re: Tucker Carlson basically endorses Abdul El-Sayed for the U.S. Senate

Half of this board is just re-posting whatever Pepe's Grandma tweets out.

The embed feature was the death knell.



I have to laugh at this point but it’s actually sad.

Is this how Tucker has always been and we just didn’t know?

Do you think he endorsed El Sayed and praised the DSA?

Roger was spot on.

Hope he’s OK and healthy.

Nope populism will swing right, very right

Fair. And I can understand that.

I’ve never paid any attention to him. His sill laugh was just too much and the same dumb expression after asking a question.

And his fly casting form kinda sucks.

You and Glenn slobbering over Momdummy now

Totally shocking

Tuckers guest claiming Abdul El-Sayad is America first AND Abdul somehow shed his DSA marxist-Islamist feathers, as Tucker nods like a dweeb tool...

Is very-clear that Tucker has lost his mind or was paid to lose his mind.

Tuckers strawman about removing Trump because of tactical nukes- he childishly imagined as a mushroom cloud- went too far...

This, is now so far off the reservation- He may as well move to his Qatar home, and go goat hunting in his blue shirt made into a chequered headress.

quote:

---

Tuckers guest claiming Abdul El-Sayad is America firs

---

Another complete fabrication.

Hey grok, what do you think?

quote:

---

No, it is not accurate to say Tucker Carlson endorsed Abdul El-Sayed. He did not endorse him. Full stop. What actually happened in the exchange: • Carlson stated he would not vote for Mike Rogers “at gunpoint.” • He called Rogers a “tool of Israel and the intelligence agencies” and said no one should be farther from a position of power. • He agreed with Saagar Enjeti that El-Sayed’s campaign messaging is “America First” and “literally Trumpian” (focusing on the framing around foreign aid, healthcare costs, and American-flag optics). • Both predicted El-Sayed would win. That is strong, public opposition to the Republican nominee combined with praise for specific tactical/messaging aspects of the Democrat’s campaign. It is not an endorsement of El-Sayed as a candidate, his overall platform, or a recommendation that people vote for him. Phrases like “basically endorses” or “all but endorses” are interpretive spin. They are common in media and social-media posts because they generate stronger reactions than the more precise description: Carlson trashed the Republican and found the Democrat’s current campaign style relatively appealing on certain foreign-policy and populist points. Those weasel words compress opposition-to-one-candidate + selective praise of the other into something that sounds closer to affirmative support than the transcript supports. Enjeti himself still described El-Sayed as “a full-blown leftist” in the same conversation, which undercuts any claim that either of them was treating him as an ideological ally. Carlson’s comments fit his long-standing pattern of criticizing establishment/pro-Israel Republicans more harshly than he criticizes certain anti-interventionist or populist messaging from other directions. That pattern is real; an actual endorsement is not. The original post and headlines that framed it as an endorsement (qualified or otherwise) overstated the evidence. The accurate summary is: Carlson made clear he rejects Rogers and sees political upside in El-Sayed’s current campaign approach.??????????????????????????????????????????????????

---