Why is Tulsi Gabbard bashed far more than Bernie Sanders?

[AtorBoltox]

I think Tulsis great, she's probably the only woman who can win the presidency due to her military experience, avoidance of identity politics

this is a form of identity politics

[AtorBoltox]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Wait, so you now support a more hawkish stance on Iran?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Has anybody claimed that Schumer is a dove?
If not, then your whataboutism is asinine.

And by the way, go seek medical help.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Wait, so you now support a more hawkish stance on Iran?

Whoosh. Schumer opposed the Iran deal and Gabbard supports it.

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Has anybody claimed that Schumer is a dove?
If not, then your whataboutism is asinine.

And by the way, go seek medical help.

Why don't you attack Schumer instead, then?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Gabbard isn't a dove.
Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have praised her for her hawkish stance against Iran.

How dare she oppose the Senate Democratic leader's position on that, right?

Has anybody claimed that Schumer is a dove?
If not, then your whataboutism is asinine.

And by the way, go seek medical help.

Why don't you attack Schumer instead, then?

Because I am not a deranged Bernie cultist in dire need of psychiatric therapy.

[Joey1996]

He gets plenty of hate here. I've seen him called a shyster and fraud multiple times.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Bernie Sanders is an actual progressive, and Tulsi Gabbard is not.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

As I said yesterday and will repeat today in a simplified down manner, she's dovish in the sense she's the opposite of the neocons but also comes across as a bit wreckless, as evident by her foreign policy trip to Syria and is a Hindu nationalist. I don't mind her terribly in Congress but I wouldn't trust her as POTUS.

Her foreign policy is much less reckless than the establishment foreign policy which supported arming every random jihadist in Syria.

And this whole Hindu nationalist thing has been blown out of proportion. Yes, she has met the members of the ruling party of India, BJP. She has also met INC members.

I don't disagree with you on the first bit, but I'd rather have someone who would arm as close to no one as possible (which is what Sanders/Gillibrand/Warren would be more likely to do than Gabbard).

As for the Hindu nationalist thing, https://qz.com/628124/tulsi-gabbard-the-first-hindu-in-the-us-congress-on-modi-hinduism-and-linking-islam-to-terror/ makes me think it's not exactly a nothingberger.

Warren is definitely more hawkish. She voted for the $80 billion military increase. Gabbard voted against that.

Modi does suck, but no one cared when Obama met him again 2 months ago in Delhi.

Because it's not like meeting with leaders of other countries is the president's job or anything.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

He gets plenty of hate here. I've seen him called a shyster and fraud multiple times.

"multiple times" means more than two basically.

Does he get anywhere near the level of Tulsi Gabbard?

Also if as you claimed the fact that she endorsed Sanders is literally the ONLY reason anyone bashes her then why do I hate her and bash her when I supported Sanders?

[Joey1996]

He gets plenty of hate here. I've seen him called a shyster and fraud multiple times.

"multiple times" means more than two basically.

Does he get anywhere near the level of Tulsi Gabbard?

Also if as you claimed the fact that she endorsed Sanders is literally the ONLY reason anyone bashes her then why do I hate her and bash her when I supported Sanders?

The question was does Sanders get as much hate on this board, and the answer is an unequivocal yes, it's only balanced by the fact that he has more supporters.

And yes, even you--someone who allegedly supported Sanders during the primary would likely have nothing to say about Gabbard had she stayed mum and later endorsed Clinton. It's the fact that she left her position in the DNC and endorsed Bernie during the primary, that she received so much attention in the first place.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

My problem with Tulsi Gabbard has nothing to do with anything regarding the Democratic primary, or the DNC or anything of that sort.

I dislike Tusli Gabbard since she has taken weirdly conservative positions on numerous political issues, and that she voted with Trump more than expected for someone from a District as heavily Democratic as hers based on the 538 tracker (which in my opinion, should be a litmus test for whether or not someone needs to be primaried).

[Joey1996]

My problem with Tulsi Gabbard has nothing to do with anything regarding the Democratic primary, or the DNC or anything of that sort.

I dislike Tusli Gabbard since she has taken weirdly conservative positions on numerous political issues, and that she voted with Trump more than expected for someone from a District as heavily Democratic as hers based on the 538 tracker (which in my opinion, should be a litmus test for whether or not someone needs to be primaried).

Did you dislike her before 2016? How many Democrats in Congress with weird conservative positions get the attention that she does here?

[Sestak]

My problem with Tulsi Gabbard has nothing to do with anything regarding the Democratic primary, or the DNC or anything of that sort.

I dislike Tusli Gabbard since she has taken weirdly conservative positions on numerous political issues, and that she voted with Trump more than expected for someone from a District as heavily Democratic as hers based on the 538 tracker (which in my opinion, should be a litmus test for whether or not someone needs to be primaried).

Did you dislike her before 2016? How many Democrats in Congress with weird conservative positions get the attention that she does here?

I don't hear Manchin, Lipinski, or Peterson claiming that they're progressives.

[Joey1996]

My problem with Tulsi Gabbard has nothing to do with anything regarding the Democratic primary, or the DNC or anything of that sort.

I dislike Tusli Gabbard since she has taken weirdly conservative positions on numerous political issues, and that she voted with Trump more than expected for someone from a District as heavily Democratic as hers based on the 538 tracker (which in my opinion, should be a litmus test for whether or not someone needs to be primaried).

Did you dislike her before 2016? How many Democrats in Congress with weird conservative positions get the attention that she does here?

I don't hear Manchin, Lipinski, or Peterson claiming that they're progressives.

So it's because she calls herself a progressive (despite supporting progressive policy) and not her foreign policy positions? If she didn't call herself progressive you wouldn't care as much?

[Joey1996]

Dianne Feinstein has very conservative positions to be a Senator from California... pro war on drugs, pro spying, anti-single payer. Not a peep from Atlas, in fact most of you endorse her 2018 campaign.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Dianne Feinstein has very conservative positions to be a Senator from California... pro war on drugs, pro spying, anti-single payer. Not a peep from Atlas, in fact most of you endorse her 2018 campaign.

That is not true.

I prefer De Leon.

[Mr. Morden]

Her trip to Syria really missed off a lot of people, myself included.

What's wrong with her opposing a military intervention against a country that has not attacked us?

That's not the problem with her Syria trip.  The problem is her uncritically regurgitating Assad propaganda, saying that all the rebel groups are terrorists, and seemingly believing Assad when he says that he's agreed to democratic elections:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=257306.msg5497738#msg5497738
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=276297.msg5897209#msg5897209

[Cold War Liberal]

Moderate DINOs hate her because she's a young, attractive, military veteran with a Non-Interventionist Foreign policy and Left-Wing economic policies who doesn't scream about #metoo and Transgenders all the time like Gillibrand.

No, instead she advocates for multiple leaders who support the mass killings of Muslims in their own countries.

Her left-wing economic policies don't mask the fact that she's far-right socially. Which of course is exactly what you want, which is why you like her so much.

Is she though? I realize her father opposes(ed) gay marriage, but she's one of the leading voices to decriminalize weed in the House.

"Sure, she called people who want gay marriage 'homosexual extremists,' but at least she supports making weed less illegal!"

My issues with her are:
-her shaky record on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite her current lip service to preserving my right to exist, I don't entirely trust her due to her previous statements
-meeting Assad
-supporting Assad
-the Hindu nationalist stuff isn't great
-I'm suspicious of any Democrat praised by Republicans (Steve Bannon, Bill Kristol, etc.)
-was very slow to endorse Hillary after Bernie lost

My problems with Bernie are:
-his ideas are good but he had no real feasible plans to actually get them through Congress
-would not have been able to actually get anything done
-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some
-civil rights is a huge issue to me and he seems to view the rights of racial and sexual minorities as less important than the issues of "ordinary Americans," by which I can only assume he means straight white people, since I know a ton of people who aren't white and/or straight but are what I'd describe as "ordinary Americans" concerned about healthcare, taxes, and other "bread and butter" issues
-his die-hard supporters are obnoxious as all get-out, and this is coming from someone who supported him in the primaries

[elcorazon]

Moderate DINOs hate her because she's a young, attractive, military veteran with a Non-Interventionist Foreign policy and Left-Wing economic policies who doesn't scream about #metoo and Transgenders all the time like Gillibrand.

No, instead she advocates for multiple leaders who support the mass killings of Muslims in their own countries.

Her left-wing economic policies don't mask the fact that she's far-right socially. Which of course is exactly what you want, which is why you like her so much.

Is she though? I realize her father opposes(ed) gay marriage, but she's one of the leading voices to decriminalize weed in the House.

"Sure, she called people who want gay marriage 'homosexual extremists,' but at least she supports making weed less illegal!"

My issues with her are:
-her shaky record on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite her current lip service to preserving my right to exist, I don't entirely trust her due to her previous statements
-meeting Assad
-supporting Assad
-the Hindu nationalist stuff isn't great
-I'm suspicious of any Democrat praised by Republicans (Steve Bannon, Bill Kristol, etc.)
-was very slow to endorse Hillary after Bernie lost

My problems with Bernie are:
-his ideas are good but he had no real feasible plans to actually get them through Congress
-would not have been able to actually get anything done
-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some
-civil rights is a huge issue to me and he seems to view the rights of racial and sexual minorities as less important than the issues of "ordinary Americans," by which I can only assume he means straight white people, since I know a ton of people who aren't white and/or straight but are what I'd describe as "ordinary Americans" concerned about healthcare, taxes, and other "bread and butter" issues
-his die-hard supporters are obnoxious as , and this is coming from someone who supported him in the primaries

Great post!

[Santander]

If I make a joke about her being bashable, how long will it take TG to delete my post? I predict less than 2 hours.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Moderate DINOs hate her because she's a young, attractive, military veteran with a Non-Interventionist Foreign policy and Left-Wing economic policies who doesn't scream about #metoo and Transgenders all the time like Gillibrand.

No, instead she advocates for multiple leaders who support the mass killings of Muslims in their own countries.

Her left-wing economic policies don't mask the fact that she's far-right socially. Which of course is exactly what you want, which is why you like her so much.

Is she though? I realize her father opposes(ed) gay marriage, but she's one of the leading voices to decriminalize weed in the House.

"Sure, she called people who want gay marriage 'homosexual extremists,' but at least she supports making weed less illegal!"

My issues with her are:
-her shaky record on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite her current lip service to preserving my right to exist, I don't entirely trust her due to her previous statements
-meeting Assad
-supporting Assad
-the Hindu nationalist stuff isn't great
-I'm suspicious of any Democrat praised by Republicans (Steve Bannon, Bill Kristol, etc.)
-was very slow to endorse Hillary after Bernie lost

My problems with Bernie are:
-his ideas are good but he had no real feasible plans to actually get them through Congress
-would not have been able to actually get anything done
-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some
-civil rights is a huge issue to me and he seems to view the rights of racial and sexual minorities as less important than the issues of "ordinary Americans," by which I can only assume he means straight white people, since I know a ton of people who aren't white and/or straight but are what I'd describe as "ordinary Americans" concerned about healthcare, taxes, and other "bread and butter" issues
-his die-hard supporters are obnoxious as , and this is coming from someone who supported him in the primaries

Great post!

[YE]

Moderate DINOs hate her because she's a young, attractive, military veteran with a Non-Interventionist Foreign policy and Left-Wing economic policies who doesn't scream about #metoo and Transgenders all the time like Gillibrand.

No, instead she advocates for multiple leaders who support the mass killings of Muslims in their own countries.

Her left-wing economic policies don't mask the fact that she's far-right socially. Which of course is exactly what you want, which is why you like her so much.

Is she though? I realize her father opposes(ed) gay marriage, but she's one of the leading voices to decriminalize weed in the House.

"Sure, she called people who want gay marriage 'homosexual extremists,' but at least she supports making weed less illegal!"

My issues with her are:
-her shaky record on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite her current lip service to preserving my right to exist, I don't entirely trust her due to her previous statements
-meeting Assad
-supporting Assad
-the Hindu nationalist stuff isn't great
-I'm suspicious of any Democrat praised by Republicans (Steve Bannon, Bill Kristol, etc.)
-was very slow to endorse Hillary after Bernie lost

My problems with Bernie are:
-his ideas are good but he had no real feasible plans to actually get them through Congress
-would not have been able to actually get anything done
-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some
-civil rights is a huge issue to me and he seems to view the rights of racial and sexual minorities as less important than the issues of "ordinary Americans," by which I can only assume he means straight white people, since I know a ton of people who aren't white and/or straight but are what I'd describe as "ordinary Americans" concerned about healthcare, taxes, and other "bread and butter" issues
-his die-hard supporters are obnoxious as , and this is coming from someone who supported him in the primaries

I wasn't aware that Tulsi Gabbard at one point was as much of a critic as her father was on the issue, so I looked it up and you're right. As I've indicated on this thread, I'm not a big fan of Tulsi 2020; I just wondered where Atlas got this idea that she's socially conservative from.

As for Bernie Sanders electability, I don't really wanna derail the thread, but since you seem to make substantive, quality posts, I'll chip in. In order for Sanders to be successful (or honestly at this point basically almost every Democratic president), there's gonna need to a realingment towards the Dems that likely results in a Democratic trifecta willing to pass a progressive agenda. No Democratic will get much, if anything productive done with a split or GOP congress. Republican's will paint almost every Democratic nominee as socialist, and most Democrats are scared to go on the offensive when that happens and make strong arguments towards left-wing ideas, so they cave in. At least Sanders seems willing to aggressively go on the offensive towards said ideas. Also, if they his programs got passed and implemented, most of Bernie's programs would be quite popular. The GOP will try to undermine his programs, much like they try to do with Obamacare now, but they won't re-appeal it for the same reason they haven't been able to gut Social Security and Medicare. As for civil rights, I think in that context, "ordinary Americans" mean the bottom 99%, but I understand how blacks could view it differently.

[Bojack Horseman]

Tulsi Gabbard on civil unions as a state legislator:

This bill is very disrespectful to the people of Hawaii who have already spoken loud and clear on this issue. As Democrats we should be representing the people and not a small group of homosexual extremists.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some

Obama was very, very concious about not appearing as "radical" in any sense, yet he received an enormous amount of crap many voters actually bought. I think this factor may be overestimated a bit. And as of certainity of a candidate betting hammered in GE, we all saw what happened in 2016.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Moderate DINOs hate her because she's a young, attractive, military veteran with a Non-Interventionist Foreign policy and Left-Wing economic policies who doesn't scream about #metoo and Transgenders all the time like Gillibrand.

No, instead she advocates for multiple leaders who support the mass killings of Muslims in their own countries.

Her left-wing economic policies don't mask the fact that she's far-right socially. Which of course is exactly what you want, which is why you like her so much.

Is she though? I realize her father opposes(ed) gay marriage, but she's one of the leading voices to decriminalize weed in the House.

"Sure, she called people who want gay marriage 'homosexual extremists,' but at least she supports making weed less illegal!"

My issues with her are:
-her shaky record on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite her current lip service to preserving my right to exist, I don't entirely trust her due to her previous statements
-meeting Assad
-supporting Assad
-the Hindu nationalist stuff isn't great
-I'm suspicious of any Democrat praised by Republicans (Steve Bannon, Bill Kristol, etc.)
-was very slow to endorse Hillary after Bernie lost

My problems with Bernie are:
-his ideas are good but he had no real feasible plans to actually get them through Congress
-would not have been able to actually get anything done
-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some
-civil rights is a huge issue to me and he seems to view the rights of racial and sexual minorities as less important than the issues of "ordinary Americans," by which I can only assume he means straight white people, since I know a ton of people who aren't white and/or straight but are what I'd describe as "ordinary Americans" concerned about healthcare, taxes, and other "bread and butter" issues
-his die-hard supporters are obnoxious as , and this is coming from someone who supported him in the primaries

I wasn't aware that Tulsi Gabbard at one point was as much of a critic as her father was on the issue, so I looked it up and you're right. As I've indicated on this thread, I'm not a big fan of Tulsi 2020; I just wondered where Atlas got this idea that she's socially conservative from.

As for Bernie Sanders electability, I don't really wanna derail the thread, but since you seem to make substantive, quality posts, I'll chip in. In order for Sanders to be successful (or honestly at this point basically almost every Democratic president), there's gonna need to a realingment towards the Dems that likely results in a Democratic trifecta willing to pass a progressive agenda. No Democratic will get much, if anything productive done with a split or GOP congress. Republican's will paint almost every Democratic nominee as socialist, and most Democrats are scared to go on the offensive when that happens and make strong arguments towards left-wing ideas, so they cave in. At least Sanders seems willing to aggressively go on the offensive towards said ideas. Also, if they his programs got passed and implemented, most of Bernie's programs would be quite popular. The GOP will try to undermine his programs, much like they try to do with Obamacare now, but they won't re-appeal it for the same reason they haven't been able to gut Social Security and Medicare. As for civil rights, I think in that context, "ordinary Americans" mean the bottom 99%, but I understand how blacks could view it differently.

I'm going to further slightly-derail the thread and point out that I agree with both of you. I agree with you in that Bernie's aggression (although sometimes it manifested itself in really unproductive ways on the campaign trail) was very important for putting issues like Medicaid for all and Tuition-free college in the discussion for the left to try to seriously debate. However, I agree with JFK in that, aside from how vocal and assertive he was, Bernie would have been a horrendous agent for these progressive changes if he was in office and could have done serious damage to those causes. In a way that is similar in some way to Trump, he didn't seem to have any plan for working his legislation through congress (or through whatever government agencies he would have had at his disposal). I decided I couldn't support him when I heard Tom Ashbrook ask him in an interview how he planned to advance his agenda when he faced Republican intransigence, and Bernie's answer was that he would just persuade the country's youths (??) to march on Washington and have some mass demonstration that would intimidate Congress. That isn't just an idiotic way to enact policy, it's a little demagogic. He also demonstrated that he was impossibly ideologically rigorous. Having a voice like that in the Senate is great, where he (now) has the power to apply pressure to pull legislation leftward, but having someone in as a sole arbiter of policy enactment like the President is a recipe for disaster as soon as you have to make any difficult decision with trade-offs. That's why I would vote for a pragmatic progressive like Warren or Perriello (although I'm afraid Warren would get slaughtered in a general election versus Trump) a million times over someone like Bernie.

-Republicans would have used MUH SOCIALISM to hammer him in the General, and if he somehow won that, they would have clobbered the Dems in 2018 and 2020, probably giving President Cotton or whoever supermajorities to work with starting in 2021, who would then reverse anything Sanders managed to accomplish, and then some

Obama was very, very concious about not appearing as "radical" in any sense, yet he received an enormous amount of crap many voters actually bought. I think this factor may be overestimated a bit. And as of certainity of a candidate betting hammered in GE, we all saw what happened in 2016.

I agree with the larger point that Bernie getting sandbagged by boogeymen arguments isn't a good reason not to nominate him, but I don't think this analogy is effective. Plenty of people were able to tar Obama as some socialist, and those same people would probably do the same to a Tom Carper or Mark Warner-type Democrat. But because Obama tried so hard not to appear as a radical, I think enough persuadable voters were given a permission structure to support him, in a way that I don't think they would with someone who was openly a socialist. It's one thing to have someone else call you a scary name, it's another to embrace it and run with it yourself.