why the 180? | TheaterFire

[-]

moomoo14@reddit

She actually answered this position change on her YouTube channel about a year ago. https://youtu.be/4TaVvv2M-Ck?si=F7dlnLKtqciAP2oF

[-]

jfoughe@reddit

I have no issue with a politician doing a 180 and changing their opinion over time, especially if they’re able to eloquently explain why.

I do however have an issue with a politician like Harris, who does random 180s, 270s, 45s, 98s, 28s, and 360s to fit into whatever style or crowd she wants to impress in any given moment.

[-]

Thank you so much for sharing this. I’m always curious when people do a 180. Not in a way that I think it’s bad. I love when people move around with different ideas. It’s so human in a day and age of algorithms.(I’m actually developing a theory on this idea, not that I’m anyone special haha I’m just a mailman and my mind doesn’t shut up during the day so I come up with lots of pointless thoughts for fun.)

But this Seems reasonable enough. Get more data then update your thinking.

[-]

Sithlordandsavior@reddit

This drives me nuts about American politics. Someone will change their mind on a viewpoint after X years and immediately people go "They're a flip flop!" and it's like... It's called being more informed?

[-]

2017hayden@reddit

I mean there are absolutely politicians that just flip flop to whatever they believe is politically convenient as well. I’ve seen politicians change their “opinion” on a topic multiple times in a week. If they actually changed their mind that often then frankly I’d have to say they clearly are a bit too easy to persuade to trust them with holding political office.

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

Tulsi has gone from supporting gun reform to advocating for no gun laws! It is a flip-flop for the grift, not a case of becoming more informed. Becoming more informed would involve all of these paranoid people who misread the 2nd Amendment and think there should be zero gun laws actually getting educated and changing their mind to say, 'Oh, I now support universal background checks.'

[-]

Siganid@reddit

More informed would mean that people reviewed the data and learned that gun control causes much more harm. In every case, violent crime rises.

The most informed position on this issue is zero gun laws.

Anything else is hoplophobia based on terrorists lying.

[-]

PubliclyDisturbed@reddit

ZERO gun laws is the most informed? Thats absolutely nuts, what you just said, you know that right? Not even most 2nd amendment advocates would say that ZERO gun laws is a logical position

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

So, where can I review more informed data that says gun control causes more harm?

I am curious: how come the USA leads the world by far in mass school shootings? Please don't tell me it's a mental health problem, because that is not exclusive to the USA.

[-]

Siganid@reddit

https://hwfo.substack.com/s/guns

That guy does a pretty good job.

how come the USA leads the world by far in mass school shootings?

Because columbine media blitzes made the shooters heroes to disenfranchised kids. The fame those kids got, combined with our celebrity worship culture causes copycats.

Nicholas Cruz probably couldn't get a date until he shot up a school. Look at him now.

The real question is would you stop school shootings if you had to kill more innocent people to do it?

Why? Why do you want to kill more people?

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

A random link to a substack? lol

Oh, of course, blame the media. lol

Y'all are so predictable.

[-]

Siganid@reddit

Y'all are so predictable.

I agree.

The truth is predictable.

Funny thing is, so are you. I should've put money on genetic fallacy regardless of what I posted as a source.

At least we know your ignorance is intentional.

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

What in the world are you babbling on about? lol.

No wonder Tulsi decided to grift.

[-]

Rlstoner2004@reddit

That wasn't really an answer though. She just generically said we all need to get along

[-]

jstohler@reddit

That was such a bullshit non-answer. "Two sides at a town hall disagreed and then they agreed and the Democrats are dictators and now that's why I did a 180 on gun control."

Fuck Tulsi.

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

Non answers are good enough for these folk. All that matters are vibes!

[-]

Daedroh@reddit

I know nothing about politics but aren’t bump stocks impossible to ban? They seem to be easy to replicate (if I remember correctly how bump stocks are used)

[-]

2017hayden@reddit

You don’t even need a bump stock to bump fire a weapon. It just makes it a little easier for some guns.

[-]

maxem38@reddit

You don’t feel different about something from 7 years ago?

[-]

jstohler@reddit

On what my favorite pizza topping is? Yes.

On something as fundamental as gun control? Nope.

[-]

Rlstoner2004@reddit

What topping do you now prefer?

[-]

jstohler@reddit

I’m now firmly anti-pineapple.

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

These folks don't realize that adults in their late 30s don't typically go from being progressive to adopting regressive stances on issues. All they know is that someone is telling them what they want to hear, which they cannot even realize is what's happening.

This woman voted for the Bipartisan Background Checks Act (H.R. 8), which aims to close the “gun show loophole.” This loophole currently allows people purchasing firearms through private sales, including at gun shows, to forgo a background check. Now, she's like, "You know what? No background checks, no laws, nada! You want a gun? Your baby wants a gun? Your dog wants a gun? EVERYONE gets a gun like it's gum! YOLO! MY 2ND AMENDMENT!"

[-]

stan2010@reddit

Money

[-]

SunsetDriftr@reddit

How is factually stating what happened a course reversal?

[-]

filolif@reddit

She’s an imbecile and a grifter is why.

[-]

RemoteConstruction90@reddit

Because she’s a self-promoting political prostitute who will do and say anything to stay politically relevant even when everyone sees her for what she truly is. And yet there are people gullible enough to call her smart because she’s soft-spoken and serving in the US Army Reserve.

[-]

LactoceTheIntolerant@reddit

After the shooting in Vegas everyone was for it.

[-]

BarryLicious2588@reddit

Kamala Harris said she believed the SA accusers against Biden, then she became his VP

People are willing to do anything for position, including relationships with mayors twice ones own age

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

Eh, there's a huge difference between the two. Tulsi changes her stance to grift, and the other was a Russian asset.

Hold up, maybe they are the same?

[-]

Ibo-Naw@reddit

Why? Because there's no money in saying 'ban bump stocks' because the crowd she would be talking to is in the streets advocating, not raging online or driving to work with their 'Trump is God' US flags hanging from their F-150.

[-]

SHD_Tech@reddit

A) She gained access to new information and changed her position. This should be encouraged, not used as an attempted “gotcha”. Who among us hasn’t had the wrong take on something and turned around when we learned more about the subject?

B) Much as I might not like gun legislation, she did co-sponsor and actual bill to do it, which is at least the correct process to do it if you’re going to try to do it. The Ban that actually happened was an Executive Order based on definition changes, which is the wrong way to do something even if it were the right thing to do.

[-]

tuepm@reddit

A) She gained access to new information and changed her position. This should be encouraged, not used as an attempted “gotcha”. Who among us hasn’t had the wrong take on something and turned around when we learned more about the subject?

what is the new information?

[-]

SHD_Tech@reddit

Information she didn’t have before. I’m not saying there was some worldwide revelation at that time, I’m saying many people form opinions based on the limited scope of what they see in their own small bubble or what they’ve been told by people they think are knowledgeable and can be trusted.

Why does this need to be explained to such a degree? Have you never thought a thing, then thought something different when you found out more information about it?

[-]

tuepm@reddit

Why does this need to be explained to such a degree? Have you never thought a thing, then thought something different when you found out more information about it?

I'm not asking you in the abstract to explain why people change their minds about things. I'm asking you what specific information are you suggesting caused her to change her mind about this specific issue.

[-]

Miserable-Bit5939@reddit

I think that “small bubble” could be living in Hawaii. I don’t know the specifics of the gun laws there, but Tulsi says they are restrictive. It can also be that she was in the Democratic Party for so long (20 years). I wish she came around sooner, but I listened to that podcast with Steve Scalise and I was convinced that she changed her position on the issue

[-]