Tulsi Gabbard will win the Democratic nomination in 2020.

[Shadows]

Maybe! She went for Sanders after 3 losses for Sanders including a crushing loss in SC - People expected Sanders to drop out on Super Tuesday. That would have damaged her career & she was threatened too that her career is over.

She opposes TPP, went & agitated in Dakota (When Warren took a stand in the last minute & didn't go anywhere), she is strong anti-war. I don't think she will push for Single Payer but on many issues like the Minimum Wage, Family Leave, Marijuana I see her going more & more leftwards.

If not 2020, by 2024 I think she will be a leader of the strong progressive faction. She should absolutely by chosen as Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State by any Dem nominee!

[Shadows]

Won't it be difficult for her to explain her homophobic father and her past anti-gay views before "evolving" to Democratic primary voters? She may look good on paper, but that tends to get candidates from both parties in trouble.

By this logic Hillary would never be the nominee since she & Bill promoted DOMA & various legislation. Her father is opposed to gay marriage (or was don't know the status) as are many old timers but she has been pro-gay marriage for over 10 years. She has been a sponsor for numberous pro gay legislation over 10 years (check her record). And she has detailed how her stay in Middle East, travelling the world opened her eyes to gay marriage.

Hillary only supported Gay Marriage in 2013 odd after opposing it for her entire life (Gabbard has been pro-gay marriage for a decade now with legislation to her credit). So if Hillary, Biden gets a pass, she will too.

Look you won't get a Bernie type record with voting against DOMA in 96, there is no perfect candidate.

[Shadows]

When did Syria and Russia become the single most important issue for red avatars on this board? I'm not saying it isn't important, because it is, but why are so many of you all of the sudden single issue voters when it comes to this?

This argument is the hallmark of a lost cause; and similar to when people would scream 'why do you care about gay marriage when the economy is in tank!' about 4-5 years ago. Even if it wasn't an important issue (which it is) it's still a barometer of your values/political outlook; supporting Assad over people who rose up in what started as a civil protest in 2010 is a foul, and awful view for anyone who claims to be on the centre left/left. When people like George Galloway support Assad it shows just how awful it is.

It's not awful to not support ISIS and Al Qaeda over Assad.

But it's awful to think that Assad is a lesser evil, or somehow a preferable choice. When people on the left were cheering the 'liberation of Aleppo' last week it shows how morally bankrupt the far left has been on foreign policy for years

Absolutely 100% Assad is way the lesser evil. This is like saying Trump & Hillary are the same.

You can't pick & choose dictators - What about US (with UK) supporting Saddam in the 80's when he was fighting against iran & used chemical weapons? What about Saudi Arabia which is an extremely theocratic authoritarian society & has killed a huge number of civilians for no good reason.

Assad is absolutely nothing compared to ISIS. Saying you want to overthrow Assad is like supporting ISIS at this point.

You have to take out ISIS & then deal with Assad.

[Shadows]

The smear campaign against Tulsi is disturbing. People are pinning everything on her, oh X group in foreign countrt (a non-violent religious one, not very different to evangelicals) support you, you went to FOX & what not.

This is the same thing people did with Ellison, anytime anti-establishment Dem comes up, you smear him or her. I remember people making a huge deal of some 50 year old letter Bernie wrote but I don't see any1 becoming the equally irrelevant creepy stuff of Biden sniffing hair, kissing wives & grown up daughters & what not.

This is just sad - Till now we have no proof that Tulsi has done anything really discriminatory. For all we know she went & campaigned in Dakota for the environment, for the right of natives. She has a great resume.

Give her a chance. She will likely not be ready in 2020 IMO. She is way too young. But people should be patient & watch over a few hours than really passing these far fetched judgments.

[Shadows]

When did Syria and Russia become the single most important issue for red avatars on this board? I'm not saying it isn't important, because it is, but why are so many of you all of the sudden single issue voters when it comes to this?

This argument is the hallmark of a lost cause; and similar to when people would scream 'why do you care about gay marriage when the economy is in tank!' about 4-5 years ago. Even if it wasn't an important issue (which it is) it's still a barometer of your values/political outlook; supporting Assad over people who rose up in what started as a civil protest in 2010 is a foul, and awful view for anyone who claims to be on the centre left/left. When people like George Galloway support Assad it shows just how awful it is.

It's not awful to not support ISIS and Al Qaeda over Assad.

But it's awful to think that Assad is a lesser evil, or somehow a preferable choice. When people on the left were cheering the 'liberation of Aleppo' last week it shows how morally bankrupt the far left has been on foreign policy for years

Absolutely 100% Assad is way the lesser evil. This is like saying Trump & Hillary are the same.

You can't pick & choose dictators - What about US (with UK) supporting Saddam in the 80's when he was fighting against iran & used chemical weapons? What about Saudi Arabia which is an extremely theocratic authoritarian society & has killed a huge number of civilians for no good reason.

Assad is absolutely nothing compared to ISIS. Saying you want to overthrow Assad is like supporting ISIS at this point.

You have to take out ISIS & then deal with Assad.

The US supporting Saddam in the 1980s was wrong; and was using the exact same logic that you used of 'Oh ISIS are worse' because they said that Iran was worse than Saddam (even though it was Saddam who invaded, ironically for oil)

Same re Saudi Arabia. I've never been a supporter of the Saudis, and think they've got an awful lot to answer for.

You're espousing the very propaganda that the Syrian regime have always been saying; that Assad is the only one who can stop the 'terrorists'. As a general rule for me at least when you've got the support of Iran, Hezbollah and Russia your regime is clearly doing something wrong.

I'm not smearing her- she voted against a bill condemning Putin. Her foreign policy solution to Syria is literally the same as Donald Trumps

And their is nothing wrong with that. This is about having some brains. You can't fight ISIS & Assad at the same time while the Kurds are blowing stuff up demanding their own nation & Turks are bombing the Kurds & then you have the Free Syrian army.

Syria is a mess & any1 who thinks ISIS & Assad are same are flat out delusional. ISIS are freaking declaring war on nations, infiltrating other nations by training terrorists, brutally murdering people all over the world & not just Syria & is radicalizing youth all over the world. Assad is a local Syrian dictator who uses brutal force against his own people (And there are many MANY such dictators throughout the world).The day you take off Assad, ISIS takes over as they are the most capable to fill that vacuum. That is the same thing which happened in Libya with Gaddafi, Libya has a strong ISIS presence now & is a literally a Harvard for terrorists for training.

Secondly going against Assad is not an option now when Russia & Iran are actively militarily supporting Assad. What do you do - Create World 3 with a Nuclear state?

I would like to see you go in the battle field & fight - I don't want more soldiers massacred & dying.

The only solution is to take out ISIS & sit with Russia & other countries & find a diplomatic solution to oust Assad!

It is incredibly sad that people have learn nothing from Iraq. You took out another brutal war-monger dictator & you destabilized not only the Middle East but something which is spreading to the entire planet.

[Shadows]

How someone who takes money from Sheldon Adelson gets more love from online liberals than Boomer amazes me

As far as I can tell, you're just straight up lying. Show me where Adelson has donated money to Tulsi.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/10300698

That piece was written by her primary opponent. And nowhere in that piece & I read it, it mentions that Adelson is paying Tulsi any money.

You should apologize!

[Shadows]

I don't see Tulsi even having a chance at the nomination.  Just on sheer optics- she's a snooze fest... I would not be good at all for motivating voters to turnout etc.  Unless you have a wealth of experience... the you need charisma & a bit of the X Factor... neither of which she has.

She has most of the Sanders wing locked up if Warren decides not to run, and has the potential to be extremely formidable.

Warren would certainly run if Sanders doesn't. And Warren is not the only progressive. Jeff Merkley may run or maybe De Blasio will (& he will have a li'l better Black support) or someone else.

She wouldn't have most of the progressive wing locked up because say a Merkley or Warren would be to the left of her on many issues. She is not Sanders & doesn't have that progressive cred. She is just 35 odd, I think she is atleast 10 years away IMO - The last thing I want is a young guy like Obama who talks big but is clearly not ready for the job.

I think Gabbard would be a good Secretary of State or Defense candidate. I mean I think she is better than Booker a Gillibrand but I don't look at her as the 2nd coming of Bernie. I appreciate her guts to come for Bernie putting her whole career on the line when Bernie was sinking essentially.

I also fully support more Dems going to Fox (the GOP propaganda machine) to give their viewpoint - Fox has the highest viewership & a very old audience (even older than CNN NBC) & if they are treated respectfully, they should reach out.

I also fully support Gabbard's view on the Middle East. If Putin is bombing ISIS I would be very happy. That is if Putin is bombing ISIS because Putin takes a lot of liberty with bombing locations. Certainly better than throwing Assad out or this disastrous policy of giving arms to rebel groups many of whom are directly affiliated to ISIS.

The smear on Gabbard is distasteful. I am not excited for Tulsi 2020 at all, but people should have an open mind, see her for 4 years & see what she does in the debates if she runs.

[Shadows]

Guys, Shadows is a Trump supporter who trolls by posting various pro-Sanders and related posts. Why are you even responding to him?

Right, I am huge Trump fan you goof. MAKE AMERICAN GREAT AGAIN...yada yada...DRAIN THE SWAMP

Mr. Ignoramus, Haven't you seen me flooding this place with pro-Trump articles, praising Trump to the moon, highlighting his amazing achievements, gushing about the future with Trump.

I am sure I am the biggest Trump supporter in here!

[Shadows]

She is 100% right on the rebels though. They are worse than Assad. Most of the rebels have association with Al Qaeda. Assad is reasonably secular while these rebels are radical extremist Sharia Islamists, 100% Sunni & theocratic.

I remember US training 60 rebels to fight ISIS in a pilot project- Everyone backed out I think after the training - 4 or 5 people odd agreed. Many of them even like ISIS & only consider Assad evil

These rebels have got many truces from Assad - Assad let some prisoners go, offered amnesty etc. And these rebels themselves have used chemical weapons on people similar to Assad. Also these rebels in many places are bombing & killing civilians.

Imagine the f**kery - CIA & the army backed 2 different groups with arms once & they ended up killing each other. Apart from Kurds, most of these folks are worse than Assad (or as bad) & are not very different to ISIS!

Democrats will ravage Trump for being close to Putin for the next four years. How can they do that and then nominate someone close to Putin?

Remember how Obama was, for years, attacked as weak on Putin? John McCain? Mitt Romney?

There's a difference between being called weak on another nation versus praising their foreign policy in an area where most Republicans and Democrats agree it's wrong.

Democrats & Republicans agreed on NAFTA

Dems & GOP agreed on Glass Steagal

Dems & GOP agreed to suck up to lobbyists & corporates & even sell votes if need be

Dems & GOP supported the war in IRAQ

Both of these parties have got a lot of stuff horribly wrong. If they both agree on something, it is more likely to be wrong than right - lol!

Tulsi seems to follow the alt right perspective that the current War On Terror is entirely due to theological disagreement. Any nuance or attempts to explain differences through economic reasoning is an attack on OMG COMMON SENSE!!!!

She is right on the broader sense that the war on terror is theological & ideological & not economics. It is being fought on those issues to establish a Sharia Radical extremist islam where you have a Sunni religious state with extreme Sharia law. However economics play a strong part on the lower level, it helps radical ideological extreme groups to recruit people - When people don't have food, they are more likely to take these extremist violent theological routes & wars!