Kamala Harris vs Tuisi Gabbard

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm not a Kamala fanboy or anything, but would Tulsi win any state other than Hawaii? Who would her base be? Harris is well to her left, so the Bernie voters probably end up in her camp, as do Hillary supporters and minorities.

Is Harris really "well to the left" of Gabbard? I feel like that's kind of a dubious statement since Harris has never served in a state house and hasn't even been in congress for a full year.

Remember that not wanting to bomb Syria is a far-right position as of now.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm not a Kamala fanboy or anything, but would Tulsi win any state other than Hawaii? Who would her base be? Harris is well to her left, so the Bernie voters probably end up in her camp, as do Hillary supporters and minorities.

Is Harris really "well to the left" of Gabbard? I feel like that's kind of a dubious statement since Harris has never served in a state house and hasn't even been in congress for a full year.

Remember that not wanting to bomb Syria is a far-right position as of now.

It isn't, but supporting Assad is.

No more than Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul supported Saddam or the Taliban.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Calling Tulsi Gabbard far-right reminds me of how someone on another forum called me a "immoral leftist libertine sodomite" for criticizing the GOP's hawkishness towards Iran.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Calling Tulsi Gabbard far-right reminds me of how someone on another forum called me a "immoral leftist libertine sodomite" for criticizing the GOP's hawkishness towards Iran.

No one is calling her "far right," Captain Strawman, just like no one is trying to define her ideology based on one single issue. The fact is, though, that every objective ranking system out there that combines ALL of her policy positions put her significantly to the right of Bernie and other 2020 contenders.

I find it odd that the same people who spent 2016 whining about how Hillary isn't liberal enough tend to either not care that Tulsi is even less liberal, or be willfully ignorant of the fact.

Actually, a lot of people are calling her far-right.  People are even calling her alt-right.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I thought that progressives were generally skeptical of military interventions, much more so than the Democratic establishment.  And especially when it's a Republican President.  In 2004 or 2008 Tulsi might have been one of the most popular Democratic elected officials.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

dictator loving tulsi is probably worse, but either of those two pro-death figures don't stand a chance against trump.

I believe Trump would have a very hard time dealing with Tulsi Gabbard.  She would neutralize the populist appeal of Trump.  She also wouldn't have the baggage of Hillary Clinton, and I think that independents and many Republicans would find her appealing, especially if Trump's presidency continues to be a disaster.

The white working class voters who flipped Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania didn't vote for Trump because they loved Trump.  They voted for him because they hated Hillary and they decided that Trump was a marginally better option.  Many of these people voted Democrat before so it's disingenuous to think that they'll never vote Democrat again.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

She's a Democrat so she's not going to have a far-right voting record. But she supports the far-rightists who are in charge of India, and her supporters here are conveniently ignoring that.

Lol I don't think she's with the BJP or against the BJP, and frankly, your average American voter isn't going to care about anything having to do with India's politics and it's various political parties.

This is just another talking point perpetrated by Democratic hacks to smear Tulsi. I just don't buy it.

Reagan was a Communist!  How could Republicans vote for a far-left candidate!

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I thought that progressives were generally skeptical of military interventions, much more so than the Democratic establishment.  And especially when it's a Republican President.  In 2004 or 2008 Tulsi might have been one of the most popular Democratic elected officials.

Tulsi's not skeptical of foreign intervention. She hasn't said anything about potential military action in North Korea, whereas Bernie for instance, has said we shouldn't take unilateral action. She's just a hack for foreign interests. Even in 2004 or 2008 the Democrats were patriotic and always opposed the Iraq war on patriotic grounds (it wasn't good for the U.S.). They never would have supported someone in the pocket of a dictator.

When foreign governments funnel money into Tulsi Gabbard's electoral campaigns, then we can talk about the supposed lack of patriotism of a veteran.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I thought that progressives were generally skeptical of military interventions, much more so than the Democratic establishment.  And especially when it's a Republican President.  In 2004 or 2008 Tulsi might have been one of the most popular Democratic elected officials.

Tulsi's not skeptical of foreign intervention. She hasn't said anything about potential military action in North Korea, whereas Bernie for instance, has said we shouldn't take unilateral action. She's just a hack for foreign interests. Even in 2004 or 2008 the Democrats were patriotic and always opposed the Iraq war on patriotic grounds (it wasn't good for the U.S.). They never would have supported someone in the pocket of a dictator.

When foreign governments funnel money into Tulsi Gabbard's electoral campaigns, then we can talk about the supposed lack of patriotism of a veteran.

In that case, we can also talk about her in handcuffs since that would be illegal. But by her actions she's shown concern for protecting Assad over all else. And that's before her BJP connections.

That's how you view her actions.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I thought that progressives were generally skeptical of military interventions, much more so than the Democratic establishment.  And especially when it's a Republican President.  In 2004 or 2008 Tulsi might have been one of the most popular Democratic elected officials.

Tulsi's not skeptical of foreign intervention. She hasn't said anything about potential military action in North Korea, whereas Bernie for instance, has said we shouldn't take unilateral action. She's just a hack for foreign interests. Even in 2004 or 2008 the Democrats were patriotic and always opposed the Iraq war on patriotic grounds (it wasn't good for the U.S.). They never would have supported someone in the pocket of a dictator.

When foreign governments funnel money into Tulsi Gabbard's electoral campaigns, then we can talk about the supposed lack of patriotism of a veteran.

In that case, we can also talk about her in handcuffs since that would be illegal. But by her actions she's shown concern for protecting Assad over all else. And that's before her BJP connections.

That's how you view her actions.

So? Do you have an alternative view?

Tulsi Gabbard, as an Iraq War veteran, understands better than most Americans the pitfalls of American intervention in the Middle East.