Tulsi Gabbard Accuses Democrats of becoming the very 'Racists they claim to hate'
Prove her wrong.
Tulsi Gabbard, who is incredibly HOT btw, left the DemonRAT party for its misguided politics
Posts
Total:
32
You still haven’t proven that you’re not a child molester.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Tulsi is the Democrat version of anti-establishment Trump
-->
@TWS1405_2
So Hindu's with acne float your boat?
-->
@zedvictor4
There is more to a person than their religious background and/or a little skin issue.
If that's all you got, personal attacks, clearly you cannot prove her wrong.
Duly noted.
"I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, hostile to people of faith & spirituality, demonize the police & protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war."
-->
@TWS1405_2
People do and say things to get themselves noticed.
And current agendas and trends might allow certain people to benefit from getting themselves noticed.
Political advantage, as it were.
Mr Trump was a prime example.
Give the people what they think they want, when they think they want it.
wait wait wait. you think she is hot?
I was just curious about the "incredibly hot" part of the title, and judging by the photos I found on the internet I really have to dispute that.
Is everything ok at home?
Is everything ok at home?
Tulsi is the candidate you would back if you're trying to avoid a civil war and bring peace and stability to the world. Therefore she has no chance.
I think Tulsi Gabbard is attractive.
-->
@Lemming
As do I.
-->
@IlDiavolo
Appreciating the inner and outer beauty of another woman ≠ anything being wrong at home. 🤦♂️🙄🤦♂️
i assume her body temperature is approximately 98.6°F. no hotter than most.
-->
@TWS1405_2
No offense, mi amigo, but to deem this woman incredibly hot you must be really thirsty. Lol.
She sure is sort of attractive, but that's all.
-->
@IlDiavolo
She sure is sort of attractive, but that's all.
I am fully aware this is meaningless trivia in the context of politics or character, but according to my aesthetics she is fairly near the ideal (for someone that age).
I do somewhat buy into the idea that people who are raised on ridiculous models, overdone makeup, unhealthy thinness, and giant mamaries (especially in pornography) are 'spoiled for choice' and indulging in a fetish by using such artifice as a gauge stick.
Nothing wrong with a fantasy, so long as you know its fantasy.
What you call "sort of attractive" is more attractive to me than the wings of a bell curve because it's genuine. The world doesn't look like a K-drama cast.
In conclusion, finding a woman with realistic natural beauty attractive indicates not "thirst" but lack thereof. The "thirsty" people form gauge sticks from the porn they are constantly surfing instead of the people they meet in the light of the sun.
-->
@IlDiavolo
-->@<<<TWS1405_2>>>No offense, mi amigo, but to deem this woman incredibly hot you must be really thirsty. Lol.She sure is sort of attractive, but that's all.
Compared to a lot of other women in political roles, she is HOT!
AOC is not hot. Neither is MTG, Bobart, et al.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I am fully aware this is meaningless trivia in the context of politics or character, but according to my aesthetics she is fairly near the ideal (for someone that age).
Well, it's said that "in matter of taste, there is no dispute". So, I'm not disputing about your aesthetics. But, take into consideration that the answer of the dude that claimed the OP is fairer than yours. I fully understand that in politics it's quite rare to find a passable woman.
In conclusion, finding a woman with realistic natural beauty attractive indicates not "thirst" but lack thereof. The "thirsty" people form gauge sticks from the porn they are constantly surfing instead of the people they meet in the light of the sun
I don't know what porn has to do with that, but if you think people that consume porn don't have sex you're totally wrong, especially us men who have a very sexual explosive nature.
And I'm not the only one that rates this woman as average, theres another poster around that do so as well. So, I'm not far from reality.
-->
@IlDiavolo
I don't know what porn has to do with that
Not just porn, and not all porn. Rather: Artifice. Cultivating a standard of attractiveness based on the contrived and unnatural.
if you think people that consume porn don't have sex you're totally wrong, especially us men who have a very sexual explosive nature.
Just because porn consumption does not strongly predict distressed celibacy does not mean distressed celibacy doesn't strongly predict porn consumption.
A man may be content in his celibacy for periods of time that college locker rooms would find unbelievable, he may indeed be a regular consumer of porn during that time; but what is really unbelievable would be that a man who is not content in his celibacy would not consume porn.
It seemed to be that you were arguing you could infer that TWS was sexually desperate because of "impaired standards", "hunger is the best sauce" type of thing.
In my experience the sexually desperate often become lost in unrealistic fantasies both in terms of the physical and mental characteristics of their imagined partner. Rather than "settling" they focus on the ends of the bell curve and compare every man or woman to the vanishingly rare ideals they have latched onto.
Therefore you have two different dynamics which make it impossible (without quantification) to draw conclusions about sexual desperation from sexual tastes.
Perhaps as you said there is no disputing taste, or perhaps your standards are artificial and rather than TWS being skewed by sexual desperation you are skewed by unreasonable comparison.
To make it more explicit, you can't get much thinner than Tulsi without being unhealthy. If you have fewer skin blemishes at her age you've probably painted your face and called it makeup. If your mammaries are larger than Kari Lake's you're probably packing silicone.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Dude, you're running around in circles. The thing is very simple, it's more of an exaggeration to say Tulsi is hot. But TWS has already explained it, in a political context she is sure hot, and I agree with that.
But to be honest, your social circle seems to be very limited to infer that the most natural beauty sample is Tulsi. She must be a 6, or 7 out of 10 to be very generous. I can assure you there are a lot of natural milfs out there that when you see them at first sight you would get a boner almost inmediatly.
-->
@IlDiavolo
You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Is taste disputable or not?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
It's undisputable but it's also based on experience which seems to be scarce in your case.
-->
@IlDiavolo
One final question, you said TWS clarified that it was a "political context".
Would you expect the political sample set to be more or less attractive than average?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Yeah, I think so. In politics you need intelligent people, not beautiful. Intelligence and beauty don't go hand in hand, I'm afraid.
-->
@IlDiavolo
It wasn't a "yes/no" question. It was "more or less" and your answer was: neither.
If beauty is not correlated (positively or negatively) with the occupation of being a politician than by definition the sample set is average. Therefore to be near the end of the distribution for beauty as a politician is also to be near the end of the distribution in general.
I think attractiveness is selected for in politicians, what is needed is not the same as what is gotten. In a large population one can easily see subsets with greater "attractiveness" which have hundreds or thousands of people in them. In media, entertainment, fashion, modeling, and pornography.
However those subsets represent a small minority of people. Presuming a linear scale where they are more than 1 / 1000 is a biased comparison. I put the second "attractiveness" in quotes like that because according to my aesthetics (which you can't dispute) simply amplifying the features which are often cited as factors of attractiveness sees diminishing returns.
You switched the term from "attractiveness" to "beauty", beauty has a different shade of meaning and need not be associated with sexual selectivity.
I am not going around in circles, you simply aren't following. This is obviously a circumstance governed by a classic bell curve and using a linear scale is silly. You said 7/10, but if there are a 100 7s for every 10 the metric is inherently dismissive of the more average and favorable to the "freaks".
It then becomes apparent that by claiming someone can be deemed "thirsty" for considering a 7 "incredibly hot" they must not have access to 7s, yet if 10 is the end of the bell curve almost no one has access to 9s and 10s.
So we are left with two possibilities, your comparison set is indeed the people around you but you live in a very unusual population, like the fashion industry. Or.. (and far more likely in my opinion) your comparison set is populated by images from people in those unusual populations (the wings of the bell curve).
I wouldn't infer anything about someone's sexual desperation from their "indisputable" aesthetics, but if aesthetics were disputable and there was a generally true quantification of attractiveness I would at least hold back until the expressed skew is below the average. For example if someone said Nancy Pelosi or Stacey Abrams were incredibly hot....
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You still haven’t proven that you’re not a child molester.
Most people don’t have to prove they aren’t child molestors because we aren’t on trial for it. Unless OP is on trial for molesting children, he doesn’t have to prove he isn’t a child molester because he is innocent until proven guilty.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Tulsi Gabbard Accuses Democrats of becoming the very 'Racists they claim to hate'Prove her wrong.
I don’t think the democrats or republicans are racists. They both denounce it.
Although if someone said, “death to white people” in a place that is 70% white, the threat has no power. If someone says, “death to black people” in a place that is 70% black, the threat has no power. If someone says, “death to whites” and whites make up 3% of the population there, the threat is credible and should be taken seriously and debunked. Same thing for blacks.
I as a white person have some comfort knowing my race is the majority in America, so waging a race war against the majority is funny to me. If my race was 3% of the population, I would be more scared. If my race was 3% if the population, I would vote for whichever party treated my race the best (and democrats treat black people better than republicans with policies like Affirmative action). But since my race is very common in America, I have less insecurity about it.
-->
@TheUnderdog
I don’t think the democrats or republicans are racists. They both denounce it.
Racists always do. Same as liars always scream the loudest to deflect their guilt. Case in point is Schumer denouncing Tucker Carlson and the segments he aired proving J6 investigation was a farce and complete violation of Americans rights.
The rest of your comment was rather nonsensical. A race war would fit like a glove into the Democratic/lefts divisive agenda.
-->
@TWS1405_2
I don’t think the democrats or republicans are racists. They both denounce it.Racists always do.
They might, but I perfer not to give false labels.
-->
@TheUnderdog
You clearly know nothing of history of this country. Nothing at all, especially where the Democratic Party is concerned.