"Falls off ranking/Tulsi Gabbard"

[bigtree]

ThePeopleForKamalaHarris @PeopleHarris 20h
We all know polls aren't the best indicators of who will win the (D) Party 2020 Presidential Nomination but if one falls OFF a poll, perhaps it says something?

"Falls off ranking/Tulsi Gabbard" https://wapo.st/2Z9MX1F

[PunkinPi]

1. .

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1295335

[EndGOPPropaganda]

2. Great! Tulsi could get Trump elected

Tulsi is someone who could easily run as a third party candidate. And that would dramatically help trump get re-elected.

[bigtree]

3. we couldn't find enough voters to () approve her for pollsters

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 09:34 AM - Edit history (1)

...and keep her in the Democratic fold.

Regrets.

[Crowman2009]

19. I guess not enough alt-right pricks could boost her numbers.

[ashredux]

7. Doubt it...she was way off base for the Democratic party...whatch...she will end up on the Right

[EndGOPPropaganda]

73. She could run as an indep. Would be terrible.

The GOP voters are cultish, they’re voting trunp all the way. I’m serious.
And if Tulsi runs third party she would have a Stein/Nader effect and help trump significantly.
Any attention she gets now helps her with a potential indep run.

[JI7]

10. i think the goal is to get Trump elected again

[Eliot Rosewater]

77. I cant say that, glad you did

[SouthernProgressive]

4. Removing a Sanders surrogate from the ranking...

Is just another example of their anti-BS bias.

[Chemisse]

6. What? That seems like a real twist of logic.

First of all, since when was she a Sanders surrogate? She seemed to have her own set of talking points.

Secondly, 'they' have specific criteria for qualifying. We've all seen it. She either meets it or she doesn't.

Finally, why must Sanders always play a victim card? That's what Trump does, which is pretty unsettling.

[SouthernProgressive]

9. "why must Sanders always play a victim card?"

He always blames others.

[Chemisse]

12. It's hard to respect someone like that.

I was delighted with his comment about Israel yesterday, but that's the first thing he's said in four years that was worthwhile, imo.

[Eliot Rosewater]

78. BErnie? He says worthwhile stuff all the time, it is the same stuff all the time and

without good plans and WORKING RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHERS it will never happen, but I like his idea on many social issues.

I just dont know how someone accomplishes those things without a tremendous amount of support in the PARTY as opposed to voters.

[thesquanderer]

46. Answering your three questions...

1. She's not a Sanders surrogate, but she supported him in 2016. I'm guessing that's what SouthernProgressive meant? Maybe S/he could clear that up.

2. Despite what the Harris people said, this is not a poll. There is no specific criteria for "qualifying" for this list. As far as I can tell, it's just a bunch of pundits offering their opinion of the relative strengths of the candidates. It has no relevance to any objective measure, qualifying for debates, or anything like that.

3. Sanders did not play the victim card. AFAIK, he's had no comment on this, and I'm not sure where you got the idea he did.

[Chemisse]

50. Ohhh, I thought this was related to qualifying to debate #3.

So of course it's subject to opinion, not numbers. My mistake.

It's Sanders' MO to play the victim card in situations such as these and here the poster simply did it on his behalf. He doesn't have to comment on each and every perceived slight. The candidate sets the tone; his supporters echo it.

[onetexan]

59. +1 K&R

The Berniecrats seem to be a cultish following as well. Glad to see they're dwindling in numbers this time around.

[thesquanderer]

95. I think you misinterpreted the post you were replying to

It's Sanders' MO to play the victim card in situations such as these and here the poster simply did it on his behalf. He doesn't have to comment on each and every perceived slight. The candidate sets the tone; his supporters echo it.

The poster is not a Bernie supporter. I suspect he was being sarcastic.

[wasupaloopa]

22. What other candidate whines about things as much

as Bernie’s campaign.

Why would I want to vote for a whiner.

[ashredux]

5. She had no business running...looked like she was auditioning for FOX

[EndGOPPropaganda]

75. I worry she is auditioning for a third party run

The right and the Russians will certainly boost her to do that... they already are.

Because the best way to help Trump win in 2020 is to have a third party spoiler candidate. Without Jill Stein 2016 there is no Trump.

[kurtcagle]

80. Not sure a third party necessarily helps Trump

A third party candidate would tend to absorb independents and the disaffected members of both parties. I think there are a fair number of Republicans who could not stomach voting for a Democrat, but would readily choose a 3rd party candidate, though there are very, very few Democrats who would not vote for a Democratic candidate this time around. Trump's favorable-ratings in the Democratic party is about 4%, where the Democrats in question are likely in places like West Virginia. I don't think the Dems have all that much chance to capture this segment, but those attracted to a 3rd party this time around are much more likely to be on the right.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

84. It does, because Trumpism is a cult

Also Repubs less likely to vote third party than Dems because their party is more homogeneous.
That’s why Rove encouraged Nader and Putin encouraged Stein.

Read josh Marshall on it- Tulsi third party greatly increase chance trump wins.

[IronLionZion]

8. interesting that Moulton, Bennet, Bullock, and others are still there

It's good for our party that the GOP's favorite Dem is off the ranking.

[MontanaMama]

35. +1

Yes. Wonder who the GrOPers will align with next?

[JI7]

11. trollberliner will be along soon

remember don't engage.

[bigtree]

13. we're disconnected

[R B Garr]

14. At least we see by your example that personally attacking other

candidates is just a canard if you legitimately don’t like their politics. It has nothing to do with their gender or ethnic background. We can put aside the double standards now. Thanks.

Edit: nice edits, but it’s clear you understand perfectly. And why bother with Tulsi...except for anger.

[bigtree]

15. Gabbard's anti gay diatribes wouldn't fly here at DU

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 10:50 AM - Edit history (2)

...we don't have to pretend to support such blatant abusers of Democratic values.

Also, you're absolutely incomprehensible here. Don't bother to clarify, that was enough.

[R B Garr]

17. Speaking of booted off DU.....

I’m talking about your glaring double standards, not Tulsi. I don’t care about Tulsi.

[bigtree]

21. so you're calling me out on this thread for my recent suspension

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 11:25 AM - Edit history (4)

It was certainly a first for me, and a bit humiliating...

You know, I've been a part of this internet community since 2003. Joined up just after I had purchased my first computer. My concerns then are essentially the same as now: anti-military engagement across sovereign borders, civil rights, social justice, and support of the only party I've ever voted for (and I always vote for our nominees), a stalwart Democratic party guy.

That's why I found this message board welcoming enough to stick it out through disagreements and other silly conflicts between members, because it remains the welcoming community I found back in 2003, committed to progressive values and Democratic principles.

Your attempt to shame, bait, or otherwise humiliate me is certain to fail. I'm now almost 59 years old and can't be, won't be shamed by anonymous folks on the internet. It's a curious thing to engage in, but you seem determined, so I'm going to switch you off of my screen (again), and I hope you find something more productive than trying to shame an old man for standing up for what he believes in.

[R B Garr]

26. It's certainly not incomprehensible to understand that DU

rules prevent me from engaging in the same style of personal attacks.

[Skittles]

56. PREACH IT, BIGTREE

YES INDEED

[Crowman2009]

20. Not to mention that she was doing interviews on Breitbart.

Along with other extreme right-wing media.

[Princetonian]

31. Gabbard did a great interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper after the second debate.

She was the top trending candidate after the second debate. I believe lots of voters wanted to research her criticisms of Harris' history as DA and AG as I did and found out that Gabbard was correct on every count (although she did underestimate the number of marijuana arrests according to The Mercury News and The San Francisco Chronicle Debate Fact Check).

Watch how she answers Anderson Cooper when he asked her point-blank whether she thinks Assad is a murderer. The entire interview is good, though. This interview puts to rest the many ugly smears that people have been using against her.

[Hortensis]

34. If you found that Gabbard was correct on every point,

your searches brought up narrowly targeted sources that were trying to take out one leading candidate. Of course.

You probably also didn’t find information for the same reason that Gabbard was trending in part for much the same reasons that Marianne Williamson was. Curiosity about two attractive brunettes most people had either never heard of— or in many cases had heard odd, questionable stuff about. Not people typically seen on the Democratic presidential debate stage, and let’s underline presidential.

As for Gabbard, I’ll be glad to leave her to the disposition of the voters of her district in Hawaii.

[Princetonian]

38. Well, not every point: Tulsi underestimated the number of MJ/hashish arrests.

You said:

"your searches brought up narrowly targeted sources that were trying to take out one leading candidate. Of course."

And you'd be wrong. I have been holding back alot of well-annotated research from respected sources but I will not stand by and see a former Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee (2013-2016)/Iraq War veteran/National Guard member since 2003 be smeared by pissy partisans.

You said:

"You probably also didn’t find information for the same reason that Gabbard was trending in part for much the same reasons that Marianne Williamson was. Curiosity about two attractive brunettes most people had either never heard of— or in many cases had heard odd, questionable stuff about. Not people typically seen on the Democratic presidential debate stage, and let’s underline presidential."

I know. I was just tweaking.

I've been a girly girl Obama Mama since 2007 and understand male googly eyes.

You said:

"As for Gabbard, I’ll be glad to leave her to the disposition of the voters of her district in Hawaii."

I am aware that Gabbard may not be long for Congress. She has a primary opponenet who is also the scion of a top Hawaiian political dynasty who by all reports is a very nice man. C'est la vie!

I very much appreciate Gabbard's loyalty to Joe after Harris attacked Joe at the first debate for which she was totally unrepentent and proceeded to double down at the second debate! She publicly and fiercely defended Joe against Harris' vile implication-attack that Joe is a racist when no other candidate did.

I stand with those who stand with Joe.

[lapucelle]

45. "The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic."

That is the summary assessment of the fact checkers at Mercury News.

Marijuana prosecutions

Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

Here's Tulsi "I tell truth to power" Gabbard's response to Anderson Cooper.:

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Bashar al-Assad is a murderer and a torturer. Do you not agree with that?

GABBARD: I don't dispute that.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1908/01/crn.02.html

[Princetonian]

49. Sigh. I already debunked your cherrypicked sentence.

Here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=242786


I encourage everyone to watch Gabbard's post-second debate CNN interview with an admiring Anderson Cooper.

[lapucelle]

53. No you didn't. Not only are they direct quotes from your sources,

they are summary statements.

Marijuana prosecutions

Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/
******************************************************************************

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Bashar al-Assad is a murderer and a torturer. Do you not agree with that?

GABBARD: I don't dispute that.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1908/01/crn.02.html

[Hortensis]

54. This is about "tell a lie often enough..."

All you can do is debunk and move on. A great deal of effort is being invested in tearing down our leading candidates.

[lapucelle]

55. Is it even possible to "debunk" directly quoted summary statements?

It may be that some people confuse debunking with spinning.

[Princetonian]

62. Yes, I can debunk false statements that do not reflect the facts of what Gabbard said in her claim.

Interesting that the Harris defenders have all focused on this one thing when there were several other incidents mentioned. Perhaps those are harder to defend?

[lapucelle]

63. How can verbatim quotes from your sources be false statements

about what your sources said?

[Princetonian]

65. You quoted a cherrypicked sentence without context. Show us the rest of the debate fact check.

[lapucelle]

67. I quoted the summary conclusion sentence concerning the marijuana claim. N/T

I

[Princetonian]

69. Now show context. Quote the rest of the reporter's fact check. You have nothing to hide, right?

Are you afraid of giving everyone the entirety of the fact check on this issue, of what the reporter wrote following your cherrypicked sentence?

[lapucelle]

71. If you want to post the whole thing, feel free to do so.

Don't forget to post the summary statement that heads that section.

Marijuana prosecutions

Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

79. Show everyone. Quote the entire fact check.

[lapucelle]

81. The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

82. That didn't refer to what Gabbard actually said. Afraid to show the entire fact check?

Gee, I wonder why?

[lapucelle]

83. The facts: It's false to say Harris kept prisoners incarcerated beyond their sentences.

Tulsi Gabbard: “She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.”

The facts: It’s false to say Harris kept prisoners incarcerated beyond their sentences.

Lawyers in Harris’ attorney general office did unsuccessfully argue against the early release of prisoners, citing needed inmate firefighting labor — but Harris said they did so without her knowledge and publicly criticized the statement at the time.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

85. Harris' office argued against early release citing need for labor.

Semantics.

[lapucelle]

87. The facts: It's false to say Harris kept prisoners incarcerated beyond their sentences.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

88. Your record is skipping.

[Princetonian]

60. Lord give me strength! Please read the facts before you wrongly malign people.

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 10:06 PM - Edit history (2)

The Mercury Press and The San Francisco Chronicle concur on 1974 as the correct number of marijuana and hashish arrests which is even higher than than what Gabbard claimed!

"A department spokesman said 1,974 people were admitted to prison for marijuana and hashish charges during that time period."

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

On Thursday, a department spokesman told The Chronicle that 1,974 people were admitted for hashish and marijuana convictions during that period."

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

Regarding the cherrypicked sentence: "This is a highly misleading statistic."

That a single sentence by a reporter is used to denigrate Gabbard's veracity is a dishonest ploy when it is clear that the reporter made an assumption about what Gabbard "appears" to have meant when Gabbard said no such thing about Harris being DA or AG in her original statement!!!!

So it is only "misleading" if you are a presumptuous reporter or someone worse who is trying to put words in Gabbard's mouth to make her look bad.

This is the quote of what Gabbard said followed by the reporter's false assumption:

'Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

Gabbard appears to be referring to the number of Californians who were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses while Harris was state attorney general. The conservative Washington Free Beacon reported this year that at least 1,560 people went to prison for pot during Harris’ tenure from 2011 through 2016, citing reports from the California corrections department that are no longer available on their website. A department spokesman said 1,974 people were admitted to prison for marijuana and hashish charges during that time period.

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

Still, Harris did directly prosecute marijuana cases as San Francisco district attorney from 2004 through 2010. The DA’s office has not yet released data about pot convictions during that time period.

Harris has a mixed record on marijuana. She supported legal medical marijuana from her very first political campaign, but opposed efforts to legalize recreational marijuana in California in 2010 and took no position on the legalization ballot measure that eventually passed in 2016. While launching her attorney general re-election campaign in 2014, Harris let out a big laugh when asked by a local TV reporter about her opponent’s support of legalizing pot for recreational use.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

Despite the bullsh*t antics, the outstanding fact is Gabbard actually underestimated the number of marijuana violations. The rest of The Mercury News Debate Fact Check supports Gabbard's claims too. Don't take my word for it or that of cherrypickers, read it for yourself.

Questions To Ask Yourself:

Why didn't Harris refute Gabbard's claims during her CNN and MSNBC appearances, on the morning of August 1st?

CNN asked Harris about Gabbard, showed her the video clip and she still did not refute the claims.

Why won't Kamala Harris simply and categorically refute Tulsi Gabbard's claims?

[lapucelle]

86. "It's wrong to say Harris put those people in jail"

Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

snip=========================================================

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

*****************************************************************************

So [the statistic] is only "misleading" if you are a presumptuous reporter or someone worse who is trying to put words in Gabbard's mouth to make her look bad.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=243431

[Princetonian]

89. As AG, the buck stopped with Harris. The fact check confirms DA Harris prosecuted MJ cases.

[lapucelle]

90. Tulsi: She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations...

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

snip==========================================================

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

91. Gabbard underestimated the number of MJ arrests. As DA, Harris did prosecute MJ violations.

[lapucelle]

92. Facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

Not "inaccurate"... misleading.

mislead

transitive verb
: to lead in a wrong direction or into a mistaken action or belief often by deliberate deceit

intransitive verb
: to lead astray : give a wrong impression exciting as they are, they mislead

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misleading

[Princetonian]

58. The updated number of 1974 backs up Gabbard's claim.

The Mercury Press and The San Francisco Chronicle concur on 1974 as the correct updated number.

"A department spokesman said 1,974 people were admitted to prison for marijuana and hashish charges during that time period."

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

On Thursday, a department spokesman told The Chronicle that 1,974 people were admitted for hashish and marijuana convictions during that period."

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

Regarding your cherrypicked sentence: "This is a highly misleading statistic."

That a single sentence by a reporter is used to denigrate Gabbard's veracity is a dishonest ploy when it is clear that the reporter made an assumption about what Gabbard "appears" to have meant when Gabbard said no such thing about Harris being DA or AG in her original statement!!!!

So it is only "misleading" if you are a presumptuous reporter or someone worse who is trying to put words in Gabbard's mouth to make her look bad.

This is the quote of what Gabbard said followed by the reporter's false assumption:

'Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

Gabbard appears to be referring to the number of Californians who were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses while Harris was state attorney general. The conservative Washington Free Beacon reported this year that at least 1,560 people went to prison for pot during Harris’ tenure from 2011 through 2016, citing reports from the California corrections department that are no longer available on their website. A department spokesman said 1,974 people were admitted to prison for marijuana and hashish charges during that time period.

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

Still, Harris did directly prosecute marijuana cases as San Francisco district attorney from 2004 through 2010. The DA’s office has not yet released data about pot convictions during that time period.

Harris has a mixed record on marijuana. She supported legal medical marijuana from her very first political campaign, but opposed efforts to legalize recreational marijuana in California in 2010 and took no position on the legalization ballot measure that eventually passed in 2016. While launching her attorney general re-election campaign in 2014, Harris let out a big laugh when asked by a local TV reporter about her opponent’s support of legalizing pot for recreational use.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

Despite the bullsh*t antics, the outstanding fact is Gabbard actually underestimated the number. The rest of The Mercury News Debate Fact Check supports Gabbard's claims too.

Questions I Ask Myself:

Why didn't Harris refute Gabbard's claims during her CNN and MSNBC appearances, on the morning of August 1st?

CNN asked Harris about Gabbard, showed her the video clip and she still did not refute the claims. Why won't Kamala Harris simply and categorically refute Tulsi Gabbard's claims?

Perhaps you should ask yourself the same questions.

Truth over lies.

[lapucelle]

61. The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic

Marijuana prosecutions

Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

The Mercury News hasn't retracted or corrected it's finding.

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

mislead (verb)

transitive verb
: to lead in a wrong direction or into a mistaken action or belief often by deliberate deceit

intransitive verb
: to lead astray : give a wrong impression

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misleading

[Princetonian]

64. Show us the rest of the reporter's fact check.

[lapucelle]

66. What does that even mean?

If you go to the link you can read the whole story.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

[Princetonian]

68. Quote the entirety of the reporter's fact check summary not just one cherrypicked sentence.

[lapucelle]

70. You are free to post anything you like.

In the meantime...

[Princetonian]

72. Why are you refusing to quote the entire fact check?

Could it be that your cherrypicked sentence would be easily debunked if the fact check were quoted in its entirety?

Please enlighten everyone by quoting the entire fact check to add context to your single cherrypicked sentence.

[lapucelle]

74. I don't take directives, especially not from strangers

who think they're entitled to tell me what to do.

[Princetonian]

76. Do stop bothering me w/the same cherrypicked sentence again & again. Gabbard's claims are correct.

[Princetonian]

57. Where is the rest of the quote? Oh, here it is!

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 09:41 PM - Edit history (2)

That a single sentence by a reporter is used to denigrate Gabbard's veracity and mine is a dishonest ploy when it is clear that the reporter made an assumption about what Gabbard "appears" to have meant when Gabbard said no such thing about Harris being DA or AG in her original statement!!!!

So it is only "misleading" if you are a presumptuous reporter or someone worse who is trying to put words in Gabbard's mouth to make her look bad.

This is what Gabbard really said:

'Tulsi Gabbard: “She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

Gabbard appears to be referring to the number of Californians who were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses while Harris was state attorney general. The conservative Washington Free Beacon reported this year that at least 1,560 people went to prison for pot during Harris’ tenure from 2011 through 2016, citing reports from the California corrections department that are no longer available on their website. A department spokesman said 1,974 people were admitted to prison for marijuana and hashish charges during that time period.

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

Still, Harris did directly prosecute marijuana cases as San Francisco district attorney from 2004 through 2010. The DA’s office has not yet released data about pot convictions during that time period.

Harris has a mixed record on marijuana. She supported legal medical marijuana from her very first political campaign, but opposed efforts to legalize recreational marijuana in California in 2010 and took no position on the legalization ballot measure that eventually passed in 2016. While launching her attorney general re-election campaign in 2014, Harris let out a big laugh when asked by a local TV reporter about her opponent’s support of legalizing pot for recreational use.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

Despite the bullsh*t antics, the outstanding fact is Gabbard actually underestimated the number. The rest of The Mercury News Debate Fact Check supports Gabbard's claims too.

Questions For Everyone To Ask Themselves:

Why didn't Harris refute Gabbard's claims during her CNN and MSNBC appearances, on the morning of August 1st?

CNN asked Harris about Gabbard, showed her the video clip and she still did not refute the claims.

Why won't Kamala Harris simply and categorically refute Tulsi Gabbard's claims?[div]

Truth over lies.

[lapucelle]

94. From the Mercury News Fact checkers:

But the attorney general’s office doesn’t directly prosecute the vast majority of drug cases in the state. That’s up to the individual district attorneys in each county, and it’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

Inmate labor
Tulsi Gabbard: “She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.”

The facts: It’s false to say Harris kept prisoners incarcerated beyond their sentences. Lawyers in Harris’ attorney general office did unsuccessfully argue against the early release of prisoners, citing needed inmate firefighting labor — but Harris said they did so without her knowledge and publicly criticized the statement at the time.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/01/democratic-debate-kamala-harris-tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-fact-check/

===========================================================

The facts: This is a highly misleading statistic.

...It’s wrong to say Harris put those people in jail.

The facts: It’s false to say Harris kept prisoners incarcerated beyond their sentences.

These are some of the conclusions reached by the fact checkers. It's bewildering why anyone would think that Tulsi's tale was 100% confirmed.

[Princetonian]

29. That is false!! FACT: Tulsi has a 100% rating w/HRC & NARAL, is pro-choice & pro-same sex marriage.

Source: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe

Gabbard not only has a 100% rating with HRC but is also endorsed by them.

[thesquanderer]

47. Her anti-LGBT stuff was long ago, apologized for, she's got top rankings now.

[The Liberal Lion]

16. Bye Felicia

[nini]

36. exactly what i was going to say

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2019, 07:56 PM - Edit history (1)

[Skya Rhen]

18. I'm not sure why she even entered the race as she didn't help herself nor other candidates.

[R B Garr]

24. Yes, and who even knows if Harris will be her only target,

she may be after others as time goes on. But this does expose those who dismiss posters legitimate gripes about other candidates based on gender and ethnicity alone.

[Princetonian]

33. Tulsi gave her reasons in an interview on The View.

I checked out of curiosity after reading your post.

This is an helpful insight into Gabbard: then Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee Representative Tulsi Gabbard gave high public praise to Barack and Joe iduring her 2012 convention speech. She, like many soldiers, are loyal to those who have done good to those who served. Gabbard has been in the National Guard since 2003 and serving honorably in the Iraq War. She took two weeks off the campaign trail to go to military maneuvers in Indonesia in service to the National Guard. This is the patriot some spiteful partisans have felt the need to smear.

'At the 2012 Democratic National Convention, Gabbard praised President Obama, a fellow-Hawaiian, and Vice-President Joe Biden, along with their wives, as “the strongest advocates our military families could ever have.”'

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe

Tulsi showed that loyalty to Joe when she surprised many by fiercely defending Joe after Harris attacked by implying Joe is a racist during the first debate. I believe she helped Joe when no other candidate would defend him.

'Gabbard hits Harris "for false accusation that Biden is a racist":
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451962-tulsi-gabbard-slams-kamala-harris-it-was-a-false-accusation-that-joe-biden

I stand with those who stand with Joe.

[SCantiGOP]

37. She is targeting SC

I have read that, and she is spending a lot of time and money here.
There are at least 5 full size billboards around Columbia, and I’ve noticed several of the large (maybe 4’ by 6’) wooden framed yard signs. We’ve also seen TV commercials.
The only thing i haven’t noticed is anyone supporting her.

[ucrdem]

39. It's not a poll, it's a columnist's weekly power ranking, i.e. entertainment

And if this is a communication from the Harris campaign I have to observe that it's misleading and unstatesmanlike.

[bigtree]

40. noted

A New York Times analysis of polling and donation data shows that nine of the 24 Democratic candidates have already qualified for the next debates by collecting donations from at least 130,000 people and reaching 2 percent support in four qualifying polls. The deadline to meet those standards is Aug. 28.

Mr. Castro, Ms. Gabbard, Ms. Gillibrand and Mr. Steyer are all within striking distance. Mr. Castro and Mr. Steyer need only one more qualifying poll; Ms. Gabbard needs three more...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/us/politics/next-democratic-debate-candidates.html

[thesquanderer]

48. I agree, post is more unflattering to Harris campaign than Gabbard's. (n/t)

[TexasTowelie]

41. Maybe she should withdraw and run for senator?

Well, at least that is what a lot of people say about my preferred choice.

[msongs]

43. now there's an ugly prospect nt

[TexasTowelie]

44. Lo siento.

I thought I might take some grief from our Hawaiian DUers for making that suggestion.

[SidDithers]

42. DU rec...nt

Sid

[Bettie]

51. A bunch of Tulsi people were at the

two parades we pulled the county party float for today in East Central Iowa.

There were six or so of them.

[vapor2]

52. No love lost here

I dismissed her when she blamed Democrats for the last government shut down.

[Princetonian]

93. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on why she is running for President - The View

Anderson Cooper asks her why she shaded Harris and what Harris said to him about it.