Tulsi for President

[Unclemel]

Recent polling figures for May 4. Gabbard. .6%

End of story.

[Frank]

yep could be trouble with Tulsi...https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/sanders-de-blasio-gabbard-most-disliked-833544/

[riversnout]

Best 2.5 hours you will spend this year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR8UcnwLH24

If only every candidate for president would be a guest on this show...

[TomK]

riversnout - any chance you could point out the highlights? I suspect many people, like myself, don't have the time to watch the whole two and a half hours.

[Chas]

Riversnout, if you right click on the video in YouTube, there is a choice for "copy video URL at current time". Helpful for getting right to the point(s) you want to highlight.

[riversnout]

It's not so much looking for soundbites, it's the general tone and honesty. Sure, fast forward to any random point and listen for 5 minutes if that's all the attention span you have.

EDIT
---------------------
or if you prefer, just wait for the Democratic "debate"

Question: "Do you support green energy?"

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock: "yes"
Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet: "yes"
Former Vice President Joe Biden: "yes"
South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg: "yes"
Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton: "yes"
California Rep. Eric Swalwell: "yes"
Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan: "yes"
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand: "yes"

etc., etc. etc.

[TomK]

Sigh.

"Sure, fast forward to any random point and listen for 5 minutes if that's all the attention span you have."

It's not about attention span, it's about people's time. Maybe you have a lot of it but others don't. So tell you what. Why not summarize what Tulsi said? Then you can point to the various points in the interview that support your position. You have the time to watch the whole video so I suspect you have the time to do what I suggest.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Tulsi is asked on ABC about a news story that her campaign is backed by Russian sympathizers:

Speaking to ABC's George Stephanopoulos on "This Week," the Hawaii congresswoman said, "You know, it’s unfortunate that you’re citing that article, George, because it’s a whole lot of fake news. What I am focused on is what is in the best interest of the American people, what is in the best interest of our national security, keeping the American people safe,"

She just talked for 2 1/2 hours in a recent interview, so I wish on this question she had not changed the subject and offered more of a response than “fake news.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/1...80?cid=apn

[riversnout]

The DNC wants to silence her. The media is all too happy to go along. This last item is just the latest in a line. How about this:

https://theintercept.com/2019/02/03/nbc-...tic-party/

"fake news" is 2 more words than the story requires.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

it's the general tone and honesty.

riversnout,
When I hear a legitimate question dismissed with “fake news” my impression is not that the guest is conducting herself in a presidential manner (tone), with honesty and transparency. Tulsi may have nothing to hide, but the clichéd “fake news” is an easy way out from what appears a simple question.

I’d like a real reply.
Even if she has no control over foreign operatives (if they exist) the question for me remains, if they are real, why would they support her candidacy?

Maybe some Puna operatives could remind her why she was elected, for who she was elected (us) and suggest if she has 2 1/2 hours for a chat on a talk show, maybe she could spend time on the phone with Harry Kim and get our highways reopened. It’s her job.