At work (about to give a talk to parents and donors, blech) and don't have time to find all the links right now. I followed it with interest when it was more relevant. If HRC wasn't dumb, it wouldn't be relevant at all today. I don't see "all this effort" that you see, I guess, but yes, you can find some articles about it out of thousands of articles. But yes, if there is a concerted smear effort (I don't quite see it as you do, but if), that would be very strange. Though the media went out of their way to take shots at Yang when he first burst onto the scene too. (e.g. Colbert mocking him, etc.) Cheers.
I agree it might not be a lot of effort, but I do see it a concerted. The major news outlets are painting her with the same brush and repeating the same smears. She is a Russian asset, the alt-right loves her, etc. and judging from the reaction here it seems to be working. You would think different outlets would have different opinions. They don't attack her positions, they just outright dismiss her with guilt through association.
Her positions are easily discredited because doesn't have much meat behind them especially with her domestic polices. She's a platitudes candidate. She's the type of person who says stuff like "We need to say Islamic terrorism to fight it" which is dumb. That is the level of discourse this lady has.
If her positions are easily attackable then it shouldn't be too hard to do. Instead they attack the messenger. I was really shocked by the NYT article from a few days ago and hadn't noticed much else since I'm not a politics junkie. But now that I'm looking into it, its quite obvious there is a narrative that has been repeated over and over.
“All this effort” seems quite generous. Has Tulsi not been the darling of those who support fringe candidates, who coincidentally usually goes for the conspiracy theories?
Well she has presented herself as anti establishment without offering much in the way of policy besides vague notions. Her response to the pullback of troops in Syria during the recent debates was to attack the media. She seems phony to me. Yang is the opposite, he’s got the policy down.
I understand your cliche. The point is Tulsi doesnt have positions to debate. For assumptions, I believe Tulsi knows she doesn't have a chance. I also believe Tulsi has (finally) come to the conclusion that the substance of ones convictions will never get you into the big league. She has to tow the party line or she is out. I feel she is very bitter about this revelation so she is going with Trumps scorched earth policy. She played a significant role in knocking Harris out of the race, which btw, was the second coming of HRC. The DNC is not going to sit idly by while Tulsi tears each candidate down just to hand Trump a beaten down candidate with plenty of ammunition come general election. I liked Tulsi in the beginning, but now she is playing stupid politics. We've all had enough of Trumps nonsense. Its time to get back to acting like adults.
Just look at the title and subtitle. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/us/politics/tulsi-gabbard.html What, Exactly, Is Tulsi Gabbard Up To? As she injects chaos into the 2020 Democratic primary by accusing her own party of “rigging” the election, an array of alt-right internet stars, white nationalists and Russians have praised her. Its just straight up smear after smear. No policy discussion at all. Two days before the Times co-sponsored debate. I figured it must have been an opinion pieces, but nope it is in the politics section. Now looking back at other articles and TV shows they all follow the same script. She has to defend herself against the same attacks over and over again.
Well because she’s following this anti establishment, attack your own party policy. Seems like she’s getting exactly what she wanted as she wouldn’t get much press otherwise. You don’t think this is her plan?
If Russia was smart they would turn their bots to supporting Warren. Then when the dems rip her apart Russia flips them to supporting another candidate.
I very much doubt it is her plan to be constantly smeared in the press. And this started the moment she announce before she "attacked" her own party. I'm not sure if you are referring to Kamla, resigning from the DNC or something else. I'm not aware of anything else, the article certainly doesn't mention anything of substance.
Think back to 2015/16. NO candidate in history ever attacked their own party like Trump did. And the coverage at that time from MSM companies like WaPo, NYT, CNN, etc wasn't anywhere near as critical. In fact, Trump was basking in the attention he received from them every day as his poll numbers were rising.
Doubtful it can succeed. There needs to be something from the candidate that they can explore to sow division.
Didn’t read that but well before the article, she has a history of saying weird things and taking weird position. I never trusted her even though I’m aligned with many of her positions. You add up all of that and the question of what the heck is she doing isn’t abnormal. From her POV, since she doesn’t realize how weird she is, she think everyone is out to get her. And now... she said she’s taking her campaign to the Dem convention even if she has zero possibility of winning. Yeap, sowing division.
Her whole schtick was anti establishment/anti media/anti DNC and she got exactly what she wanted. How else was she going to gain any attention? She’s a wet blanket personality wise and doesn’t have any policies like Yang.
Tulsi playing by that playbook too but she’s not nearly as populist and willingly to use xenophobia. Like I said, without the “media attacks” giving Tulsi free coverage, where’d she be?
Hey, I went and poked around when I was done with my work today, and I didn't find anything with any real meat. It's just that she seems to completely over-perform, in particular, in huge numbers, to web polls and "who wont the debate" type stuff, especially on fringe sites. It seems that people, from what I can tell, are at least in some cases just inferring what's going on to explain some of that. But it could also just be a lot of horny guys thinking they're responding to hot-or-not or something. HRC (her political instincts aside) may know more about how foreign bots work, given her former jobs. But who knows. I do not. What I did unfortunately look up was Gabbard's unhinged twitter response to HRC. So after insulting the 2016 nominee up one side and down the other (you know, to speak persuasively to... 64 million democratic voters, I guess?) she tweets this gem: Um, "this primary is between you and me... Join the race directly." What kind of lunacy is that, from a candidate polling at 1%? She sounds like someone who called into the Rush Limbaugh show, LOL. Yikes. That is looking a lot like a "Spartacus Moment." Maybe she needed more concussion protocol.
She would do better if she ran as a Republican, given how much you guys appear to love her. Clearly she's got you guys much more excited than any Dems. Though you guys get to have the convo with your religious base where you tell them she's a practicing Hindu. I'm staying far away from that room.
