an authoritarian nightmare in the order of what Putin, Xi, Orban, Kim, Netanyahu, and other authoritarian strongmen dictators have planned for their nations.
This isn't Left-Wing vs. Right-Wing. It's Egalitarian vs Authoritarian, and the Authoritarians smell blood in the water. Be careful and mindful how you use your vote.
PS: Yes, I agree with Leate_Wonceslace here. This user is not an honest debater. It's here for nefarious purposes: To enable Trump to steal the election and force Project 2025 on us. Keeping this in the here and now, and keeping it real.
"Independent journalists," but he posts a fuckload of podcasts from far right radical propagandists. I think I prefer fact-based journalism to brainwashing myself, thanks though.
Guys please stop arguing with this disingenuous accelerationist. They clearly give zero fucks about actually making the world better or improving conditions for real people, they're just here to cosplay revolutionary and support the conservative status quo.
Don't engage with them, just block them.
Don't block people like this, that just amplifies their voice. Call them out.
How exactly does blocking them amplify their voice, especially when loudly calling for others to do the same?
Blocking them doesn't silence them. It just means that you, specifically, can no longer see them. Which means you can no longer downvote them or call them out.
Blocking someone is not winning an argument, it's ceding the floor to them.
Unfortunately, you can't call them out like they should be called out because we handcuff ourselves with rules about 'civility' when they have none. Thus we only can try to call their arguments out, which of course leads to a circular argument where you lay out the counterpoints to their nonsense and they repeat it, just more fervently. Within the context of both the rules and the mods choice to enforce them more on our side than the dishonest people who come here, ESPECIALLY with the prohibitions of calling a spade a spade (no calling shills, no calling trolls, no calling Russian plants, no calling out as a bot or a sock puppet, even if it's clear the account in question is what's being called). When you're basically told 'be nice to people who are not being nice to you', the only real answer is to block and move on.
the only real answer is to block and move on.
Hard disagree. There's usually more of us than them, and as we can see from lemmy.ml, when mods/admins blatantly and obviously go against the will of the people, then people abandon them. Seeing 15 upvotes and 136 downvotes is a powerful indicator. Seeing a series of people ridiculing a tankie or fascist or "bothsides" troll is powerful. Mods get afraid to be obviously partisan because people will leave.
But when people avoid testy conversations, it gives power to those trolls and partisan mods.
Good point.
I still think we handcuff ourselves too much with Rule 3, especially if the comments put up by the trolls are left up by the mod team while removing our comments. I'm not going to go so far as to call the mods here partisan, just unintentionally handicapping the community against paid actors. I am absolutely certain the account I was replying to was disingenuous and not here to have an honest debate. That we can't accuse users of being bots or paid actors or trolls when they most clearly are definitely is ceding the floor to them. We then have to engage them like they are honest and open debaters, when they are most definitely not. Some of us get frustrated with the same old bullshit going unchallenged and unchecked, so I can see why those people would like to block, but you make a good point about ceding the floor to them.
I agree that rule 3 (and similar community rules) are a big handicap, and I think you're more generous than I am regarding mods. It's tough to keep seeing obvious propaganda left up while counter points are removed.
When it gets to be too much for me, I disengage for a couple of days. Just stop reading for a bit.
Heh, true. Still, a few days is a few days the bad actors can operate without being called out, so it's hard. It's not the community that has me down. It's the bad actors, and the fact I can't call 'em out as what they are. Because 'civility'...
