June 27, 2019
“You know who’s protecting al-Qaeda right now is Saudi Arabia.” -Tulsi Gabbard
Last night’s Democrat debate was stupid and boring.
The only interesting part was anti-war and pro-First Amendment candidate Tulsi Gabbard – who was given only half the speaking time of the large high yella negroid homosexual Cory Booker.
I literally don’t even know who Ryan and Delaney are, but they got more time than Tulsi.
The media went on to attack her afterward, claiming that she was talking too much about war, and should have been talking about the fake “gender pay gap,” her previously stated anti-gay views (which she has renounced) and other inane bullshit.
That big boi Booker even said that giving her life for analism is “not enough.”
Tulsi Gabbard: "I've served with LGBTQ service members…I would give my life for them."
Cory Booker: "That's not enough."
— Jake M. (@jakemerci) June 27, 2019
If giving your life for queers isn’t enough, then what exactly are they demanding from us? The lives of our children?
Keep in mind, we’re standing on the brink of a war with Iran, which would presumably turn into a World War, and make all of this gay shit about faggots, trannies, feminism and global warming irrelevant – even if you believe in it.
Presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard faced swift backlash during the first Democratic Party debate after using a question about closing the gender wage gap to talk about her military service.
Ms Gabbard, a Hawaii Democrat who has consistently polled at nearly one per cent in national surveys, shared a personal story about how she enrolled in the US military after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers, sparking controversy from critics who said she was “cheapening” her military career by immediately pivoting.
She isn’t “cheapening” it. That is not even close to honest. She is simply using that as a relatable way to talk about war.
Asked about pay equality, the congresswoman responded: “Well, first of all, let’s recognise the situation we’re in: the American people deserve a president who will put your interests ahead the rich and powerful. That’s not what we have right now.”
“I enlisted in the Army National Guard after the Al-Qeada terror attacks on 9/11, so I could go after those who attacked us on that day,” she added. “I still serve as a major. Served over 16 years. Deployed twice to the Middle East.”
The response stirred criticism online from audiences, who noted how Ms Gabbard frequently discussed military service and the September 11 attacks throughout the night, even when asked about issues that had nothing to do with terrorism or international conflict.
Who criticized her?
The Independent cites a rando:
Tulsi Gabbard's "I served" is Rudy Giuliani's "I was mayor on 9/11." She cheapens it.
— 2,864,974 (@sarahburnes) June 27, 2019
A BuzzFeed journalist:
Tulsi Gabbard is talking about 9/11, national security and war in response to a question about .. equal pay?
— Miriam Elder (@MiriamElder) June 27, 2019
And an Intercept journalist:
Tulsi Gabbard managed to mention Al Qaeda and 9/11 in her very first Democratic debate answer to a question on… the economy. Lol.
She truly is the Rudy Giuliani of this presidential election cycle.
— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) June 27, 2019
I wonder why they didn’t mention the loony cunt Louise Mensch attacking her?
Not a Democrat.
— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) June 27, 2019
Would that have been too embarrassing?
Of course, they could have just as easily written an article about all of the people praising Tulsi Gabbard – which is literally everyone who saw her in the debate other than journalists, Jews and Jewish journalists.
Most people didn’t know who she was before this, because the Jew media is trying to bury her. She only got in the debates because the Daily Stormer shilled so hard for her.
She won the debate, according to a Drudge Report poll.
As a surfer, @TulsiGabbard chose the wave that becomes an empathetic tsunami and eventually will sweep away the banality of evil and take her into the #WH: ALOHA!#Tulsi2020#MakeAmericaSaneAgain#MASA#MeeTooAbusedByPsychopaths#UpriseOfHumanityForSanityhttps://t.co/0Fd0Ej42RC
— Thomas Binder ⏳ (@Thomas_Binder) June 27, 2019
Tulsi was also the MOST GOOGLED candidate during the debates (though to be fair, a lot of guys were probably just looking for nudes).
The media is just lying – but a lot of people see it.
Lol now that's just silly and please stop taking us for fools.
Tulsi Gabbard was the obvious winner.
Google searches say👇Tulsi was the most searched candidate, during and after the #DemocraticDebates https://t.co/2ifYlnoPAG
— Sonia Mota (@SoniaKatiMota) June 27, 2019
The kikes were seething over this.
It is ONLY the media that doesn’t like her, and they are all ganging up to report on each other not liking her.
Her bit on Iran was very well received – at the debate and by the internet.
LESTER HOLT, NBC NEWS: Congresswoman Gabbard, Congresswoman Gabbard, you’ve said you would sign back on to the 2015 deal. Would you — would you insist, though, that it address Iran’s support for Hezbollah?
REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI): Let’s deal with the situation where we are, where this president and his chickenhawk cabinet have led us to the brink of war with Iran.
I served in the war in Iraq at the height of the war in 2005, a war that took over 4,000 of my brothers and sisters in uniforms’ lives. The American people need to understand that this war with Iran would be far more devastating, far more costly than anything that we ever saw in Iraq. It would take many more lives. It would exacerbate the refugee crisis.
And it wouldn’t be just contained within Iran. This would turn into a regional war. This is why it’s so important that every one of us, every single American, stand up and say no war with Iran. We need to get back into the Iran nuclear agreement, and we need to negotiate how we can improve it.
It was an imperfect deal. There are issues, like their missile development, that needs to be addressed. We can do both simultaneously to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and preventing us from going to war.
HOLT: Your time is up. And this is a very quick follow-up. But what would your red line be that would — for military action against Iran?
GABBARD: Look, obviously, if there was an attack against the American — our troops, then there would have to be a response. But my point is — and it’s important for us to recognize this — is Donald Trump and his cabinet, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, and others — are creating a situation that just a spark would light off a war with Iran, which is incredibly dangerous. That’s why we need to de-escalate tensions. Trump needs to get back into the Iran nuclear deal and swallow his pride, put the American people first.
There were all kinds of positive responses to this.
Can we get all 10 to go on the record opposing military action against Iran like Tulsi just did? #DemDebate
— John Iadarola (@johniadarola) June 27, 2019
Tulsi Gabbard invokes her record as a military veteran to advocate for no war on Iran. #DemDebate
“What would your red line be?” Lester Holt asks.
Gabbard insists people focus on how Trump admin is creating this crisis.
— Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) June 27, 2019
Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate so far who sounds fluent on foreign policy. She is speaking from a real place when she talks about the horror of war and her unqualified opposition to intervention in Iran is tremendously refreshing. #DemDebate #DNCDebate
— LeftOfTheDial (@EricShapiro3) June 27, 2019
— Brian C. Hall 🌺 (@brianchall) June 27, 2019
— Rob (@Snipper_13) June 27, 2019
— Shawna Burley 🌺 (@shawna_burley) June 27, 2019
Women responded much more positively to Tulsi than to the other two candidates, because she doesn’t act like a horrible dyke wench.
@TulsiGabbard smart to say no war with #Iran. Every American should send that message: “This war with Iran would be far more devastating, far more costly than anything that we ever saw in Iraq” #democraticdebate
— Maria Shriver (@mariashriver) June 27, 2019
Even fatty-fatty-bo-batty-mi-my-mo-matty Meghan McCain said something nice about Tulsi, before deleting the tweet.
Meghan displayed a moment of courage to tweet this out before deleting it. Tulsi's lived a lifetime of courage – and she won't cave to establishment pressure. -V @MeghanMcCain @TheView #TULSI2020 #DemDebate #Democrat https://t.co/cxwF26gZSC pic.twitter.com/1liSlwBcx3
— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) June 27, 2019
The media hates Tulsi for the same reason they hated Trump – because they’re Jews.
- Tulsi wants to end insane Jewish wars
- Tulsi wants to pass laws saying that the First Amendment is a basic right and the only way internet monopolies can ban you is if you break the law
As Tulsi’s sister pointed out on her Twitter account when she was on stage – Jew Rachel Maddow and the rest of the posse obviously wanted Elizabeth Warren.
It's clear who MSNBC wants to be president: Elizabeth Warren. They're giving her more time than all the other candidates combined. They aren't giving any time to Tulsi at all. -V (Tulsi's sister)
— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) June 27, 2019
This is because Warren is an unhinged warmonger on par with Doland Blormf and has come out saying she will start arresting and prosecuting people for their political beliefs.
Tulsi is literally the ONLY serious person in the running for president, other than Andrew Yang.
I personally believe that Bernie is the best person with a chance, because Tulsi is going to have a hard time getting any enthusiasm going, just because she’s a woman. Unless Trump starts this war early, then you might see a groundswell of organic support.
But if I could pick any of the current candidates, I would pick Tulsi.
Bernie is really sort of the reverse-Trump, and not exactly a serious person, what with the hardline Stalinist communism.
She is also the only one who is certain to beat Trump. So if Democrats cared about that, they’d pick her. She is the only person who is professional – in fact, she is elegant – and who wouldn’t be susceptible to Trump’s strategy of childish mockery.
Tulsi would really go a long way toward creating some kind of consensus among white people as to the direction this country should be going in. She is basically a Tucker-type figure on the left, attacking the neolib doctrine in the way that Tucker attacks neocon doctrine.
They’re even friends.
If you haven’t donated yet, donate a dollar to her to get her in the second debates. If you’ve already donated, encourage your friends and family to do so.
This is measured by the total number of voters, not the total number of dollars.
— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) June 26, 2019
(Remember that it was us that got her in the first debate, so we can easily do this.)