Why Tulsi Gabbard will win the nomination in 2020

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

okay, answer me this: who is Tulsi's base in the Democratic Primary? I know the standard response to this is that she'll inherit all of Bernie's supporters because she endorsed him in 2016, but I don't see working class whites in places like McDowell County, WV or Ingham County, MI voting for a 39 year old Hindu Woman, and I certainly don't see College Kids or Affluent White Liberals voting for someone who's so favorable towards Putin, Assad, and Modi. Cornering the "anti-war vote" won't do it either: otherwise, Howard Dean would have been the nominee in 2004, and while this certainly helped Obama in 2008, it was just one factor in his appeal among many.

Barack Obama kind of invalidates the first part of your argument. Who cares if she's a Hindu woman?

Howso? Barack Obama lost every county in West Virginia in the primary. As for who cares, the same WWC Democrats everyone worries about now after Trump.

Also most Americans don't even know who Modi is, and I don't see how she's favorable towards Putin and Assad. She's just more skeptical and less hostile in general when it comes to dealing with them. It's just the war hawks in this party who want to paint her as an ally of Putin and Assad.

Please explain, if having an Assad-allied fascist group fund a trip to Syria for someone who personally meets Assad and spouts his propaganda afterwards isn't something that qualifies as "friendly to Assad", what does?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Imagine if in 2002 a Democratic politician planning on running in 2004 personally went to Iraq and had a friendly meeting with Saddam Hussein. They'd be crucified by the rest of the party, including the most anti-war Democrats, and would be seen as DOA come 2004, and rightfully so.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Also Beet should go see what DU and DailyKos about her in regards to his highly scientific internet comments method.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bernie Sanders was well known in political circles, even if just for being the only independent in Congress or a self described socialist. Sure he wasn't all that well known with your average person off the street outside of Vermont, but how many people can even name a Senator besides their own?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bernie Sanders was well known in political circles, even if just for being the only independent in Congress or a self described socialist. Sure he wasn't all that well known with your average person off the street outside of Vermont, but how many people can even name a Senator besides their own?

But who cares if you are or aren't "well known in political circles" two years before you declare your candidacy?  I don't see how it really makes a difference.  And in any case, what is "political circles"?  People who are not quite (but almost) political junkies?  Because for true political junkies, like the kind of people who post on this forum, Gabbard *is* known.  So then what are you saying?  Sanders was better known four years ago than Gabbard is now among people who aren't quite as nerdy about politics as we are, yet still more nerdy about politics than the average voter?  (Yet both were unknown among the public at large?)  That seems like hair splitting.

Well as noted above using Beet's highly scientific internet comments methodology, about half of people who talk about Gabbard think she's pretty awful (see the discussion on this very site, or places like DailyKos and DU.) I know jfern likes to handwave that by arguing that DailyKos and DU are establishment sell out sites now, but literally the only claim to being progressive that 72.98% on Crucial Votes scoring on Progressive Punch Tulsi Gabbard has is that she endorsed Bernie...thus meaning that Dan Lipinski must also be a progressive hero. But anyway based on the logic that all Bernie supporters will flock to her, that also means that all of these green counties are going to be pretty ripe to be voting for a 39-year old Hindu woman from Hawaii:



*Can I point out that Cory Booker has an over 96% rating?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Gabbard refuses to denounce Bannon: https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/853968963931430912

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Gabbard refuses to denounce Bannon: https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/853968963931430912

If a Democrat is going to defeat Trump in 2020, it's not going to be by denouncing Bannon. I don't think Gabbard will be the nominee for a multitude of reasons, but at least she is talking about policy and what she wants to do for her constituency. If the Democrats choose a Clintonesque strategy of solely running against Trump, and not running for something, they will continue to lose.

False dichotomy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

She's not even progressive. Progressive Punch rates her as the 136th most progressive member of the House. That puts her to the right of over 70% of Democrats.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Beet's stellar prediction record continues!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's going to be close. Here is a 53-47 Macron victory based on how the 1st round supporters divide up:

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The male and older version of Gabbard sure did stellar tonight!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

With the current state of her "campaign" and finishing behind Uncommitted and multiple dropped out candidates in multiples states this just makes me laugh.