2020 US Election - Let The Games Begin!

Hello H2O said:
Trump has a new ad..


And CNN refuses to run it.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

CNN Refuses to Run Trump Campaign’s Biden Ad

CNN won't run a 30-second advertisement about Joe Biden purchased by Donald Trump's re-election campaign.
www.hollywoodreporter.com www.hollywoodreporter.com
Click to expand...


That is savage, I love it. As it stands the democrats haven't a hope of pulling this election short of shenanigans of the most blatant kind, which would provoke a backlash so intense I doubt they would even go there. Trump campaign has shown they are fully prepared to bring certain dirty laundry to light (Biden) if it suits them, so would probably heavily publicize any evidence of rigging.

And realise that we are nearing the end of a full Trump term and the world hasn't imploded, nobody has been nuked, and generally the economy is doing pretty good and getting better. Who are practical people gonna vote for? Sure you can push people to get worked up about racism and other social issues, but in the end they will care most about putting food on the table.
 
Tulsi Gabbard was so wonderfully outspoken at yesterday's DNC debates. Notice how many times she references the US's "regime change war" in Syria. She also hits back at the New York Times and CNN for the smears they've made about her. Tulsi shows some real honest to goodness guts and smarts. And that's why 'the swamp' will likely double down on their attacks of her, even if they'll all eventually be proven to be lies.


 
Last edited:
Like her other 2020 debate appearances, Gabbard was the most searched for candidate: Gabbard, again most Googled candidate, slams 'despicable' CNN, NYT coverage of her Syria policy

Even though near the least time speaking time.

www.nytimes.com

Which Candidates Got the Most Speaking Time in the Democratic Debate (Published 2019)

Senator Elizabeth Warren and Joseph R. Biden Jr. led the stage of 12 candidates.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

Maybe broadly people simply notice she speaks a very different narrative to the others? They want to find out what that's all about and it compels them to search for more?

Does this mean generally people's BS gauge isn't as bad as the propoganda makers are led to believe? Or would it follow that those propoganda makers are simply less competent in today's different context? I don't know to be honest. It's somewhat refreshing for me anyway.
 
alkhemst said:
Does this mean generally people's BS gauge isn't as bad as the propoganda makers are led to believe?
Click to expand...
I think moderate liberals looking for a sane choice would find Gabbard very appealing. I'm sure they're out there and the radical turn of the other Democratic candidates has left them without a choice.
 
Any Democratic candidate that's not running on an anti-war platform is a sell out and a fraud. Without ending the senseless, costly, destabilizing regime change wars that Gabbard is speaking out against, there is no money for social programs and infrastructure. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Any serious person who believes in those things and wants to see things improve here at home should be very interested in what she is saying and want to find out more.
 
SummerLite said:
I think moderate liberals looking for a sane choice would find Gabbard very appealing. I'm sure they're out there and the radical turn of the other Democratic candidates has left them without a choice.
Click to expand...

That radical turn was again exemplified by Hillary Clinton spreading the Russian conspiracy disinformation on Tulsi Gabbard.

To my surprise, a far left FB friend posted about it from a far left news site, which was favourable to Tulsi: Van Jones: Hillary Clinton Is Playing A 'Dangerous Game' With Tulsi Gabbard Remarks

Might be wishful thinking, but what if the writing is on the wall for these outlets and they are starting to dip their toes in actual news coverage? Would be nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom