Here's the sequence of events with Tulsi Gabbard's presidential campaign which is important if you believe in running a fair democracy, my fundamental point here.
Gabbard resigned as a rising star DNC VP in 2016 to endorse Bernie Sanders over Mrs Clinton who had bought the party off with a cash infusion (largely raised by Weinstein) on the agreement she had control of party strategy and messaging, and could include multiple super delegates at the convention.
Congreswoman Gabbard announced her grass roots funded presidential campaign and has run it from a mini van with volunteers, a very small paid staff and ~$1m budget.
Gabbard got great traction - most searched for via Google - in the first two TV show Q & sixty second answer commercial TV 'debates' and destroyed the Harris campaign with her debating skills in November.
Throughout the campaign, and massively increased in 2020, the DNC media has either subsequently ignored her or run negative messaging to undermine her credibility. The DNC knows reform would come if Gabbard got control.
The DNC changed their debate rules to allow 55x billionaire Bloomberg to 'run' and debate as a presidential candidate, spending incredible sums to obliterate Sanders and others before pulling out again.
The corporate puppet candidates Buttigieg, Klobochar (and subsequently Warren afterwards) pulled out just before Super Tuesday - and after tens of thousands had cast their postal ballots - to endorse Biden, the DNC's preferred candidate.
The debate rules were changed again by the DNC after Gabbard won two delegates to exclude her. The only media Gabbard gets coverage on is Fox News and internet shows and podcasts.
There is a massive disinformation campaign she is constantly fighting (Russian asset, Assad and Modi supporter etc) that undermines her fundamental anti war pro diplomacy platform.
My point: if the DNC give hundreds of millions in free positive media coverage to their preferred candidates and blacklist/ blackout positive coverage of other candidates is it any surprise Gabbard has done so badly, or other future and past candidates? Many many people don't even know she is in the presidential race on ballots that still list long suspended campaigns from Harris and others.
The DNC rely on name recognition and positive media messaging to amplify their preferred candidates. This is not democracy or a level playing field.
The Gabbard platform positions:
www.tulsigabbard.org
Correct. There needs to be campaign finance restrictions put in place, otherwise these media owning oligarchs and their networks will continue to have overwhelming control over democracy.
Gabbard is just a congresswoman and army major with a very modest background.
Gabbard resigned as a rising star DNC VP in 2016 to endorse Bernie Sanders over Mrs Clinton who had bought the party off with a cash infusion (largely raised by Weinstein) on the agreement she had control of party strategy and messaging, and could include multiple super delegates at the convention. Congreswoman Gabbard announced her grass roots funded presidential campaign and has run it from a mini van with volunteers, a very small paid staff and ~$1m budget.
Gabbard got great traction - most searched for via Google - in the first two TV show Q & sixty second answer commercial TV 'debates' and destroyed the Harris campaign with her debating skills in November.
Throughout the campaign, and massively increased in 2020, the DNC media has either subsequently ignored her or run negative messaging to undermine her credibility. The DNC knows reform would come if Gabbard got control.
The DNC changed their debate rules to allow 55x billionaire Bloomberg to 'run' and debate as a presidential candidate, spending incredible sums to obliterate Sanders and others before pulling out again.
The corporate puppet candidates Buttigieg, Klobochar (and subsequently Warren afterwards) pulled out just before Super Tuesday - and after tens of thousands had cast their postal ballots - to endorse Biden, the DNC's preferred candidate. The debate rules were changed again by the DNC after Gabbard won two delegates to exclude her. The only media Gabbard gets coverage on is Fox News and internet shows and podcasts.
There is a massive disinformation campaign she is constantly fighting (Russian asset, Assad and Modi supporter etc) that undermines her fundamental anti war pro diplomacy platform.
My point: if the DNC give hundreds of millions in free positive media coverage to their preferred candidates and blacklist/ blackout positive coverage of other candidates is it any surprise Gabbard has done so badly, or other future and past candidates? Many many people don't even know she is in the presidential race on ballots that still list long suspended campaigns from Harris and others.
The DNC rely on name recognition and positive media messaging to amplify their preferred candidates. This is not democracy or a level playing field.
The Gabbard platform positions: www.tulsigabbard.org