Dems Engineering Tulsi Gabbard Out of Contention: Fantasy US Democracy in Action
Aspirants for the US presidency and key congressional leadership positions are considered unqualified for being anti-war/pro-social justice — the process rigged against them.
In 2016, undemocratic Dems engineered Hillary’s nomination over Sanders by primary election fraud.
Things were cooked for her to win the key New York primary — by disenfranchising over 125,000 registered Dems, along with countless independents.
She stole Iowa by rigged coin-flips – Massachusetts, Nevada and Arizona by old-fashioned fraud.
She became Dem standard bearer by election-rigging. Former acting DNC chairwoman Donna Brazile accused her of a conducting a hugely unethical power play to usurp control of the party during the primary season — including by money-laundering fundraising.
Anti-war presidential aspirant Tulsi Gabbard opposes US intervention abroad, especially perpetual wars with no end of them in prospect.
Earlier she said “knowing first-hand the cost of war, both on our service members, on our veterans, as well as the cost on the people in the countries where we intervene, as well as the trillions of dollars, our taxpayer dollars, that are spent on waging these wars, dollars that are sorely needed to address the very real urgent needs of our families, our communities, our neighbors right here at home” — she called for using the nation’s resources for domestic needs.
“No more wars for regime change, like Syria and Afghanistan,” she said — opposing intervention abroad as well for regime change in Iran, Venezuela and elsewhere.
“The United States needs to stay out of Venezuela,” she stressed. “Let the Venezuelan people determine their future. We don’t want other countries to choose our leaders—so we have to stop trying to choose theirs.”
She opposes regime change/war-mongering threats against Iran, wants US involvement in Syria and Yemen ended.
Dems are engineering her out of contention by excluding her from further debates, wanting her denied a nationwide public stage.
Unacceptable DNC rules require presidential aspirants to have 130,000 unique donors, at least 400 of them in 20 states, along with at least 2% support in four or more DNC-approved polls between June 28 and August 28 — ones they control to assure candidates they oppose are disqualified.
According to rigged Dem rules, Gabbard didn’t make the cut — despite exceeding 2% support in 26 national and state polls, including by leading broadsheets in New Hampshire and South Carolina.
On August 23, ahead of this week’s Dem debate, her campaign called on the DNC “to revise (its) list of debate qualifying polls to ensure transparency and fairness in light of numerous irregularities in the selection and timing of those polls.”
Dems haven’t released criteria for selecting polling organizations they consider “certified.”
Contributor to Real Clear Politics Michael Tracey said Gabbard is being “victimized (by) dubious (DNC) criteria that appear increasingly absurd.”
Her support exceeds other Dems included in next week’s debate. She’s excluded for being anti-war and pro-social justice.
RT reported that “Gabbard was the most googled candidate after her second debate, and had a standout moment when she confronted Kamala Harris’ record of incarcerating people for marijuana use when she was attorney general. She was also the most googled candidate during the first debate.”
Colorado Senator Michael Bennet also slammed the DNC process for “stifling debate at a time when we need it most,” adding:
“We’re rewarding celebrity candidates with millions of Twitter followers, billionaires who buy their way onto the debate stage, and candidates who have been running for president for years.”
For supporting peace, social justice, and criticizing US foreign interventions, establishment media oppose Gabbard — supporting dirty business as usual candidates instead.
Her “vision for America” includes peace over endless wars, “access to nourishing food…everyone receiv(ing) the medical care they need…a roof over their head…education they need, and is able to find good paying, fulfilling work (without) worry(ing) about making ends meet in their old age.”
Her Stop Arming Terrorist Act called for ending direct and indirect US support for ISIS and other jihadists.
She wants countless trillions of dollars spend for militarism and warmaking directed to vital homeland needs.
Political rhetoric is one thing, policies another in office. Gabbard’s views are no guarantee of what she’d support if elected to the nation’s highest office, given enormous pressure brought to bear on incumbents by dark forces.
Yet US presidential aspirants don’t espouse views like hers. With things rigged against her for voicing an anti-war/progressive agenda, it’ll likely never be known how she’d operate as president and commander-in-chief.
Note: davidicke.com explained that “spineless fraud,” longtime political conman/progressive in name only Bernie Sanders failed to “defend Tulsi Gabbard or shame (the) DNC for cheating her out of” this week’s debate.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”