Updated: Tulsi at 5% in New Hampshire, 4% in Iowa--in Polls That Don't Count
UPDATED: with 2 more polls--that don't count--where Tulsi achieved 2% in both polls.
One is the latest Economist/YouGov poll here.
The much more interesting one is in SOUTH CAROLINA, where up until now, Tulsi has pretty much always gotten 0%. ChangeResearch did a nice poll of the state, and Tulsi appears in 7th place with 2%. The poll is here.
It pretty much seems to be true that Tulsi is polling at 2% or more in all polls except those needed to qualify for the debates!
-----------------
Yes, you guessed it! More polls showing Tulsi gaining ground, but oh wouldn't you know it!, these polls are not in the DNC-approved list.
In a New Hampshire Gravis poll, yes, look at that! Tulsi in 6th place (one of the entries above her is Uncertain) with 5%, her highest poll ever! She rates above Gillibrand, O'Rourke, Booker, Klobuchar, Yang, Steyer, and all the other minor players, and in 5th place above her is Harris with 7%--only a 2% difference!!!
In a poll of the Iowa State Fair, Tulsi ranks 7th place with 4%. Okay, okay, this one is much more unscientific (not to mention it is limited to the Des Moines area) a poll than the Gravis poll above, but it shows that Tulsi can rank more than 1% in Iowa.
Word on the street is that 6 more qualifying polls will be released before the Aug. 28 cut-off date. Tulsi needs to get 2% in at least 3 of them to qualify for debate #3.
Comments
OK, guys, let's take it from the top--
this time with less passion and appeal!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Wow!
You hit that nail on the head in reference to Harris and Warren.
It is sad to think we might(and probably will) be relegated to the ever decreasing range of bland establishment candidates.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
The DNC's not gonna let Tulsi on the next debate
They will find a way to deny her the opportunity because that's what they do especially given that they are understandably terrified of her attacking their sacred cows. I hope she goes after both Biden and Warren anyway. In any event, she may get called out for aiding and abetting the Indonesian military. Over the years, a few Democratic congressmembers have taken to task decades-long US support of the excesses of the Indonesian military. I wonder if she will eventually speak out about those excesses??? Jakarta, East Timor, Aceh, Papua and more . . . .
Correct. Just as there was no way
they were going to let Mike Gravel on the stage.
Military industrial types are so sensitive. Can't stand to have anybody criticize them.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Who is "They"?
Sure, the folks on top are all TPTB. But there are also factions up there like tenacles crisscrossing themselves every which way.
I'm hoping they done outsmarted themselves this go round and the tentacles of the giant capitalist octopus will get all tangled up.
1904 American cartoon depicting the Standard Oil company as an octopus (Library of Congress)
Whereby octopus cartoons are often accused of being anti-Semitic
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567167/Cartoon-German-newspape...
Rockefeller as octopus? Okay. Rothschild? Not okay.
And David Frum is calling Trump a Marxist
And others claim Bernie isn't Jewish enough, so on and so forth.
A better octopus analogy may be multiple ruthless octopi. Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Infocontainment, etc. They usually but don't always find common cause.
"They" are the corporate media, in this case CNN,
and the two major political parties, in this case the DNC. Also "their" backers, the most powerful of which are on Wall St, running big weapons corporations in Northern Virginia or Southern Maryland, or sending working class men to risk their lives drilling for oil under the ocean. Oil barons, weaponsmakers and financiers.
You've got the front men (politicians and media) whose job it is to manage the population. You've got the enforcers, whose job it is to manage the front men. And you've got the money men, whose job it is to fund the front men and the enforcers. There are a few more pieces to the puzzle, but it's not that complicated.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
"Their" hegemony is not entirely hegemonic . . . yet.
But it's getting there in a hurry.
I don't think we'll get another opportunity in our lifetime, however miniscule it might well be, like we have before us right now and then some and then it will be too late.
Ach, you've probably read my spiel many times over.
I doubt if Tulsi
was in a position to choose her next NG assignment. And right now, as she must fulfill her commitment for 2 weeks, her campaign is better off trying to make the case for her being in the next debates and the arbitrariness of the DNC polling criteria. Her spokespeople should be citing the polls where she is getting 2 and 3%, while other qualifying polls seem flawed/biased.
So far, however, I haven't heard much from her camp. And she only has 2 more weeks to get qualified in a few polls (2, 3?). If she can't make it to the next debates, I don't see how her campaign could continue, which would leave zero candidates making the case against our foreign regime change adventures.
Not a big fan of military enlistment here
No, those who enlist don't get a choice where they're sent.
I guess this subject was explored a week or so ago on C99% and got folks riled up enough then so I'll punt.
edit add / And while Bernie may not be all that consistently outspoken on the campaign trail about regime change wars, I feel pretty confident his head is in the right place and won't be indulging the MIC like other candidates.
I agree that Bernie
is unlikely to engage in regime change wars, and he doesn't have to go full Tulsi for me to openly speculate on that.
But beyond my favorites of Tulsi or Bernie, if I were to suggest on this board, where so many seem to believe there is no significant difference between the next 5-6 D candidates we occasionally discuss and the current WH occupant, that perhaps one or two other contenders, usually described as being at least semi-progressive, would also be unlikely to so engage abroad, I would be met with an onslaught of critical posts denouncing me as a "mushy centrist" willing to accept the LOTE approach, possibly with some other colorful name-calling directed my way. But we are free to speculate about Bernie and Tulsi and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Beyond Bernie and Tulsi . . .
We disagree. I have no reason to expect Warren to be anything other than a warmonger. The same for the other Dem candidates. I just don't trust Warren in general. Is she better than Trump on a wide range of domestic issues? Sure. But I'm just unable to support someone who I don't think will drastically cut back the defense budget, which stm to be a necessity to adequately fund social programs and infrastructure repair and improvements. Will she fight the fight necessary re the environment? To some extent, certainly more so than Trump, but still not enough which simply isn't good enough when we're up against crunch time. If Bernie can't pull off a miracle and somebody comes at me calling me privileged and selfish, I'll guess I'll just have to explain working class hedonism to them. More likely, I won't even try. But I ain't there yet.
Well I expected
you to disagree on that point, your right of course, but appreciate how you can discuss w/o engaging in ad homs and disrespecting those who hold opposing points of view.
Finally here, last post on this thread for me, in my comments about EW being an acceptable, if still more flawed, 3d choice for me, I'm only echoing the comments of certified progressive blogger Michael Tracey (hope I haven't confused him with Jordan Chariton on this point) who matter-of-factly noted recently that, sure, he would support Warren against Donald if that should be the choice. I would have thought, especially on a board which welcomes diverse points of view, that this rather uncontroversial position would be held by more than just yours truly and that stating such position would be received by other posters in the spirit this board espouses.
Cheers ...
While it was Leahy's boondoggle
Bernie fully supports the F-35 basing in Burlington, VT.
He's no enemy of the MIC.
bernie also voted for the
Defense of Nato/Africom Act, as did AOC.
Bernie's also voted down the last 3 increased military budgets
And he's clearly spoken against all sorts of US military interventionism.
I find some faults with some of his FP votes and positions, too. But he still seems pretty damn unique among possible candidates who might actually have a chance of winning, even if it will take a miracle or two. I don't know of any other candidate in our lifetimes who presents such an opportunity for change. I can't imagine another who will.
Here... Parse his foreign policy positions some more:
https://www.ontheissues.org/International/Bernie_Sanders_Foreign_Policy.htm
Peace!
It's support for business in his home state.
Nobody's going to get elected being a complete pacifist.
IOW, Democrats found yet another way of rigging primaries.
your OP
exactly reflects some of the current Catch-22s of #FakeDemocracy™, doesn't it?
[video:https://youtu.be/-LFujE3Y-ZI?t=111]
to clarify:
your OP: "in polls that are not DNC approved". thus the above Catch 22, a the league of women voters collectively flip their zoris....
DK has banned sexism and misogony finally....
Tulsi Gabbard Looks More and More Like a Troll With a Glass Jaw
This is written by a new member whose 5 diaries on ToP have all been on the wreck list. I remember the old days when calling someone a troll was forbidden there and might have been a bannable offense if the person couldn't back up their statement. But those rules fled with the ides of March and it seem anything goes. It is now acceptable to call members of congress allies of a foreign government and calling it treason. It's acceptable now to denigrate a democratic congress woman and call her a Putin puppet and and an Assad apologist.
I know that members here don't want to give the site a click however you might want to see just how far into the rabbit hole the site has fallen..
Hey remember when any criticism of Obama was considered racism just because he was black? Isn't Tulsi considered a POC? A troll with a glass jaw? Was that a slur against her looks?
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Racism and Sexism only exist...
if the victim says they exist.
Therefore, since the victims say they exist, it doesn't matter what the perpetrator says, they're guilty. (No alleged about it. If the victim says it, it happened, and if you don't believe instantly, you're a sexist and a racist!)
You see, Gabbard has aligned herself with the WHITE MALE POWER STRUCTURE (TM) and therefore acts as their proxy. Therefore any actions taken against her are not actions taken against "POC"(TM) or "Women"(TM) But rather against the Evil White Male Power Structure. Therefore, anything said about her, her appearance, her morals, or her attitude is not directed at her, but rather the EWMPS Or "Ewww- Meps"...
Therefore, it's totally fine, and if you say anything about it you're racist and sexist.
/snark
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
It pains me to think of all the time
I spent on that site. Time wasted. I will waste no more. Thanks anyway.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
So much time to make up, every where you turn,
Time we have wasted on the way.
So much water flowing underneath the bridge,
Let the water come and carry us away.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
So true
Sometimes, ill advisedly I'll admit, I meander back to the past and wonder how my present day self would've used my time back in my twenties. I know one thing. I wouldn't have been as timid as I was. Always apologizing or self deprecating for taking up space wherever I was. Instead, knowing what I know now, I'd be taking names and kicking ass!
If only there was a time machine for that, eh?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
As the saying goes...
youth is wasted on the young. Or as I like to put it, none of us live long enough to get good at these things.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone
Take this in the good spirit in which I intend it
My grandmother -- who very recently passed at the age of 99, and even then she went kicking and screaming -- would merrily have corrected your statement that "none of us lives long enough to get good at these things."
And then she would have agreed with you.
*heart*
99 years old
That is impressive. I hope she had peaceful passing and that you were able to celebrate her life.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Thanks, Anja. <3
I had the profound gift of holding her hand during her transition and, while she was ironically deathly afraid of dying, I do believe she made her peace with it. She'd been in terrible pain, so the cliche rings true: she's now in a better place.
I'll leave out all the bs family politicking that prevented the true celebration she deserved, but some of us managed to do it on our own.
Dissidents don't get to be people of color.
Nor do they get to be LGBT people, or women.
Those are the rules
that I just made up.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Jeez what a hate fest
The posters there certainly got the word that Tulsi was to be an object of their hatred. Oh, latest TOP poll has Warren on top--Bernie right behind. Biden really fading.
I can only guess that the hatred for Tulsi began when she left the DNC because of bias toward Bernie which of course the Wikileaks postings proved was correct.
Yup
This was the first thing the diarest brought up and the second thing was Assange who you know is accused of rape in Sweden although he was never charged and Sweden has dropped the case because of no facts. But the second thing she had a problem with was his undercover work with Russia to throw the election to Trump by exposing how the DNC and Hillary rigged the primary against her. The last part is considered CT there.
But it's the absolute appalling comments there towards Tulsi that if were directed at HER, Warren or Harris would get people banned. The hypocrisy of Her's supporters is so far off the charts and yet no one sees it. That a website that is supposed to support all democrats can stay up after calling one a troll for pointing out Harris' abhorrent tenure as DA and AG should make DK and Marcos the biggest laughing stock evah. But it became that years ago when it allowed people to denigrate Sanders just because he was running against Her and he exposed her sordid history too.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Off topic
I am thinking still that the fix is going to be in for ByeDone and more so than ever that there is talk of Stacey Abrams being his VP. She was on Rachel last night and I have seen 5 websites discussing her as VP. A few others for some of things she has done and wants to do.
Now I am sure of it.
Yup.. she has to get her name out there so people can know who she is before Joe picks her as his VP. Yay... another centrist in the WH.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
one could ask "why?" (Stacey Abrams)
what are her qualifications to be VP? Because they should be the same as those for Prez, especially when the top of the ticket in this hypothetical situation is approaching 80.
She seems to be one out of thousands who would fit the role of "mild mannered liberalism".
This is a good question
The only thing I know about her is that she ran for governor of Georgia and she is considered to be a centrist. The funny thing is she is working on making the 2020 election fair. Will she say anything if the DNC rigs it against Bernie again? Stay tuned. But I'm betting no.
On a side note. Did any of the people who are bitching about what Wikileaks released bother to read the information that showed how it was rigged? It was spelled out in black and white and Warren and Brazile both admitted it. Warren of course walked it back after getting flack for the party high ups. lol..so brave, Liz.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Oh wait..
Abrams will bring in the black vote. Silly of me not to think of that. People are saying that ByeDone is having trouble getting the black vote because of all the legislation he helped get passed that made their lives worse.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
and the female vote?
that would be extremely cynical of the DNC to think like that.
And
the Southern vote. The DNC may think Abrams would deliver the trifecta: POC, women, and the South.
If that's where they're headed, I believe they are deluding themselves, yet again.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
He's running coz he figures it's in the bag
I've always noted that Biden is the guy to beat. The script probably also ultimately includes Sec of the Treasury to Warren (but it will be made clear to her that she's expected to sit on those wavy hands and not do much of anything unless it's okayed by the TPTB).
As far as a VP selection goes, the choice of Abrams should need little explanation.
But the best laid plans of Biden and the DNC and their corporate sponsors/overlords might still go awry. Obama/Biden vs our bestest buddies Clintons Inc. trying to throw the nomination into a second ballot with their sundry array of id pol candidates may well result in Bernie first pulling off a miracle.
We are seeing another coronation
It seemed apparent that Hillary thought she had the election in the bag and just needed to show up at the DNC convention claim she won. How many events did she do with the general public as opposed to her private fundraisers at wealthy people's homes? Aren't we seeing this same thing happening with ByeDone pacing himself and just doing a few a month where there are a hundred or so showing up? Why would he tire himself out if he's the pick of the litter?
The good news is that ByeDone has never won Iowa. Or was it Ohio?
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
I'll wait 'til Super Tuesday . . .
. . . and only then throw in the towel if Bernie flames out. And I don;t think that's gonna happen.
I can't forget how Bernie pretty much always got 10 and more pts over what polls showed.
And the latest poll even shows him ahead in New Hampshire right next to Warren's home state of Massachusetts. What's up with that???
Bernie's strategy is to start out with a bang by winning Iowa and New Hampshire. Hopefully, Booker and Kamala will split the Black vote in So. Carolina and give him the opportunity to quite possibly win there, too. Of course, if he manages to do as well as he expects throughout those early primaries, if you think you've seen dirty politics, just wait especially with Super Tuesday coming up so early next year on March 3rd with California being the high stakes match-up.
Bernie is beating Warren in her home state?
lol..will the media report that? I'm betting no. But it's funnier than hell don't you think? Bernie won more states than he was given credit for because Hillary had so many delegates already backing her. In a fair election I think he would have mopped the floor with her.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
NH not MA
He's ahead in New Hampshire next to Warren's home state of Massachusetts.
Wow, I sure do like this Dr. Kaz dude!!!!!
Booker and Kamala
splitting the black vote in SC? According to this recent SC poll, Biden enjoys a whopping 51% support among black SC Dems. Clearly in SC he's getting credit for being Obama's loyal VP, with Obama not being considered a failed president, let alone an evil one.
Next is Kamala with 12%, Bernie with 10% black support, Liz with 9%. Booker registered only at 2% among blacks in SC. I think this poll was conducted prior to the most recent debate, where KH got nailed by Tulsi. I see a downward trend for Harris in SC, and more so in other states.
The newest state poll has Booker doing much better
. . . and Kamala almost kaput.
Biden's numbers will continue to slide at least until he does a PR thing with Abrams or whomever.
Dunno which
poll you saw, but here's what I found from a day ago, Post & Courier poll. Didn't see a breakdown by race. Does show Bernie up and KH and Bottajig down.
Tulsi showing at 2%, so this poll probably doesn't count.
State wide not just the AA demograhic
Sorry I didn't make that clearer.
It's way early and I'd bet that Booker will increase his AA support in SC. Kamala tho! I'm starting to wonder if it would have been better for Tulsi not to have savaged her so much. I like the idea of Booker and Kamala going head to head against each other.
Biden + Abrams
= Trump, Round 2.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
Hillary has a power to beat Trump if she wants him gone
Of course she isn't the only person who could declare that Bernie is the best candidate to beat Trump. Just like Warren could have done it last time, Pelosi and Schumer saying that he's the best chance to beat him would clinch it. But...
We all know that will never happen because the democrats aren't really against the things Trump does. Just the way he goes about it.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Pages