Why are Berniecrats so obsessed with Tulsi Gabbard?

[bilaps]

They aren't.

They are.

See how easy that was?

Every Bernie supporter I know hates her because she criticized Islam. Protecting Islam is the most important issue to the modern left, it trumps all other issues social and economic.

Can't remember anything more falsely written here than this. And that says a lot.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Very few real people who voted for Bernie even know who she is.

This has generally been true in my experience.

[Beet]

As a "Berniecrat," I couldn't tell you. I notice the seemingly wide support for her as well, particularly among YouTube commenters and do not fully understand. It makes even less sense considering that Gabbard, thus far, has not given any indication that she is even interested in running.

She is popular because she does and says things that people like. People don't like PACs, so she says she won't take PAC money. People don't like NSA survelliance, so she introduces a proposal limiting it. What is so hard to understand? This should be 1+1=2, yet we have 100 Senators and 434 members of the House who don't.

[Mr. Morden]

Btw, there's a new article in Jacobin magazine titled "Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend":

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

So don't accuse Atlas forum of being the only place where people are "obsessed" with her. 

[Shadows]

As a "Berniecrat," I couldn't tell you. I notice the seemingly wide support for her as well, particularly among YouTube commenters and do not fully understand. It makes even less sense considering that Gabbard, thus far, has not given any indication that she is even interested in running.

She is popular because she does and says things that people like. People don't like PACs, so she says she won't take PAC money. People don't like NSA survelliance, so she introduces a proposal limiting it. What is so hard to understand? This should be 1+1=2, yet we have 100 Senators and 434 members of the House who don't.

Beet's favorite Gabbard co-sponsored the 15$ Min Wage & looked lonely standing there when Keith Ellison hugged her, was joking around with her & dragged her to speak. She looked emotional to hear the testimony of single moms who were talking about not being able to provide for their family despite working 2 jobs !

Now you can start a Gabbard 2020 bandwagon !

[Mr. Morden]

She is popular because she does and says things that people like. People don't like PACs, so she says she won't take PAC money. People don't like NSA survelliance, so she introduces a proposal limiting it. What is so hard to understand? This should be 1+1=2, yet we have 100 Senators and 434 members of the House who don't.

Yet she's losing in a landslide in the all-important Atlas forum primary!:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=264865.0

[7,052,770]

Btw, there's a new article in Jacobin magazine titled "Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend":

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

So don't accuse Atlas forum of being the only place where people are "obsessed" with her. 

Lol, still opposes gay marriage personally.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Btw, there's a new article in Jacobin magazine titled "Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend":

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

So don't accuse Atlas forum of being the only place where people are "obsessed" with her. 

Lol, still opposes gay marriage personally.

That would be pathetic for anyone, but especially so for someone under 40.

[Santander]

Btw, there's a new article in Jacobin magazine titled "Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend":

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

So don't accuse Atlas forum of being the only place where people are "obsessed" with her. 

Sounds terrific.

[MM876]

Honestly, I've been trying, but I just don't understand the opposition to her. She's opportunistic to be sure, and she wouldn't have endorsed Bernie and left the DNC if she didn't think it would advance her career, but I see nothing wrong with that.

I like her position on Islam so long as its combined with an anti-war stance, which it is. I have seen little to no evidence that she is a 'stooge' for any right-wingers, I know she's talked to multiple right-wingers but I have no problem with that. She said she wanted to be sure that Assad was in fact the one attacking civilians earlier this year, which in light of the Iraq fiasco seems prudent. Even if she aligns with Narendra Modi and hates Muslims, the Muslim population in the U.S. is about 1%, liberals have overblown the importance of Muslims in the U.S. and if we don't go adventuring in the Middle East, her policy on Islam doesn't even really matter that much for foreign affairs.

She tows the line on all the economic issues I care about; she supports single payer, Glass-Steagall, she doesn't take PAC money, and she wants to raise the minimum wage. Yet, being a veteran and relatively conservative on Islam means she has significant crossover appeal, which is obvious something that is reassuring after the disaster that was 2016.

All the stuff about her homophobic behavior doesn't bother me in the slightest. Obergefell has passed, by and large homosexuality as a political issue is over and now just requires some effort on the state level and time to settle. We can revisit it later, because we're obviously not at 100% equality yet, but the battle is won and we're not going to extinguish homophobia in this generation. Also I find it incredibly disingenuous how much other people bring up her father's political beliefs: if you're talking about Tulsi, talk about Tulsi, but the stuff about her dad seems like trying to smear her to me.

Plus, she checks off all the identity politics boxes so I wouldn't have to worry about the headache of people wanting the first woman president or a minority candidate to draw out the minority vote, which was one of the most frustrating things about Bernie running against Hillary for me. That she's a veteran can only really help, and her youth means that even if she has to wait for Hirono to die in office, she could still have a fruitful career. Plus, being from Hawaii means that unlike my other favorite, Sherrod Brown, she's a safe bet: she's not going to lose reelection.

I don't agree with everything she says, but a Democratic Primary would push her to the left a bit on concerning social issues, he economic issues are solid, and overall she's one of the best candidates the Dems have for the future, possibly even as early as 2020. If Sanders runs in 2020, Tulsi is his ideal vice presidential candidate.

[Sumner 1868]

Clinton and her allies have been trying to rope feminists into supporting intervention in Syria. Gabbard contradicts the claim anyone who opposes the "rebels" is some kind of misogynist.

[Mister Mets]

She endorsed Bernie, and criticized the DNC for putting their thumb on the scale in the primary, at a cost to herself (she quit as Vice-Chair.)

She's seen as a rising star.

Demographically, she's different from former political candidates. She's young, not Christian or Jewish, multiethnic, and has served in the military. There was some criticism that opposition to Hillary was a sign of misogyny, so there are incentives for Bernie Bros to list a woman as one f their favorite politicians.

[GoTfan]

Honestly, I've been trying, but I just don't understand the opposition to her. She's opportunistic to be sure, and she wouldn't have endorsed Bernie and left the DNC if she didn't think it would advance her career, but I see nothing wrong with that.

I like her position on Islam so long as its combined with an anti-war stance, which it is. I have seen little to no evidence that she is a 'stooge' for any right-wingers, I know she's talked to multiple right-wingers but I have no problem with that. She said she wanted to be sure that Assad was in fact the one attacking civilians earlier this year, which in light of the Iraq fiasco seems prudent. Even if she aligns with Narendra Modi and hates Muslims, the Muslim population in the U.S. is about 1%, liberals have overblown the importance of Muslims in the U.S. and if we don't go adventuring in the Middle East, her policy on Islam doesn't even really matter that much for foreign affairs.

She tows the line on all the economic issues I care about; she supports single payer, Glass-Steagall, she doesn't take PAC money, and she wants to raise the minimum wage. Yet, being a veteran and relatively conservative on Islam means she has significant crossover appeal, which is obvious something that is reassuring after the disaster that was 2016.

All the stuff about her homophobic behavior doesn't bother me in the slightest. Obergefell has passed, by and large homosexuality as a political issue is over and now just requires some effort on the state level and time to settle. We can revisit it later, because we're obviously not at 100% equality yet, but the battle is won and we're not going to extinguish homophobia in this generation. Also I find it incredibly disingenuous how much other people bring up her father's political beliefs: if you're talking about Tulsi, talk about Tulsi, but the stuff about her dad seems like trying to smear her to me.

Plus, she checks off all the identity politics boxes so I wouldn't have to worry about the headache of people wanting the first woman president or a minority candidate to draw out the minority vote, which was one of the most frustrating things about Bernie running against Hillary for me. That she's a veteran can only really help, and her youth means that even if she has to wait for Hirono to die in office, she could still have a fruitful career. Plus, being from Hawaii means that unlike my other favorite, Sherrod Brown, she's a safe bet: she's not going to lose reelection.

I don't agree with everything she says, but a Democratic Primary would push her to the left a bit on concerning social issues, he economic issues are solid, and overall she's one of the best candidates the Dems have for the future, possibly even as early as 2020. If Sanders runs in 2020, Tulsi is his ideal vice presidential candidate.

THANK YOU!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Honestly, I've been trying, but I just don't understand the opposition to her. She's opportunistic to be sure, and she wouldn't have endorsed Bernie and left the DNC if she didn't think it would advance her career, but I see nothing wrong with that.

I like her position on Islam so long as its combined with an anti-war stance, which it is. I have seen little to no evidence that she is a 'stooge' for any right-wingers, I know she's talked to multiple right-wingers but I have no problem with that. She said she wanted to be sure that Assad was in fact the one attacking civilians earlier this year, which in light of the Iraq fiasco seems prudent. Even if she aligns with Narendra Modi and hates Muslims, the Muslim population in the U.S. is about 1%, liberals have overblown the importance of Muslims in the U.S. and if we don't go adventuring in the Middle East, her policy on Islam doesn't even really matter that much for foreign affairs.

She tows the line on all the economic issues I care about; she supports single payer, Glass-Steagall, she doesn't take PAC money, and she wants to raise the minimum wage. Yet, being a veteran and relatively conservative on Islam means she has significant crossover appeal, which is obvious something that is reassuring after the disaster that was 2016.

All the stuff about her homophobic behavior doesn't bother me in the slightest. Obergefell has passed, by and large homosexuality as a political issue is over and now just requires some effort on the state level and time to settle. We can revisit it later, because we're obviously not at 100% equality yet, but the battle is won and we're not going to extinguish homophobia in this generation. Also I find it incredibly disingenuous how much other people bring up her father's political beliefs: if you're talking about Tulsi, talk about Tulsi, but the stuff about her dad seems like trying to smear her to me.

Plus, she checks off all the identity politics boxes so I wouldn't have to worry about the headache of people wanting the first woman president or a minority candidate to draw out the minority vote, which was one of the most frustrating things about Bernie running against Hillary for me. That she's a veteran can only really help, and her youth means that even if she has to wait for Hirono to die in office, she could still have a fruitful career. Plus, being from Hawaii means that unlike my other favorite, Sherrod Brown, she's a safe bet: she's not going to lose reelection.

I don't agree with everything she says, but a Democratic Primary would push her to the left a bit on concerning social issues, he economic issues are solid, and overall she's one of the best candidates the Dems have for the future, possibly even as early as 2020. If Sanders runs in 2020, Tulsi is his ideal vice presidential candidate.

THANK YOU!

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

[Adam Griffin]

She endorsed Bernie, and criticized the DNC for putting their thumb on the scale in the primary

Yeah, this is literally all there is to it. In Hardcore Bernie World, if you're a politician who supported Bernie - regardless of your personal or political positions and whether any are progressive or not - you're a True Progressive. If you're somebody with an identical record or have a comparable number of ideological transgressions as "Generic Progressive" but who didn't support Bernie, you're a neoliberal hack.

It's really not complicated. It's also why a) the push for ideological purity from these supporters is so laughable and b) why this movement is very likely to continue falling flat on its face in terms of enacting legislation/policy. They'll just keep supporting anybody who kisses the ring as "progressive" (i.e. supporting Bernie and/or a handful of other figures) and then get all mad when half the candidates that they actually do succeed at putting into office don't turn out to support them on a particular initiative.

[Mr. Morden]

She endorsed Bernie, and criticized the DNC for putting their thumb on the scale in the primary

Yeah, this is literally all there is to it. In Hardcore Bernie World, if you're a politician who supported Bernie - regardless of your personal or political positions and whether any are progressive or not - you're a True Progressive. If you're somebody with an identical record or have a comparable number of ideological transgressions as "Generic Progressive" but who didn't support Bernie, you're a neoliberal hack.

It's really not complicated. It's also why a) the push for ideological purity from these supporters is so laughable and b) why this movement is very likely to continue falling flat on its face in terms of enacting legislation/policy. They'll just keep supporting anybody who kisses the ring as "progressive" (i.e. supporting Bernie and/or a handful of other figures) and then get all mad when half the candidates that they actually do succeed at putting into office don't turn out to support them on a particular initiative.

Well, as I said upthread, I don’t think that captures the full picture.  Sure, some just blindly back Gabbard because she endorsed Sanders.  But there’s definitely a strain of Gabbard fandom which has joined the Gabbard cult for reasons that have little to do with Sanders.  Read the commentary at RunTulsiRun, and other FB and Reddit groups, you’ll see the folks who have a Glenn Greenwald-esque view of the world, where they are anti-establishmentarian above all else, and their principle attraction to Gabbard that elevates her above other progressives is her rejection of the bipartisan foreign policy consensus.

I mean, they like her on other things too, like health reform and the Dakota Access Pipeline, etc., but it’s her foreign policy views that set her more apart from most of the rest of Congress.  Some of these folks will even talk about how Sanders is too wishy washy on foreign policy.

EDIT: E.g., here is someone who's deep in conspiracy-land and strongly backs Gabbard:

https://medium.com/@marshallbart/tulsi-gabbard-is-americas-last-best-hope-deb62b45efb6

His column actually ends with "We are living in The Matrix and Tulsi is The One."

[Chief Justice Keef]

I'm pretty mixed on her. It's good that she's turned to the left on a lot of economic and social issues, but her past as a Hindu nationalist is pretty icky.

[7,052,770]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

[Famous Mortimer]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Personally opposed but goes along for political reasons can't be trusted? You would never trust a practicing Muslim as a politician then?

[7,052,770]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Personally opposed but goes along for political reasons can't be trusted? You would never trust a practicing Muslim as a politician then?

Uh what? The only two Muslims in U.S. history to ever serve in Congress are outstanding pro-LGBT liberal Democrats.

I would prefer not to have an anti-gay bigot as president, even if he/she promised to ignore their bigotry treat and everyone equally.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Gabbard has supported SSM longer than Hillary, and Hillary was made out to be some sort of savior of gays, so whatever.

[7,052,770]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Gabbard has supported SSM longer than Hillary, and Hillary was made out to be some sort of savior of gays, so whatever.

Hillary has always privately supported gay equality but in the past had to publicly pretend not to because the political environment demanded it. That's literally the opposite of Tulsi.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Gabbard has supported SSM longer than Hillary, and Hillary was made out to be some sort of savior of gays, so whatever.

Hillary has always privately supported gay equality but in the past had to publicly pretend not to because the political environment demanded it. That's literally the opposite of Tulsi.

Hillary was so brave to wait until 58% of Americans supported SSM to stop opposing it.

[Shadows]

And while she wasn't good on LGBT issues when she was 22 or whatever, she's pretty good on them now.

https://www.votetulsi.com/node/25012

False. If she's personally opposed to gay equality but just goes along with for political reasons, she can't be trusted at all.

I mean Jesus, jfern. If Hillary believed that about gays you wouldn't shut up about how awful it was.

Gabbard has supported SSM longer than Hillary, and Hillary was made out to be some sort of savior of gays, so whatever.

Hillary has always privately supported gay equality but in the past had to publicly pretend not to because the political environment demanded it. That's literally the opposite of Tulsi.

Do you make it a point to say false statements in every single thread? Hillary was asked multiple times if it was the political environment or situation which caused her to oppose gay marriage? This was after she had the HRC endorsement & supported Gay marriage. She took strong opposition to this & said she didn't believe in gay marriage & she evolved with most of the people did (She is also quite a religion person as she said when talking about marriage being between a man & a woman).

Regarding Gabbard, she has supported Gay Marriage, far longer than Hillary. She opposed DOMA in 2012, co-sponsored Respect for Marriage act (repeal DOMA & legalize same sex marriage).

She credited her tours of duty in the Middle East for her change in views: "It brought me to a deeper understanding of the meaning of freedom in our country. We cannot afford to walk down that dangerous path of government overstepping its boundaries into the most personal parts of our lives."

Her father is a conservative, a lecturer at the Catholic church, a religious person & she grew up in that household. By the time she was 30 odd & travelling the world, she was already supporting gay marriage.

Some of the comments are pure political hackery !