Tulsi Gabbard

[Guest]

Weird that you don't allow that for Bernie Sanders.

I do. I said, "everything is possible". Can you please think about what I am saying? Do you have any evidence that Warren is telling the truth?

an essentially dishonest political actor even though she really isn't.

How do you know? I don't think Sanders is honest on everything, but I am not aware that he makes up stories for political points. If I am wrong please give me a reference.

Here is my reference.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... cause-she/

You said this was nonsense, largely because you didn't want to believe it, and attacked honest reporters like Harry Enten as engaging in a conspiracy for sharing that view.

Yes because there was no scientific polling at the time and Kamala Harris had no name recognition. You kept defending the CNN headline as a horse race coverage. It is not a conspiracy theory, it was just the bandwagon effect and free coverage.

What I told you was that she was a plausible front runner, which was the consensus view of both professional forecasters and betting markets for good reasons

You defended CNN headline. Yes because of the free coverage and the bandwagon effect, but the poll numbers never showed that she was the front runner.

[_DoubtingThomas]

So, Warren indicates that her lack of credentials might have been an issue. Regardless, the school board offered to renew her job.

Warren noted that she later "went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out for me.’ And I was pregnant with my first baby. So, I had a baby and stayed home for a couple of years, and I was really casting about, thinking, ‘What am I going to do?’ And my husband’s view of it was, ‘Stay home. We have children, we’ll have more children, you’ll love this.’ And I was very restless about it."

Warren’s story is different as a senator and on the presidential campaign trail.

[_DoubtingThomas]

Because of sexist stereotyping

It is not a good thing to see sexism everywhere. Just give me some evidence.

[_Jersey Girl]

Here is my reference.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... cause-she/

The statements in that article can be reconciled.

[_EAllusion]

I do. I said, "everything is possible".

You said that while dismissing one possibility and taken the other as a basis for form judgement. That's not being agnostic on the matter.

Can you please think about what I am saying? Do you have any evidence that Warren is telling the truth?

You're calling her a liar. The burden is on you, buddy.

Here is my reference.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... cause-she/

Wait, what? This is not a story that Warren made up. Your link doesn't even assert that. There are examples of her being sketchy for political purposes, but this ain't it.

If you trust politfact, just do a search on Sanders and instances in which he was marked as lying. There are lots.

Yes because there was no scientific polling at the time

Yes there was.

and Kamala Harris had no name recognition.

This statement is contradicted by the first one, and isn't really accurate in context.

You kept defending the CNN headline as a horse race coverage. It is not a conspiracy theory, it was just the bandwagon effect and free coverage.

What? I defended Harry Enten, formly of 538, now of CNN, for arguing that of the candidates, it was reasonable to assert Harris was a weak frontrunner. The case for this was reasonable. Again, it was the consensus view of political forecasters in general, and this was reflected in prediction markets. I was also careful to point out that because no candidate has the majority of probability of winning, they technically all are likely to lose.

Right now, Joe Biden is a the clear Democratic frontrunner. He, and he alone, is the most likely to win the nomination and no one else is all that close to him. It's also the case that Joe Biden is likely to lose the Democratic nomination. If you can't keep these thoughts in your head at the same time, you need to think about math a little harder.

but the poll numbers never showed that she was the front runner.

You said there were no polls. That aside, there's more to forecasting that far out than looking at polls. If it were that simple, Donald Trump has already lost. But it's not that simple.

[_EAllusion]

So, Warren indicates that her lack of credentials might have been an issue. Regardless, the school board offered to renew her job.

Warren noted that she later "went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out for me.’ And I was pregnant with my first baby. So, I had a baby and stayed home for a couple of years, and I was really casting about, thinking, ‘What am I going to do?’ And my husband’s view of it was, ‘Stay home. We have children, we’ll have more children, you’ll love this.’ And I was very restless about it."

Warren’s story is different as a senator and on the presidential campaign trail.

It's not "different." I just has more details. It's not contradictory to simply exclude that she was not retained for a teaching job because she was pregnant. People do this all the time because they have views, sometimes ones that change, on what is appropriate to include in brief biographical information in different contexts. This may simply have gone from something she didn't want to discuss in public, or felt would be harmful to her to discuss in public, to something she viewed as important or worthwhile to share. There's nothing about such a change that would indicate lying. That's just human nature. You can't infer lying from that kind of fact pattern.

This is your evidence that Warren is a giant liar, so it's safe to assume she's lying about Bernie? Yeah, cool.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

You wanna know what Trump's lying has done for me? I literally don't care if a candidate has lied about their past now. Now that I've seen lying about who you are, what you've done, and what you're doing is gladly accepted because 'that's what politicians do', I just can't muster the enthusiasm for placing someone in the office of the Presidency who values telling the truth to the American people.

- Doc

[_Dr Exiled]

I think it is clear that CNN has it out for Bernie, no matter which side one takes in the he said/she said dust-up.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/january-democratic-debate-2020-cnn-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-938365/

From the article:

“CNN reported yesterday — and Senator Sanders, Senator Warren confirmed in a statement — that, in 2018, you told her you did not believe that a woman could win the election. Why did you say that?”

Not “did you say that,” but “why did you say that?”

Sanders denied it, then listed the many reasons the story makes no sense: He urged Warren herself to run in 2016, campaigned for a female candidate who won the popular vote by 3 million votes, and has been saying the opposite in public for decades. “There’s a video of me 30 years ago talking about how a woman could become president of the United States,” he said.

Phillip asked him to clarify: He never said it? “That is correct,” Sanders said. Phillip turned to Warren and deadpanned: “Senator Warren, what did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?”

That “when” was as transparent a media “Screw you” as we’ve seen in a presidential debate. It evoked memories of another infamous CNN ambush, when Bernard Shaw in 1988 crotch-kicked Mike Dukakis with a question about whether he’d favor the death penalty for someone who raped and murdered his wife, Kitty.

The leading questions are so obvious. It's like 2016 all over again when Wolf Blitzer was talking about super delegates and how they were all for Clinton during the California primary when the polls were still open.

[_moksha]

I prefer Yang, but Sanders is the best candidate of the top 4.

Buttigieg, he is smart, young and honest - the exact opposite traits of Trump.

[_Some Schmo]

I can't stand CNN these days. The network feels like it's suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and Trump/the right-wing nuts are their kidnapper.

They are only slightly less obviously in the bag for Trump than Fox. Maybe the Democrats should start whining that CNN is fake news... bring them back around to reality.