Tulsi Gabbard Took the red pill

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Yes he said it but put it into context. Just after a mass shooting and the police had been called to the shooters home dozens of times becuase he threatend to shoot up the school. The police said there was nothing they could do becuase of due process. Trump rightfully replied screw due process,take his guns first. He was 100% correct. Screw due process if the man is threating to shoot up a school enforce the damn law and arrest his ass.

Problem is you people took it out of context and used a small part of what he said and used it for political purposes. So sick of nevertrumpeters and your Alynsky tactics.

^^^^ Accurate assessment. He was specifically talking in context of the Florida case (Parkland) in a meeting with lawmakers on school safety. Off the cuff comment that went nowhere. Yet... Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump.

“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time.” Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.

[hotbiggun42]

^^^^ Accurate assessment. He was specially talking in context of the Florida case (Parkland) in a meeting with lawmakers on school safety. Off the cuff comment that went nowhere. Yet... Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump.

“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time.” Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.

And since when is it legal to threaten to kill people? Especially children. Cops had every right to bypass due process and enforce the damn law. Trump was 100% correct in telling lawmakers the police screwed up.

[hotbiggun42]

Screw due process! **** the Constitution!

I’m not taking anything out of context. He said what he said. Defend him or don’t. I don’t care.

He’s a democrat, pretending to be a republican. If anything, he’s more an independent than anything.

But you keep going with yourself. Every American is innocent until proven guilty. If the laws are ****ed up then change them. You wanna support someone who doesn’t give a shit about our freedom, that’s on you.

I love receiving titles from internet no names. In case you missed it, I voted for the guy twice. There won’t be a third time. But I’ll be your never trumper!

Have a great day friend! I hope you can find peace in your life.

No whére in the constitution does it say you have the right to threaten to kill school children . Trump was right to call out the police and use thier BS excuse about due process against them. You are letting your derangemnet overpower what you know is right.

[georgeib]

It's a shame that critical thinking isn't more highly valued.

People that think that Tulsi Gabbard is now a conservative constitutionalist are a shining example of why we get the kind of traitors elected to office that we do.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Poor Tulsi Gabbard... no VP pick today. RFK chose ex-wife of Google's co-founder, Nicole Shanahan. Special VP criteria includes sharing RFK's passion for healthy food.

[WillBrink]

It's a shame that critical thinking isn't more highly valued.

People that think that Tulsi Gabbard is now a conservative constitutionalist are a shining example of why we get the kind of traitors elected to office that we do.

I have seen no one make that claim about her. I think she's talking/acting more libertarian and has for a while for those who actually followed her, vs leaping into threads and acting as if she made her changes over night.

Poor Tulsi Gabbard... no VP pick today. RFK chose ex-wife of Google's co-founder, Nicole Shanahan. Special VP criteria includes sharing RFK's passion for healthy food.

A bad choice that will lose a lot of people (see comments in the RFK jr thread) but she brings the big $, which you can't win an election without today, so hard to know what if any net benefit there will be. It does favor Trump, so there's that for Trump supporters. As to TG, I don't think VP is a good fit in any Trump admin, but could see her as head of state due to her seemingly alignment on a less interventionist policy Trump (claims) he has also. They seem to align on that one "on paper" at least, she'd be a far better person for that job than HC, that's for damn sure.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

A bad choice that will lose a lot of people (see comments in the RFK jr thread) but she brings the big $, which you can't win an election without today, so hard to know what if any net benefit there will be. It does favor Trump, so there's that for Trump supporters. As to TG, I don't think VP is a good fit in any Trump admin, but could see her as head of state due to her seemingly alignment on a less interventionist policy Trump (claims) he has also. They seem to align on that one "on paper" at least, she'd be a far better person for that job than HC, that's for damn sure.

I don't believe RFK's VP matters much as long as she doesn't wildly clash with him which she doesn't appear to. RFK is a protest candidate who isn't serious about winning the election. RFK's general appeal is to a faction within the conspiracy-minded, environmental and protest crowd.

What is more likely to have an impact is which states RFK is able to get on the ballot (money will definitely help with that) and how that might affect Trump/Biden. I mean... RFK on the ballot in California or New York will have zero impact because the margins between Trump/Biden are too wide for a protest candidate to matter. However, if RFK gets on the ballot in a swing state where the race would otherwise be a cliffhanger... a relatively small number of votes could affect the outcome. Who knows which states those will be....

Generally speaking... Money is of course important but we also recently witnessed DeSantis outspend Trump 2 to 1 in Iowa. Hillary also greatly outspent Trump. There's a lot of critical variables that money can't fix.

[Diamondback]

I'd like to see how she answers, or dodges, one simple question:

"Let's say we can rewind the tape to when you first took office. On which specific bills would you vote differently? Which bills would you sponsor that you did not, and which that you have sponsored would you have not done so? Please include procedural votes for Speakers, Committee assignments and bills let out of or held in Committee."

[hotbiggun42]

I would ask her if hilliary and the dnc had not turned on her would she still be a democrat?

Answer, of course she would be. Do yo believe if she won the democrat primary that she would have switched parties?

[ryanm]

Some of ya'll need to let some sh$^ go and move forward. Might not be the best track record but she is moving the ball on the field pro-2a now. Seriously doubt she is some "Manchurian Candidate". She is solidly an advocate at this point and continuing to crap on someone who is trying to help is utter stupidity. Take the win rather turning the W into an L with FUDD logic.