While I do agree with you I do not understand why did she not get institutional support.
The left-wing media turned on her the second she attacked Hillary and I do not think her party liked her very much after destroying / telling the truth about that hyena of a Vice President. I'm also noticing that the 2 she attacked are both feminists.
Maybe she is set up as a fail-safe of sorts, in case the narrative crumbles they can move her as an alternative?
or maybe another naieve person thinking they could accept an award without knowing the history of it. I dont see any evidence besides 'not trusting politicians' to prove her unworthy in the thread.
While I do agree with you I do not understand why did she not get institutional support. The left-wing media turned on her the second she attacked Hillary and I do not think her party liked her very much after destroying / telling the truth about that hyena of a Vice President. I'm also noticing that the 2 she attacked are both feminists.
Maybe she is set up as a fail-safe of sorts, in case the narrative crumbles they can move her as an alternative?
Tulsi is the WEF choice for when enough people openly reject the establishment neoliberal, far leftist and neocon candidates.
the democrats stopped supporting her after she rekt kamala, did they not?
or maybe another naieve person thinking they could accept an award without knowing the history of it. I dont see any evidence besides 'not trusting politicians' to prove her unworthy in the thread.
i think they also closed her out of the debate by changing the rules... it seems like a direct action after destroying kama (yt)
You've never heard of controlled opposition?