The mainstream media seem to judge the Democratic primary debate last night quite differently than the general public.
Quartz cites multiple polls which show that Tulsi Gabbard won the debate:
[T]wo candidates seemed to pique a lot of interest among US voters, at least when judged by who Americans searched for on Google: New Jersey senator Cory Booker and Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.
Rob Kall is an award winning journalist, inventor, software architect,
connector and visionary. His work and his writing have been featured in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, ABC, the HuffingtonPost, Success, Discover and other media.
He's given talks and workshops to Fortune
500 execs and national medical and psychological organizations, and pioneered
first-of-their-kind conferences in Positive Psychology, Brain Science and
Story. He hosts some of the world's smartest, most interesting and powerful
people on his Bottom Up Radio Show,
and founded and publishes one of the top Google- ranked progressive news and
opinion sites, OpEdNews.com
more detailed bio:
Rob Kall has spent his adult life as an awakener and empowerer-- first in the field of biofeedback, inventing products, developing software and a music recording label, MuPsych, within the company he founded in 1978-- Futurehealth, and founding, organizing and running 3 conferences: Winter Brain, on Neurofeedback and consciousness, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology (a pioneer in the field of Positive Psychology, first presenting workshops on it in 1985) and Storycon Summit Meeting on the Art Science and Application of Story-- each the first of their kind. Then, when he found the process of raising people's consciousness and empowering them to take more control of their lives one person at a time was too slow, he founded Opednews.com-- which has been the top search result on Google for the terms liberal news and progressive opinion for several years. Rob began his Bottom-up Radio show, broadcast on WNJC 1360 AM to Metro Philly, also available on iTunes, covering the transition of our culture, business and world from predominantly Top-down (hierarchical, centralized, authoritarian, patriarchal, big) to bottom-up (egalitarian, local, interdependent, grassroots, archetypal feminine and small.) Recent long-term projects include a book, Bottom-up-- The Connection Revolution, debillionairizing the planet and the Psychopathy Defense and Optimization Project.
STAY IN THE KNOW If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Comments
The time limit for entering new comments on this quicklink has expired.
This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.
8 people are discussing this page, with 20 comments
This bright and courageous lady is the only one even looking at the bullseye, let alone taking aim at it!
My biggest concern is for her safety.
Ray McGovern and John Kiriakou (sp?) are you listening?
(Member since Jan 22, 2008), 36 fans, 70 articles, 408 quicklinks, 5466 comments, 48 diaries
Reply to Daniel Geery:
I share that concern of her safety, as well as her concern for the well being of people, is definitely against Corporatism (Fascism) and even attempting to make the people aware of the fact they are being used and screwed makes her an enemy.
Submitted on Saturday, Jun 29, 2019 at 10:11:43 AM
At this stage Tulsi has been marginalized by the power elite and poses no threat.
Should that change as Chuck Schumer said to Trump, Intel "...have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."
Btw what's up with Jimmy Carter? He says Russia stole the election and gave it to Trump (Jimmy claims Trump is illigitmate). As my mom use to say always time to add a word never time to take it back. Jimmy best to stay off the ralking head circuit.
One of the best exposes I've read on Tulsi Gabbard that speaks to why I, someone who has voted Green since Nader first ran, have felt compelled to see her as the very best candidate for these times. click here
Gabbard could win the election against Trump. She is not an emotional resister. Poised, knowldgeable and authentic she has attracted a broad range of people..
Tulsi has been sidelined by the media since the start of her campaign. Why should they take Pete Buttigieg more seriously? My guess is that it's just not OK to talk about scaling back the worldwide US military presence. Perhaps Bernie knew that already 4 years ago, and stuck closely to domestic economic issues in his campaign (as he is doing this round as well).
Submitted on Saturday, Jun 29, 2019 at 12:48:18 AM
(Member since Jan 22, 2008), 36 fans, 70 articles, 408 quicklinks, 5466 comments, 48 diaries
IMHO
Tulsi Gabbard has the characteristics of what a leader of our nation must have,
traits that are lacking in sorely lacking in our present Commander in Chief
which make her stand out even more.
She
is showing a strong ability to listen and comprehend what people have to say
whether they be heads of state or average citizens. This simple characteristic
is shown by her actions as she has introduced and/or sponsored several bills in
Congress.
Tulsi
has shown the strength of standing by her convictions. Presently, although she
is getting silenced and smeared by the Presstitute Medial Propagandists because
she actually has the audacity of wanting to stop these ongoing illegal
invasions of sovereign nations, something polls show the general public also
wants, she actually doubles down putting people above profits of a few. In 2016
when she was the #2 person in the DNC she resigned from that position in order
to not break rules and endorse a specific candidate knowing it would not be
favorable for her as her choice was for the one the DNC was doing all they
could to eliminate.
I
might add another present candidate chose to go against all she had been telling
the people she was for and chose to endorse the DNC's choice who was the exact
opposite in her views.
Congresswoman
Gabbard has the presence of a leader. Although she is being smeared and shut
out she remains calm and continues on without any negativity toward her
assailants as her agenda of working toward developing a world at peace rather
than one of constant aggression is more important than the criticisms these
bought and paid for media hacks can deliver.
Tulsi
Gabbard will make America proud to have her as the 1st woman
President. She would make America a strong "sleeping giant" rather than a weak
bully it is now.
Submitted on Saturday, Jun 29, 2019 at 10:44:50 AM
I have been a supporter of Tulsi Gabbard, her stand at Standing Rock. Her support for Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning. Her anti-regime change wars and most recent her courageous postions on Venezuela, Iran and Syria.
However in 2014 she was on the record of supporting the Ukrainian US backed coup. I would like to understand how this squares with all I mentioned above.
Ukraine with US backing over threw a democratically elected leader. It has been known that the forces behind it were Ukrainian neo-Nazis. It was a prime example of US imperialism.
Tulsi, as a donor and supporter of your courageous positions, where do you stand on Ukraine and for that matter, Russia?
Submitted on Saturday, Jun 29, 2019 at 11:47:34 AM
Kim Iverson said the real proof will come when (and I'd add IF) we get to see the bump in donations. TG got a recurring one from me. The MSM is already trying to downplay polls, except when done by "experts."
By voting FOR far more military budget increases than she has voted AGAINST, she has made very clear who her masters are, and they are NOT you and me. What does the Congress do with more money? They SPEND it with their MIC 'donors' (and past/future employers) , thus guaranteeing nice kickbacks from same. What does the military do with more equipment (bombs, bullets, planes, etc.)? They USE it in more and more military actions and provocations around the world, the most popular being 'regime-change' wars.
She is ACTIVE-DUTY military. Where do you really think her loyalties and priorities lie? Even a cursory reading of or listening to her words will give you the answer to that. Keep in mind that one of her sworn duties is to refuse illegal orders, and yet she failed to refuse to participate in the Middle East (all illegal by any international legal standards, which supercede U.S. laws). There is a possibility that she is actually on the vanguard of a military takeover of this country. Something to think about when you are voting for a 'warrior' President.
I'd say that the MSM's avoidance of her is a little too obvious to be believable. The psy-ops that are run by the 'deep state' or whoever runs things are frequently not what they appear to be on the surface, but far more complex. How many were fooled by Obama, Clinton, or even Trump? To not be suspicious of her deeper motives is foolish, based on the history of this country and its politics. I'll stand by my skepticism until proven otherwise, but I would actually welcome being proven wrong in her case. However, you don't get to be a Major in the military without a certain indebtedness to same, and as I've stated before, I don't want a "warrior" in the White House, I want a pacifist.
I won't apologize for not being one of the Tulsi 'fan-boys' that currently populate this site. She has repeatedly proven my position by her own words and actions. Unfortunately, there are many who choose not to see. When she expresses her biggest concerns as being her 'brothers and sisters at arms', bearing in mind that those folks she cares so much for are involved in illegal military actions (as was she), she clearly shows where her priorities lie. Anyone who VOLUNTEERS for the military at the age of 23 to engage in illegal assault on a sovereign country and has never renounced their own participation does not deserve my respect. She still believes there is something legitimate called a 'war on terror'. I thought that by now most of us would have realized that said 'war' is one of our own making, and that one of its purposes is to ensure warfare in perpetuity. That little gem was put firmly in place by G.W. Bush and Co., and we have run with and profited from it ever since. Since Tulsi apparently buys into that as well, endorsing drone 'warfare' specifically, I have no trust or faith in her to look out for the best interest of the civilian population of this country, let alone the rest of the world. This obviously sounds like a crazy notion to some of you, but I feel there is a real possibility that Ms. Gabbard may represent the pivotal chess piece to allow for a military takeover of this country under the guise of eliminating so-called 'regime-change wars' in favor of the eternal pursuit of the fake 'war on terror'. I was really hoping that after so many had drunk the Obama Kool-Aid, they would be a little more 'gun-shy' the next time around, but that is something I readily admit to being wrong about.
As a recently IGNORED Princeton Univ. study concluded, :
"The preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." The one thing that DOES influence policy? MONEY. What branch of the U.S. government gets budget increases virtually every year? The MILITARY. What does the military do? Engage in battle, and the more money, the more battles. So go ahead and vote for your darling, Tulsi Gabbard, who is a self-espoused "WARRIOR", NOT a PACIFIST, and has voted REPEATEDLY for more money for the military.
2
2
1
