I disagree with this for 1 simple reason. You said personal attacks on a candidate, when I didn't(for the most part). The most I did was call her a Snake and a fraud and I only did that the first few times (and I even went on to explain how what she says doesn't line up with actions and that's she trying to fool the electorate). Everything else I posted was simply "Here's Warren saying something that's not progressive, here's an article explaining her record, here's an article / video about how bad her M4A and other proposals are". That's not attacking the candidate personally that's going after their flawed policy, record, character and more than that, that's letting the candidate sink their own ship. I only exposed Warren's lying to this threads audience and everything I said besides the snake and fraud (which tbf is the conclusion I've come to along with a hell of a lot of people) is backed up and supported by actual evidence
On the other hand, Moren and Jaicee when it comes to Tulsi are throwing around smears that cannot be proven and peddling establishment talking points about Tulsi being a traitor to her country or a Russian Asset. Do you want to know how hypocritical both of these users have been especially the former for how they've gone after Tulsi? They go with the Modi and the go with the Assad but one of them certainly loves Pelosi who has done the exact same thing as Tulsi and met up with these 2 individuals and taken pics with them. Why is it fine for Pelosi and other top dems who have done the same exact thing but when Tulsi who also happens to be on the foreign affairs committee does it its wrong?
There's nothing wrong with being critical of a candidate, however that depends on what you're doing. If you being critical is smearing her instead of going after her policies, it doesn't matter who the candidate is I'll defend them cause that's wrong. However, if its legit criticism I accept it. When I saw Jaicee go after Tulsi on somethings, I pointed out her hypocrisy with how her support of Warren comes from Warren's evolution but for Tulsi who has evolved on her LGBQT stance and has a 100% voting record on it, she's still using it as an attack point which her record has proven isn't the case.
I dislike this kind of blanket statements where if someone says something that would hurt a candidate its an attack, or trying to tie Moren's legit personal attacks to my breakdowns of Warren's policies and actions. Does Moren have any proof that Tulsi is a Russian Asset or a traitor to her country? Hillary implied this and is getting sued for it, Hillary was asked about this and couldn't provide any evidence to back it up, she just left these implications there. I'm just saying, one of these things is not like the other. One is actually attacking the candidate the other is going after their Policy and record. I've said it numerous times before, but Its not my fault Warren lied about her teacher job and heritage, Its not my fault Warren waffled on M4A, Its not my fault she endorsed hillary in 2016, Its not my fault she's a bad candidate. I posted some contrasts between her and Bernie to show Bernie was more progressive, then I posted her record and lies for the people in this thread to see. If she never did any of these I wouldn't have had them to share. That's the difference.
Okay then, I'm sorry. I was wrong to compare the two situations as the same. My point remains though.